Continuing Legal Education (CLE)
Free for Members: Design Patent Case Law Review: Federal Circuit, PTAB, and District Court
April 23, 2020 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM
Member-benefit exclusive! No CLE credit available.
Join for a fast-paced overview of the most important design patent decisions from the Federal Circuit, the PTAB, and the district courts from the past year. Hear from two prominent design patent IP thought leaders as they discuss the importance of these cases moving forward in 2020.
Presented by Tracy-Gene Durkin of Sterne Kessler PLLC; Christopher Carani of McAndrews, Held & Malloy, Ltd; Alex Neuworth of Foley & Lardner LLP; Pauline Pelletier of Sterne Kessler. PLLC; and Michael Piery of Quarles & Brady LLP
System requirements:
Webinar access is compatible with any Windows 7 or later computer, Android OS devices, or Apple/iOS devices. Check system compatibility here.
Accessibility for hearing impaired:
AIPLA’s webinars are available and accessible to individuals who are hearing impaired. If anyone at your location would like to know more about accommodations, please contact cle@aipla.org. We ask that you let us know at least 7 business days out from the webinar, to ensure that we can identify and deploy the solution that best fits our registrants needs.
Disclaimer: AIPLA is a nonprofit national bar association. The sole purpose of this CLE program is to provide educational and informational content. AIPLA does not provide legal services or advice. The opinions, views and other statements expressed by contributors to this CLE program are solely those of the contributors. These opinions, views and statements of the contributors do not necessarily represent those of AIPLA and should not be construed as such.
News
-
Supreme Court Issues Unanimous Decision in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc.
June 4, 2026
On June 4, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc. While the Court reaffirmed existing law on pleading standards, it reversed the Federal Circuit’s decision that had focused on how relevant statements could be understood by medical providers as instructions to infringe. The amicus brief filed by AIPLA on March 27, 2026, advocated for affirmance and cautioned the Court not to change the patent infringement pleading standard or adopt any categorical exemption from inducement for a particular industry. -
AIPLA Submits Comments to the USPTO on 2026 Supplemental GUI Guidance
May 15, 2026
Arlington, VA. May 12, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the USPTO on its Supplemental Guidance for Examination of Design Patent Applications Related to Computer-Generated Interfaces and Icons, issued on March 13, 2026. -
AIPLA Comments on the Copyright Office's Proposed Fee Schedule Adjustment
May 8, 2026
Arlington, VA. May 1, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments in response to the U.S. Copyright Office’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on adjustments to its fee schedule. -
AIPLA Submits Comments on the Enlarged Board of Appeal’s 11 Preliminary Opinion in G 1/25
May 1, 2026
Arlington, VA. April 17, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments on the Enlarged Board of Appeal’s 11 March 2026 preliminary opinion in G 1/25, addressing whether patent descriptions must be adapted following claim amendments. -
AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in Range of Motion Products, LLC v. Armaid Company Inc.
April 20, 2026
Arlington, VA — April 17, 2026 — The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus curiae brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Range of Motion Products, LLC v. Armaid Company Inc., No. 23-2427, supporting rehearing and rehearing en banc. AIPLA urges the Court to restore clarity to design patent law by (1) reaffirming that Gorham v. White (1871) provides the sole governing test for infringement and forecloses any separate “plainly dissimilar” threshold, and (2) confirming that claim construction may not be used to exclude any visual portions of the overall claimed design.