2020 Virtual Design Rights Boot Camp

September 3 to 24, 2020

Registration

Fee: Member $395

2020 Design Rights Bootcamp (3)

Conquer The New Design Frontier

Strengthen your design rights skills with our virtual program.

The 3rd Annual AIPLA Design Rights Boot Camp has moved online and is now a four part, online, CLE program designed for new IP practitioners, or those new to design rights, who wish to learn about protecting designs in all areas of IP, including copyright, trade dress, and design patents. We also have a session on protecting designs in the EU, including with copyright, registered designs and unregistered designs.

The program has lessons for both beginning practitioners and experienced practitioners that want to know more about the increasingly important area of design rights, which covers copyright, trade dress and design patents.

Join us every Thursday in September from 12:30 - 2:00 pm EDT for the CLE programming and stick around from 2:00 - 3:00 pm for an opportunity to speak with the presenters and network with other attendees!

"The content was very good. I wish I could have been in two tracks at once." ~ 2018 Attendee

Who Should Come?

Beginning practitioners and experienced practitioners that want to know more about the increasingly important area of design rights. There will be sessions on applying for and obtaining copyright registration of designs, trade dress in designs and filing for US design patents. There is also a session on design rights in the EU, where there have been important developments in copyright of designs, registered community designs and unregistered designs. Any design question your client have has potential implications in all of these area, make sure you do not miss a chance to protect your clients’ important design rights.

What We Cover

European Union Design rights, including copyright, registered community designs and unregistered community designs.
Drafting and filing a design patent and responding to rejections
Drafting and filing a trade dress application, and responding to rejections
Drafting and filing a copyright application, responding to rejections and Information on Content Management Information (CMI) and ways it allows you to protect copyrights that were not registered prior to infringement

Event Program

Design Protection in Europe - September 3^rd

Registered Community Designs
European Copyright in Designs

Moderated by: Elizabeth Isaac, Dunlap Codding, P.C.

Speakers:
Dr. Henning Hartwig, Bardehle Pagenberg
Dr. Peter Schramm, Meyerlustenberger Lachenal AG

Copyright in Designs - September 10^th

Copyright 101 – including preparing and filing a copyright application
Advanced Copyright in Designs including responding to rejection

Moderated by: Pina M. Campagna, Carter, DeLuca & Farrell LLP

Lauren Emerson, Leason Ellis
Garfield Goodrum, Goodrum Design Law

Design Patents - September 17^th

Design patents 101- including the basics of drafting and filing a design patent application
Advanced design patent prosecution including responding to objections and rejections

Moderated by: Trevor Copeland, Brinks Gilson, & Lione

Speakers:

Craig Mueller, FisherBroyles
James Aquilina, Quarles & Brady LLP

Trade Dress in Designs - September 24^th

Preparation and filing of a trade dress application at the USPTO
Advanced trade dress prosecution including responding to a USPTO rejections

Moderated by: Robert L. Lichter, Lando & Anastasi, LLP

Darren S. Cahr, Drinker Biddle & Reath, LLP
Sarah Schneider, Sheridan and Ross

Add to:

News

AIPLA Comments on CNIPA Draft Measures for Prioritized Patent Examination
April 1, 2026

Arlington, VA. March 30, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) regarding the Draft Measures for the Administration of Prioritized Examination of Patents.
AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc
March 31, 2026

Arlington, VA. March 27, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc., No. 24-889. AIPLA urges the Court to affirm the Federal Circuit’s application of the established Iqbal/Twombly pleading standard and inducement law in reviewing Hikma’s motion to dismiss Amarin’s claim that Hikma’s conduct, in combination with its “skinny label,” induced infringement of Amarin’s patented treatment methods.
Supreme Court Issues Unanimous Decision in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment
March 25, 2026

On March 25, 2026, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment. The majority opinion limits contributory liability to situations where a party intended that its service be used for infringement, either by affirmatively inducing infringement or by selling a service tailored to infringement. A concurring opinion by Justice Sotomayor argues that the material contribution test should be retained, and that other forms of secondary liability can be found, which is consistent with the position asserted by AIPLA in its amicus brief filed on September 5, 2025. To read the opinion of the Court, please click here.
AIPLA Comments on the Draft Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China
March 23, 2026

Arlington, VA. February 9, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the Legislative Affairs Commission of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress regarding the latest Draft Trademark Law of the People’s Republic of China. AIPLA recognized the NPC’s efforts to streamline trademark procedures, strengthen protection, and address abusive and bad-faith filing practices.
AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in USAA v. PNC Bank
March 3, 2026

Arlington, VA. March 2, 2026 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court in USAA v. PNC Bank, N.A., No. 25-853, in support of USAA’s petition for certiorari, urging the Court to provide much-needed guidance to address the unpredictable and overly broad application of the judicial exceptions to patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101, particularly the “abstract idea” exception.