DESIGN PATENT BLOG POSTS
Visually Similar Is Not Anticipation: What 40 abandoned design applications show and what practitioners might consider
Of the 40 design applications abandoned October 26 to November 1, 2026 after a rejection, two were refused for anticipation under a “visually similar” test that is not the law, a lamp lost to an article about itself inside the grace period, two obviousness rejections resting on one-line rationales went untested, and seven pan lids filed as separate applications were all given up.
The Sibling With the Wrong Drawings: What 278 prosecution histories show and what practitioners might consider
Of the 278 design patents issued November 3, 2026 after a rejection, nine files stand out. A connector was withdrawn from issue because a sibling patent issued with the wrong drawings and the family’s 2016 patent became prior art. Also: four PTAB decisions applying LKQ, two Amazon dates that failed, and a design continuation of a utility family that kept its 2020 date.
An Icon With No Screen: What 263 prosecution histories show and what practitioners might consider
Of the 263 design patents issued October 27, 2026 after a rejection, ten files stand out. An Abbott icon issued with no display screen in the drawing under the March 2026 guidance. A continuation won back its parent’s date by redrawing one ring, an allowance was pulled back a year after the issue fee, and two patents print language cancelled to get them allowed.
The Top Three, Illustrated: Inside the best prosecution histories of October 20, 2026
The top three files from the October 20, 2026 weekly review, shown with the pages that decided them: the examiner’s Air Up comparison that Amazon’s own AI re-dated, a single plan view of a power tool housing that survived 112 under Maatita, and the TikTok post a restored priority date pulled into the grace period.
Nobody Answered: What 51 abandoned design applications show and what practitioners might consider
Of the 51 design applications abandoned October 12 to 18, 2026 after a rejection, only 5 applicants ever replied. Sibling Hague registrations were rejected over each other, three files died on rejections a terminal disclaimer would have cured, a grace-period disclosure went unclaimed, and one allowance was pulled back after the issue fee because the replacement drawings had been stretched.
An Examiner Asks Amazon’s AI for the Date: What 343 prosecution histories show and what practitioners might consider
Of the 343 design patents issued October 20, 2026 after a rejection, ten files stand out. An examiner used Amazon’s AI assistant to re-date a listing and withdrew the rejection. A single plan view of a power tool housing survived 112 under Maatita, a restored priority date saved a TikTok disclosure, and four allowances were pulled back after the issue fee was paid.
The Shape the Consumer Never Sees: What 509 prosecution histories show and what practitioners might consider
Of the 509 design patents that issued on October 13, 2026, two Lamb Weston files beat anticipation by showing that the cited shape was raw dough or an uncooked strip the ordinary observer never sees. Also this week: three ways to beat an Amazon “Date First Available,” a priority document that saved a mistaken drawing set, and a grace-period reference cleared with no declaration.
Line Weight as Evidence of Possession: What 466 prosecution histories show and what practitioners might consider
Of the 466 design patents issued October 6, 2026 after a rejection, ten files stand out. A 2015 parent’s line weights saved a one-line DexCom claim from new matter. The first allowances under the March 2026 GUI guidance arrived. An Amazon Seller Support reply moved a reference forward nearly three years, and one frame of a patented animation avoided double patenting.
No Declaration Needed: What 431 prosecution histories show and what practitioners might consider
Of the 431 design patents that issued on September 29, 2026 after a rejection, the most useful files cleared prior art without the declaration the examiner asked for: a prior-disclosure statement in the specification, an attack on Amazon’s “Date First Available,” and an inventorship correction. Also this week: a boundary line that cost a 2011 priority chain, and an appeal brief that ended a functionality fight.
The Review Is Not the Product: What 285 prosecution histories show and what practitioners might consider
Of the 285 design patents that issued on September 22, 2026 after a rejection, the best responses attacked what a web listing actually proves: a reused Home Depot SKU whose oldest review did not date the picture, and an inventor’s own listing used as a shield against third-party registrations. Also this week: measurements that beat the inventor’s own Instagram post, and one ADS line that broke a priority chain.
Lost in the Drawings: What 21 abandoned design applications show and what practitioners might consider
Of the 21 design applications abandoned September 14 to 20, 2026 after a rejection, most were lost on the drawings, not the prior art. Three Hague designs the examiner had cleared on the art were let go over fixable drawing defects, an applicant’s own Amazon listing inside the grace period went unanswered, and the files tied to three issued patents put useful findings on the record.
Secondary Considerations After LKQ: What the Examination Record Shows and What Practitioners Might Consider
The fourth Graham factor applies to design patents. LKQ v. GM, 102 F.4th 1280, 1296, 1299-1300 (Fed. Cir. 2024) (en banc). The court named commercial success, industry praise, and copying, and said it was not deciding whether long-felt need and failure of others apply to designs.