Replying to Avatar Sarah Fackrell

This one came across my radar because it mentions that the plaintiff obtained a now-expired design patent (which the plaintiff incorrectly refers to as a "Registration"):
Avatar
Sarah Fackrell 2y ago

Here's the patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/USD381933S/en?oq=country:US+type:DESIGN+D381%2c933

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Sarah Fackrell 2y ago

Anyway, the accused product does look pretty identical. The issue here is going to be protectability--is the purported trade dress actually distinctive and nonfunctional?

Avatar
Sarah Fackrell 2y ago

Anyway, the accused product does look quite cynical. The big issue here is going to be protectability--is the purported trade dress actually distinctive and nonfunctional?