Design Patent

Patent Disputes Are Technical by Nature, Not Emotional

Unlike many business conflicts, patent disputes are not resolved by narratives or goodwill. They are decided by technical comparisons between legal language and real-world products.

Courts and decision-makers focus on:

• What the patent actually claims
  
  
• How the accused product is built or operates
  
  
• Whether the two overlap in legally meaningful ways
  
  

This technical grounding is why patent disputes often surprise business owners. A product can look similar or compete directly in the market and still avoid infringement—or infringe despite surface-level differences.

Why Claim Language Drives Every Outcome

Patent claims are not marketing descriptions or general explanations. They are precise legal boundaries. Every word matters.

Effective patent dispute strategies start by:

• Identifying which claims matter most, not which ones look impressive
  
  
• Understanding how courts interpret claim terms
  
  
• Distinguishing between required elements and optional features
  
  

Many disputes fail because one side assumes infringement (or non-infringement) without fully appreciating how narrowly or broadly claims may be read.

Choosing Counsel Is a Strategic Decision, Not a Formality

Patent disputes occupy a narrow legal space that blends engineering concepts with courtroom strategy. Not every IP lawyer operates comfortably in that space.

Experience matters most when counsel has:

• Deep familiarity with patent claims and specifications
  
  
• Experience analyzing infringement from both sides
  
  
• Exposure to how judges evaluate technical arguments
  
  
• A practical understanding of how patent disputes escalate
  
  

Attorneys who focus exclusively on filings or registrations may not be equipped for adversarial patent analysis. Likewise, lawyers without technical training may overlook critical details that determine the outcome.

Strategies for Asserting Patent Rights Effectively

For patent owners, enforcement is about precision, not reach.

Strong enforcement strategies tend to:

• Focus on the clearest, most defensible claims
  
  
• Align claimed features with observable product functionality
  
  
• Avoid overstating the scope of protection
  
  
• Anticipate counterarguments before they arise
  
  

Overly aggressive enforcement can backfire by inviting invalidity challenges or undermining credibility. A targeted, technically grounded approach often produces better results.

Strategies for Defending Against Infringement Allegations

Being accused of patent infringement does not mean liability is inevitable. Many claims collapse under close scrutiny.

Common defense pathways include:

• Demonstrating that a required claim element is missing
  
  
• Showing that an accused feature operates differently than claimed
  
  
• Exposing ambiguity or overbreadth in claim language
  
  
• Identifying weaknesses that threaten patent enforceability
  
  

Patent disputes are often decided on narrow grounds. One missing or altered element can change the entire analysis.

The Value of Early, Objective Assessment

One of the most effective tools in any patent dispute is early clarity.

Before costs escalate, an objective technical review can help determine:

• Whether a claim is likely enforceable
  
  
• Whether a product realistically infringes
  
  
• Where negotiation makes sense—and where it does not
  
  

This type of assessment empowers businesses to make informed decisions instead of reacting under pressure.

How Lloyd & Mousilli Approaches Patent Disputes

Lloyd & Mousilli approaches patent disputes with a focus on leverage, clarity, and long-term business impact. We represent both patent holders and accused parties, which gives us insight into how disputes unfold from every angle.

Our work includes:

• Early claim-focused risk analysis
  
  
• Practical infringement and non-infringement assessments
  
  
• Strategic positioning for negotiation or litigation
  
  
• Aligning legal action with business objectives
  
  

Patent disputes carry real financial and operational consequences. Winning them requires more than familiarity with intellectual property—it requires disciplined analysis and strategic restraint.

If you are facing a patent dispute or considering enforcement, schedule a free consultation with Lloyd & Mousilli to discuss your position and the smartest path forward.

When Visual Design Is the Real Competitive Advantage

Design patents are most effective when a product’s appearance carries independent value apart from its functionality.

They are commonly used to protect:

• Distinctive product housings or silhouettes
  
• Packaging or container configurations
  
• Visual layouts for interfaces and displays
  
• Decorative or ornamental surface features
  

If the originality of a product lies primarily in how it performs or operates internally, utility patent protection may be more appropriate. In many cases, however, companies benefit from combining design and utility protections to safeguard both form and function.

Design Patents Serve a Different Purpose Than Utility Patents

Understanding what design patents do—and what they don’t do—is key to making the right filing decision.

Design patents protect:

• The ornamental appearance of an item
  
• What is shown visually in the patent drawings
  

They do not protect:

• Functional processes or methods
  
• Internal mechanics or performance features
  
• How a product is used or assembled
  

This distinction is critical. A design patent can be very strong when the appearance itself is difficult to change without sacrificing market appeal.

How Design Patent Protection Works in Practice

While the filing process is typically simpler than for utility patents, design patents still follow a structured examination path.

A typical design patent matter progresses through:

• Preparing drawings and drafting the application
  
• Review by a U.S. patent examiner
  
• Issuance, if the design meets legal standards
  

Although many design applications proceed smoothly, careful preparation is essential because the drawings define the scope of protection.

Preparing a Design Patent Application Strategically

The effectiveness of a design patent is determined long before the application is filed. Early decisions about what to show—and what not to show—have lasting consequences.

Preparation typically includes:

• Selecting views that fully capture the design’s distinctive elements
  
• Deciding whether to claim an entire product or only specific components
  
• Identifying alternative configurations worth protecting
  
• Ensuring visual consistency across all figures
  

Design patent drawings are not illustrations for marketing purposes. They are legal documents, and precision matters.

Why Design Drawings Carry So Much Weight

In a design patent, the drawings are the claim. Unlike utility patents, where words define scope, design patents rely almost entirely on visuals.

Well-prepared drawings:

• Clearly show what is protected
  
• Use consistent line types and shading
  
• Include multiple views to eliminate ambiguity
  
• Employ broken lines where appropriate to exclude unclaimed features
  

Small drafting choices can meaningfully affect enforcement later, which is why professional illustration and close review are critical.

The Role of the Written Portion of the Application

Although brief, the written portion of a design patent application plays an important supporting role. It typically:

• Identifies the subject matter of the design
  
• Describes each figure accurately
  
• Clarifies the use of broken lines or omitted views
  

Errors at this stage—even minor directional mistakes—can create unnecessary complications. Accuracy and consistency are key.

Timing Expectations for Design Patents

Design patent timelines are generally shorter than those for utility patents but still require patience.

Typical milestones include:

• Time to prepare formal drawings and application materials
  
• USPTO examination, which often takes over a year
  
• Resolution following examination, depending on whether objections arise
  

Some applications move from filing to issuance within two years, though timing varies with examiner workload and application complexity.

Predictability Compared to Utility Patents

Design patents tend to be more predictable than utility patents, both procedurally and financially.

As a category:

• Allowance rates are generally higher
  
• Examiner objections are often formal rather than substantive
  
• Overall prosecution tends to be more streamlined
  

That predictability makes design patents especially attractive for startups and companies seeking cost-effective protection.

Understanding the Cost Structure

The cost of a design patent depends on several components rather than a single flat number.

Costs usually include:

• Attorney fees for preparing and filing the application
  
• Government filing and issue fees
  
• Professional illustration costs
  
• Additional fees if examination issues arise
  

At Lloyd & Mousilli, we often structure design patent work using flat-fee arrangements to provide clarity and cost control from the outset.

Addressing USPTO Feedback When It Arises

Some design applications receive feedback from USPTO examiners. Common issues may relate to:

• Drawing format or consistency
  
• Shading or line-type requirements
  
• Similarity to prior designs
  

When this occurs, responses often involve revised drawings or focused legal argument. These situations are usually manageable with proper preparation and coordination.

Integrating Design Patents Into a Broader IP Strategy

Design patents are rarely used in isolation. They often work best alongside:

• Trademark protection for brand identifiers
  
• Utility patents for functional features
  
• Trade dress protection where applicable
  

When used strategically, design patents can deter copying, support licensing discussions, and strengthen brand recognition.

How Lloyd & Mousilli Helps Clients Protect Product Design

Lloyd & Mousilli works with companies at all stages—from early product development to established brand enforcement—to secure design patent protection that aligns with business goals.

Our team helps clients:

• Determine whether design protection makes strategic sense
  
• Define the right scope for visual protection
  
• Coordinate technically precise drawings
  
• Manage the application process through issuance
  
• Align design patents with trademarks and broader brand strategy
  

If you are launching a product, redesigning an existing one, or concerned about competitors copying your visual identity, schedule a free consultation with Lloyd & Mousilli to discuss whether design patent protection is right for your situation and what the path forward may look like.

Issued Patents vs. Filed Applications

It is important to distinguish between patent applications and granted patents. Applications may be abandoned, rejected, or substantially narrowed during prosecution. Issued utility and design patents, however, represent inventions that have cleared examination and are legally enforceable.

When assessing a patent attorney’s experience, focusing on issued patents provides a more accurate picture of results delivered for clients.

Using USPTO Patent Public Search to Review Patent Activity

The USPTO provides a public research tool known as Patent Public Search (PPUBS), which allows users to search issued patents using a variety of criteria, including practitioner name.

The platform offers two search options:

• Basic Search, which can be useful for general research but may return incomplete results.
  
  
• Advanced Search, which allows more precise queries and is recommended when reviewing practitioner activity.
  
  

Selecting the Correct Patent Database

To review granted U.S. patents, users should select the USPAT database. This database covers issued patents dating back to 1970 and is generally sufficient for evaluating the work of currently practicing patent attorneys.

Older patents may be found in separate archival databases, but for most due diligence purposes, USPAT provides relevant and reliable results.

Searching by Patent Attorney Name

When searching by practitioner name, advanced queries may be required. Attorney names may appear with middle initials or variations, which can affect search accuracy.

Using proximity search commands—designed to locate first and last names that appear close together—can help capture a more complete set of results. In some cases, adding parameters such as firm affiliation or date ranges may further refine search outcomes.

Because patent records can be formatted differently depending on filing practices and firm policies, no single search method is perfect. Multiple inquiries are often necessary to obtain meaningful results.

Confirming Patent Attorney Registration

Not all attorneys who advertise intellectual property services are registered to practice before the USPTO. Only registered patent attorneys and patent agents are authorized to prepare and prosecute patent applications.

The USPTO Office of Enrollment and Discipline maintains a public directory that allows users to:

• Confirm whether a practitioner is registered
  
  
• Determine whether they are a patent attorney or agent
  
  
• Review their registration date, which reflects how long they have been authorized to practice patent law
  
  

This verification step is critical for inventors deciding who can lawfully represent them before the USPTO.

Common Limitations of Patent Searches

Patent searches by practitioner name do have limitations. Some firms list only the firm name on issued patents, rather than individual attorneys. In those situations, searching by individual name may produce limited or no results.

Additionally, U.S.-only search tools do not capture:

• International patent filings
  
  
• PCT applications
  
  

‍

Why are Examiner Interviews beneficial?

Examiner interviews are the not-so-secret weapons of patent prosecution. If conducted strategically, an interview with your patent examiner can potentially be the driving force that leads to a successful registration. 

An examiner interview can provide several benefits, including: 

_{‍Clarification}

Examiners are only human; misunderstandings in the written communication between the examiner and the applicant can often be clarified with a face-to-face discussion. Your conversation may unearth information you otherwise would not have obtained. For example, your examiner may have misunderstood your claim as you’ve written them. A verbal explanation may provide the necessary clarity that the examiner was missing. 

_{‍Cost and time reduction}

On average, each Office Action response costs about $3,000. An interview with the examiner can potentially reduce the number of refusals issued against your application, saving you money and cutting down the prosecution time. 

‍When and how can you request an interview?

Once a first refusal has been issued, patent applicants are entitled to an interview with their examiner. There are three ways to submit a request for an interview: 

(1) Fill out a PTOL-413A form 

(2) The USPTO’s online Automated Interview Request (AIR) system

(3) Call your examiner directly to request an interview

‍Tips for a successful interview:

Simply attending the interview isn’t enough; preparation is key. Some ways to prepare for your interview are:

_{‍Prepare an itinerary}

Come prepared. Examiner interviews are typically 30 minutes long - make the most of your time by being as concise and efficient as possible. Prepare an itinerary for your discussion, including all questions and arguments you have for the examiner.

_{‍Ask for input}

An interview allows you to directly request the examiner’s recommendations for improving the claims in your application. For example, making note of the claim language the examiner uses is a strategic way to improve your arguments; they are not likely to reject their own language, so take advantage of this opportunity to receive their direct input. 

‍Ready to take the plunge on a patent application?

Patent applications are tedious and complex. It can take the average person months to learn the ins and outs of patent prosecution. Applying on your own is always a risk, as one small mistake can lead to drastic consequences regarding cost and time delays. 

Lloyd & Mousilli has dedicated intellectual property attorneys who are experienced in the patent application process. We can assist with the preparation and filing of your application, as well as offer strategic guidance on your overall intellectual property protection. 

‍

Introduction

Common questions arise once an investor understands that a design patent is necessary for their new and exciting product. Questions regularly thought about are “where do I begin?” and “what information is needed?” These, and many more, are answered below. At the end of this article, you will confidently call an attorney at Lloyd & Mousilli who can handle your design patent application.

A Design Patent

• Do you need a design or utility patent?

You need a design patent whenever an invention has new and unique ornamental features embodied in a product. In simple terms, a design patent protects the way an article looks. Whereas, The way an article is used and works are protected by a utility patent. Theoretically, you have created a new and useful phone. A utility patent protects the phone’s ability to call and text. A design patent protects the shape of the phone. If your invention simply created a new and unique way to call or text but shaped like any other phone, you cannot obtain a design patent.

A patent is a license giving a right or title for a set period of time – 20 years for a utility patent and 15 for a design patent – to an inventor. The inventor’s rights exclude others from making, using, or selling their invention. In particular, a design patent protects the inventor’s design from other companies creating a substantially similar design.

• What makes a design patentable?

First, you as the inventor should understand how the USPTO defines the word “design.” The definition says, “A design consists of the visual ornamental characteristics embodied in, or applied to, an article of manufacture.” (35 U.S.C. 171) In other words, a design is the visual characteristics of a new physical product. Think of a visual characteristic as the unique shape, look, or physical form of the product.

Second, the design must be primarily ornamental. If the utility of the product primarily dictates the product design, then it cannot obtain a design patent. Therefore, a design patent is not available if the utility is primarily achieved through the product’s characteristics. More so, the design should be visible during a commercially important time or in normal use. Using our phone reference as an example, if the design of the phone is necessary for the new and unique way of calling, then the design is not primarily ornamental. Likewise, if the design in question is the hard drive inside the phone, and there is no commercial importance, the phone may not secure a design patent from the USPTO.

The design may also be uniquely fixed to a tangible medium, but not necessarily independently connected to it. For example, a unique design on a dresser may obtain a design patent that can be applied to lunch or toolbox.

Third, is to understand what is considered an “article of manufacture.” The law broadly describes it as any physical product made from raw materials. However, there are some exclusions which include paintings, silkscreens, and decals. If there you are uncertain about your article of manufacturer’s eligibility, talk to an experienced attorney at Lloyd & Mousilli.

In conclusion, if your new physical product has visual characteristics that are primarily ornamental, then a design patent is for you. Some common examples of design patents are fountains, lamps, cars, and dressers.

Understanding a Design Patent Application and its Process

The United States Patent and Trademark Office is the governing agency that administers patents to founders. Having an understanding of the materials required for a design patent will enable you, as an inventor, to better situate yourself with an attorney who will complete the patent process. Here, you will learn what information you should provide an attorney at Lloyd & Mousilli to get your design patent process started.

Here is what the USPTO requires for a design patent application.

Create a Preamble

A Preamble is a text that contains the name of the applicant, title for the design, and a short description on the intended use of the product that the design is embedded in. The Preamble is what appears on the patent when the design is granted patentability.

Cross-references to related applications.

For example, any related utility or design patent applications on the phone. You may or may not have this information readily available. Keeping a detailed database of the patents your company has applied for and owns is essential in making this element efficient.

1. A statement regarding whether or not the design is federally sponsored.
2. A detailed description of the figure(s) of the drawing (“The Title”).

The title of the design must identify the article in which the design is embodied by the name generally known by the public. The Title should be specific and descriptive of the product. A good title for the phone reference would be “…a new design for a phone. The phone provides calling and texting.”

• A feature description.

A feature description indicates each view of element seven, the drawings. For example; top, bottom, perspective view, etc.  Another description of the design is not necessary because the examiner finds element seven, the drawings, as the best description.

• A single claim.

The application only includes one claim and defines the design. As a result, the claim MUST be in formal terms. The claim must say, “The ornamental design for (the article/product which embodies the design) as shown.” For example, “The ornamental design for the phone as shown”.

• Drawings or photographs.

The drawings or photographs artistically exemplify the design which embodies the invented products. It must either be in the form of a drawing or a black and white photograph. Typically, the USPTO requires drawings with black ink on paper. However, if photographs are the only practical medium to display the design then they are permitted. Drawings and photographs may not be sent in conjunction with each other and a photograph submission must not show an environmental structure. An environmental structure would be the table a lamp sits on or flowers in a vase. On rare occasions, the USPTO will accept color drawings and photographs after a petition is granted.

Detailed drawings and photographs are of utmost importance because they MUST show the entire visual disclosure (“Views”) of element six, the claim. A sufficient number of drawings varies. At a minimum, the drawings and photographs must show the front, rear, right and left sides, top, and bottom. There must be an appropriate number of drawings or photographs to completely disclose the contours of the surface(s). Adding perspective views shows the examiner the contours and shape of three-dimensional designs.

If one view simply duplicates another view, and the specification makes this very clear it may be omitted from the drawings and photographs. For example, mention in the specification if the right and left sides are completely uniform, and do not create two independent views. (Figure 1) & (Figure 2)

Changes to the drawings or photographs after submission is not permitted. Getting a professional draftsperson who specialized in design patent drawings will prevent an incomplete picture of the claimed design.

• Executed oath or declaration.

An oath or declaration is required and must contain a number of elements. Click HERE to see what is required.

The Process:

The process has potentially four elements. They are the filing of the application, the examination, the response, and potential reconsideration.

• Grinding the Application:

There is not a particular format required by the USPTO. However, consult an attorney for a successful template. Once the application has all the required documents, has been submitted, paid the appropriate filing fees, and is received by the USPTO, an Application Number and a Filing Date are assigned. This information is sent in a “Filing Receipt.”

A filing, search and examination fee is required. Good news startups; your fees are reduced by half.

• Examination:

Here, an examiner reviews the application. His or her primary objective is to check compliance with formalities, ensuring completeness of the drawing, and comparing the design with the prior art. Prior art is patented designs and published materials that are substantially similar to the application in question. If the examiner finds the design patentable, then instructions are sent to complete the process. CONGRATULATIONS YOU ARE ALMOST DONE. However, not all applications get approved at the first examination proceeding.

An examiner may deny registration for a few reasons. If the application is initially denied, a notice is sent to the applicant called an “Office Action.” The applicant may receive an Office Action if the disclosure cannot be understood or is incomplete or if there is a patented design substantially similar to the applicants (“prior art”). This office action will detail the issues and reasons behind denial and may suggest amendments.

Response:

A response is only required after receiving an Office Action and should contain any necessary amendments, a request for reconsideration, and be in writing. A timely response – within six months of the date the Office Action was mailed – is required. The application is abandoned if the response is not timely. A timely reply with a petition for an extension, and a fee ranging from $50 to $3000, may prevent abandonment.

• Reconsideration:

Once the reply is submitted to the USPTO, the examiner will look at the remarks and the amendments. The decision is final and denied if the design is found not patentable by the examiner. The examiner may also approve the application.

An inventor can appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) if the application is abandoned.

Conclusion

If you have a new and improved invention or artistic design, consider getting a design patent.

Additional notes:

• At any time there is communication between a person and the USPTO, there should be the following information: Application number, Group art unit number (in the office action), Filing date, Name of the Examiner who prepared the Office Action, and The Title of the invention.
• You may file a new application prior to abandonment of the original design patent which continues prosecution of the claim.
• Having a design patent DOES NOT prohibit you from receiving copyright and trademark protection. See Copyright and Trademark.

Figure one– design patent drawing:

Notice:
Drawing is in black and white.
Shading that exemplifies curvature and angles.
There is no “environmental structure”

Figure two: Here is an example of multiple angles required for a single article.

Notice:
There is more than one angle of the dresser.
Each angle shows different ornamental characteristics.

Remember, a design patent protects the ornamental character of the object. In the dresser example, it protects the unique design, not the utilitarian function of holding clothes or opening up.

*All images are from the United States Patent and Trademark Office website. We are not the owners nor the sole distributors of the images shown above.

‍