The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a jury's verdict of infringement against Top Brand LLC by Cozy Comfort Company LLC regarding design and trademark issues. Cozy Comfort's U.S. Design Patent No. D859,788 was at the center of the dispute. The CAFC concluded that representations made to the Patent Office during prosecution affect claim scope. Additionally, it dismissed Cozy Comfort's claims that Top Brand waived its construction argument, reinforcing that objections to jury instructions must explicitly be made to invalidate them.
"We see no reason to distinguish between disclaimer by amendment and disclaimer by argument and conclude that a patentee may surrender claim scope of a design patent by its representations to the Patent Office during prosecution."
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision holding that the principles of prosecution history disclaimer apply to design patents, reversing a jury verdict that found Top Brand LLC infringed Cozy Comfort Company LLC's trademarks and design patent.
The CAFC rejected Cozy Comfort's argument that Top Brand waived its claim construction argument due to failure to object to a jury instruction, emphasizing that parties do not waive such arguments in the utility patent context.
Top Brand sought declaratory judgment of non-infringement, and the jury found Top Brand had infringed Cozy Comfort's patent and trademarks, despite insistence on a detailed limiting construction based on Cozy Comfort's statements during prosecution.
Collection
[
|
...
]