Wednesday, November 13, 2013

Juicy Whip, Inc. v. Orange Bang, Inc. case brief

Juicy Whip, Inc. v. Orange Bang, Inc. case brief summary
185 F.3d 1364 (1999)


CASE SYNOPSIS
In a patent infringement action, plaintiff patent assignee appealed the judgment from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment on grounds that plaintiff's invention lacked utility and was unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.S. § 101.

CASE FACTS
Plaintiff, a patent assignee, sued defendants for infringement of its post-mix beverage dispenser. Defendants moved for summary judgment of invalidity and the district court granted the motion on grounds that plaintiff's invention lacked utility as its purpose was to increase sales by deception and was unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.S. § 101.


DISCUSSION

  • On appeal, the court reversed and remanded. 
  • The requirement of utility in patent law was not a directive to the Patent and Trademark Office or the courts to serve as arbiters of deceptive trade practices. 
  • The fact that one product could be altered to make it look like another was in itself a specific benefit sufficient to satisfy the statutory requirement of utility. 
  • The district court erred in holding that the invention of the patent lacked utility because it deceived the public through imitation in a manner that was designed to increase product sales.

CONCLUSION
On appeal, the court reversed and remanded the case because the district court erred in granting defendants motion for summary judgment on grounds that plaintiff's invention lacked utility and was unpatentable.

Suggested Study Aids and Books

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Ins and Outs of Class Action Lawsuits: A Comprehensive Guide

Sometimes, you may buy a product only to find it defective. To make it worse, your search for the product reveals mass complaints. You can ...