J.S.I.K. Intl. LLC v. Schuster

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• applying Second Circuit law and stating, “[i]f there was intentional copying the second comer will be presumed to have intended to create a confusing similarity of appearance and will be presumed to have succeeded.”
• noting that the record showed “the existence of a myriad of athletic shoe designs in which each of the functions identified by [the alleged infringer] as performed by the [patented] design elements was achieved in a way other than by the design of the . . . patent” (emphasis added)
• “When there are several ways to achieve the function of an article of manufacture, the design of the article is more likely to serve a primarily ornamental purpose.”
• undisputed commercial success of the patented design, and appellants’ copying thereof, were relevant to analysis of the obviousness of the design
• “[T]he primacy of appearance in the design of shoes can not be ignored when analyzing functionality.”
• “A would-be infringer should not escape liability for design patent infringement if a design is copied but la- beled with its name.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).