Colgate-Palmolive v. Ranir, L.L.C., C.A. No. 06-417-GMS, July 31, 2007.
Sleet, C.J. The Court issued an order construing claims in a case involving seven toothbrush design patents and one utility patent.
A design patent only protects the novel, ornamental features of the patented design, an attribute which creates an irreconcilable divergence in the process of claim construction. Where the design contains both functional and non-functional elements, the scope of the claim must be construed to identify the non-functional aspects of the claim. Yet the distinction between ornamental and fundamental is a question of fact. The Court declined to identify at this point what features of the design patents are functional, and may further limit the current constructions at trial by factual determinations. The Court invited the parties to weigh in on whether invalidity should be submitted as a bench trial, or whether infringement and invalidity should be bifurcated wherein invalidity would be tried first, and the first jury would also serve as an advisory jury on the issues of ornamentality and functionality. The Court provides claim construction for both utility and design patents.
A copy of the full opinion is available here.
