Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 7 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Litton Systems, Inc. v. Whirlpool Corporation.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Litton Systems, Inc. v. Whirlpool Corporation Anchor | green | “minor differences between a patented design and an accused article's design cannot, and shall not, prevent a finding of infringement.” | 5 |
| 2 | Braun Inc. And Braun Aktiengesellschaft, Plaintiffs/cross-Appellants v. Dynamics Corporation of America | green | “in evaluating a claim of design patent infringement, a trier of fact must consider the ornamental aspects of the design as a whole and not merely isolated portions of the patented design.” | 2 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.