Are hybrid 2D/3D design disclosures sufficiently definite under 35 U.S.C. § 112? The answer is of growing importance because it directly impacts indefinite depth rejections,
Design patent prosecution can be a complex and nuanced process, particularly when determining whether a design for an automotive part is obvious in light of
The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Tech. Operations LLC, 102 F.4th 1280 (Fed. Cir. 2024) has significantly altered the framework
The prosecution history of Design Patent Application No. 29/860,441 (US D1,057,742) provides an insightful case study on the evolving obviousness standard in design patents post-LKQ
Introduction The landmark LKQ Corp. v. GM Glob. Tech. Operations LLC, 102 F.4th 1280 (Fed. Cir. 2024) decision reshaped the landscape of design patent law
When analyzing design patent prosecutions with non-final rejections over the past four years (2021-2024), we uncovered interesting insights from the top 50 most cited cases.
Robert is a Registered Patent Attorney and is Board Certified in Patent Litigation, Civil Trial Law, and Civil Practice Advocacy by the National Board of Trial Advocacy. He holds two LL.M (Master of Law) Degrees, including an LL.M in Patent and Intellectual Property Law (with highest honors) from the George Washington University Law School in Washington, D.C.
Robert served as lead trial and appellate counsel for Egyptian Goddess, Inc. in what has been called the most important design patent case in the last one hundred years. (Egyptian Goddess v. Swisa). He has tried to verdict as lead counsel cases involving design patents, utility patents, and trademarks, and has argued eleven cases before the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals including an en banc case involving a design patent.
Robert currently serves as one of four members on the Patent Litigation Specialty Program Commission of the National Board of Trial Advocacy.