a blue and orange check mark with the letter w on it as the Wilson Whitaker Rynell Logo

Examples of Design Patent Non-Infringement

John Wilson • April 21, 2020

Examples of Design Patent Non-Infringement

a large light bulb is hanging from the ceiling in a room .
Given the prior art it can often be difficult to tell if a viable claim for design patent infringement can be maintained against manufacturers of similar products.

Test For Design Patent Infringement

The primary test for determining infringement of a design patent was established in the seminal design patent infringement case, Gorham Co. v. White, 81 U.S. 511 (1871). In Gorham, the United States Supreme Court declared that infringement of a design patent occurs if: “in the eye of an ordinary observer, giving such attention as a purchaser usually gives, two designs are substantially the same.” In 2008, a Federal Circuit court held that the “ordinary observer test,” as established in Gorham, is the sole test for determining design patent infringement; however, the determination must be “conducted in light of the prior art.” If a design patent is substantially similar to prior art, then the differences between the design patent and the potentially-infringing products will be accentuated. Therefore, the appropriate test for design patent infringement is whether an ordinary observer would consider two designs substantially the same, considering the prior art.

Design patent infringement is highly contingent on prior art. Therefore, the relevant prior art must be considered when analyzing the viability of claims against potential infringers. 35 U.S.C. §102(b) identifies that prior art may consist of an invention that “was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.”   

Examples of Design Patent Non-Infringement

Although design patent infringement is determined on a case-by-case basis, examples of prior decisions may be used as a guideline to predict potential outcomes of future design patent infringement cases. The following examples used the “ordinary observer” test to determine that a design patent had been found not too infringe.  

The Federal Circuit Court in Richardson found no infringement in a case that involved a tool which combined three tools into one – a hammer, jaw, and crowbar – because the overall appearances of the designs were not substantially the same. Figure 4 displays a side-by-side comparison of the products at issue with the relevant prior art.
three drawings of a hammer with a patent number
Richardson v. Stanley Works 597 F.3d 1288 (Fed. Cir. 2010)

Although the district court in Victor Stanley held that a bench end featuring accentuated curvature to the legs infringed the ‘623 patent, the same court held that another bench end featuring accentuated curvature to the legs did not infringe the ‘623 patent. The latter design featured an oval below the seat, from which the court determined that the bench end created “a different and distinctive look that would not confuse the ordinary observer.” Specifically, the court stated: “[e]ach of the individual ornamental elements may be almost identical in isolation, but the overall impression is aesthetically different.” Figure 5 displays a side-by-side comparison of the products at issue.
a drawing of a bench and a picture of a bench
Victor Stanley v. Creative Pipe, 2011 LEXIS 112846 (D.Md. 2011)

Although the prior art in Victor Stanley featured a looped arm rest and curved bench legs, both the ‘623 patent and the infringing design featured accentuated curvature of the legs, which was the distinguishing feature of the ‘623 patent and the prior art.  

Given the prior art it can often be difficult to tell if a viable claim for design patent infringement can be maintained against manufacturers of similar products.
Man in blazer leans toward laptop, eyes wide, mouth open, holding glasses; table and white wall in background.
By John Wilson January 26, 2026
Avoid the top 7 costly patent filing mistakes Texas inventors make. Wilson Legal Group in Dallas, Houston & Austin reveals how to protect your invention from disclosure errors, weak claims & bad provisionals.
Tailor measuring the back length of a man's jacket with a yellow tape measure in a shop.
By John Wilson January 16, 2026
Discover how to file a suit on sworn account in Texas to recover unpaid debts efficiently. This guide from Wilson Whitaker Rynell explains benefits, differences from breach of contract, and step-by-step filing for businesses and individuals. Get your money back faster—learn more today.
Woman looking intently through magnifying glass; red background.
By John Wilson January 13, 2026
Discover how to challenge a judgment in Texas. Learn about due process violations, bill of review process, and when improper service can void rulings. Get expert insights from Wilson Legal Group.
Hands on table with broken hearts, photo of couple, and jewelry.
By John Wilson January 12, 2026
Considering an annulment in Texas? Learn the legal requirements, filing deadlines, differences from divorce, and mistakes that can cost you your case.
Feet in white socks sticking out of a cardboard box, surrounded by other packed boxes.
By John Wilson December 24, 2025
Guide to dissolving a Texas parent company: legal steps, subsidiary protection, deadlock solutions, and checklist for corporations & LLC
Yellow bathtub with legs in pink pants and shoes up in the air. Yellow wall in background.
By John Wilson November 21, 2025
Learn how trade dress drawings, distinctiveness, functionality, and secondary meaning affect USPTO registration and infringement claims. A practical 2025 guide from Wilson Whitaker Rynell.
Santa Claus peers through a window, surprised, decorated with a Christmas garland.
By John Wilson November 3, 2025
Navigate divorce challenges during the Texas holiday season with expert guidance from Wilson Whitaker Rynell in Dallas. Discover emotional coping strategies, financial preparation tips for community property division, child custody, co-parenting plans, and year-end tax considerations to protect your family.
Four people assembling a large puzzle together; collaborative teamwork concept.
By John Wilson October 22, 2025
Explore the Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (TUFTA) and its role in safeguarding business partnerships from asset mismanagement and financial disputes. Practical steps to protect your interests with insights from Wilson Whitaker Rynell, a Texas law firm specializing in complex commercial litigation.
A hanging light with cage around bulb in front of a
By Leigh Whitaker October 14, 2025
Texas' new S.B. 2794 "Three Strikes" law, effective Sept 2025, fights child visitation denials in Dallas, Plano, Frisco, and DFW. Learn how Wilson Whitaker Rynell helps enforce custody orders and secure remedies.
Show More
The Wilson Legal Group are Dallas attorneys that specializes in Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, Trade Secrets, Complex Litigation, Business/Corporate Law, Family Law and Real Estate Law. At the Wilson Legal Group, our clients are our focus. Our philosophy is simple and straight-forward: Understand our clients' needs, hopes, and interests in order to help them flourish. Our staff strives to build strong relationships with our clients in order to appreciate their best interests and help them achieve their goals.

Request A Blog?

Have an idea for a blog?  Click and request a blog and we will let you know when we post it!