• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Contact form
Patentanwaltskanzlei

Patentanwaltskanzlei

  • Deutsch

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email
MENUMENU
  • Services
    • Advice On Protective IP Rights
    • Patent Application /TM Registration
    • Enforcement Of IP Rights
    • Defence Against IP Rights Enforcement
    • Costs
  • Company
    • Fields of Law
      • Patent Law
      • Utility Model Law
      • Employees‘ Inventions
      • Trademark Law
      • Design Law
      • Trademark and Product Piracy
      • Expert Opinions
    • Our Law Firm
      • Dr. Tim Meyer-Dulheuer
      • Dr. Klaus Zimmermann
      • Zhichao Ying
      • Walter Benjamin Feldheim
    • Commitment
  • Contact
    • Where To Find Us
    • Write us!
    • Request call back
  • Blog

Declaratory judgement against Skechers on loop shoe design

22. February 2019

Does a distinctive bow on the shoe lead to a patent infringement? Shoe manufacturer Eliya has filed a declaratory action against Skechers before the U. S. District Court of New York after Skechers accused Eliya of patent infringement.

Eliya loop design shoe
Eliya Bow shoe

A few days ago, the shoe company Eliya Inc. filed a complaint for a declaratory judgment (“Complaint for Declaratory Judgment”) before the U. S. Supreme Court. S. District Court Southern District of New York (Eliya, Inc. et al. v. Skechers U.S.A. Inc. et al.1:19-cv-00861). Skechers had sent Eliya a cease-and-desist letter in which she accused Eliya of infringing two of Skechers’ shoe design patents ( U.S. Pat. No. D821,724 and U.S. Pat. No. D810,412). By asking the court for a declaratory judgment, the threatening and possibly very costly controversy can perhaps be resolved. In the declaratory action, Eliya alleges Skecher’s injury to the Puma Bow Shoe and The Eliya Bow Shoe shoe models.

Under U.S. law, a design is infringed if a copy is “substantially similar”. Under U.S. Patent Law designs must be new and not obvious in order to be patentable. In the case of utility models protecting functional elements of inventions or processes, the entire product is protected, in the case of designs only the ornamental designs of functional objects are protected.

Is a bow functional?

Skechers
left: Skechers Patent,
right: Puma Bow shoe

Eliya denies that the design with the bow was new at the time of the patent application. As early as 2015, Puma began selling a shoe in bow design. But Skechers did not apply for a patent for such a bow design until February 2018.

Eliya also claims that the Skechers bow design protected by the patent is functional. Because the bow fulfils a functional task when the shoe is put on or released by putting on or releasing the bow around the foot. If the court were to agree with that view, the arch design could not be protected as a design since it would fulfil a function.

 

 

With this reasoning, Eliya asks that the Court give the following judgment against Skechers:

  • A statement that Eliya did not cause any injury.
  • The annulment of the patent U.S. D821,724 for lack of novelty.

Skechers is not the first time in a dispute over his shoe design. In May 2018, a U.S. court ruled that there was a significant risk of confusion between the adidas sneaker Stan Smith and the Skechers’ Onix sneaker ( Partial success for adidas before U.S. Court of Appeals ).

Would you also like to protect your trademark or brand?

Our lawyers are experienced in trademark and patent law, national and international law.


 

Source for text + picture:

U.S. ligigation Eliya vs. Skechers 1:19-cv-00861

  • share  
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 
  • share 

Category iconDesign Law,  International Intellectual Property,  Product- and Trademark piracy Tag iconEliya,  Skechers

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

More articles about: Design Law

All articles

Blog Menu

  • Design Law
  • Healthcare & Lifesciences
  • International Intellectual Property
  • Licenses
  • News from our law firm
  • Overall
  • Patent Law
  • Product- and Trademark piracy
  • Trademark Law

Recent Posts

  • What is the public allowed to know? 3. June 2024
  • BPatG: Patent claim of cancer drug on active substance as salt 7. March 2022
  • Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022 4. March 2022
  • CODE-X vs. Cody’s: Likelihood of confusion in drinks? 25. February 2022

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Das könnte Sie auch interessieren:

4. March 2022
Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

Grant for European IP Protection: SME Fund 2022

17. February 2022
China joins the Hague Agreement

China joins the Hague Agreement

14. February 2022
Crypto trading: NFT for luxury and art

Crypto trading: NFT for luxury and art

11. February 2022
Shipwreck for Iglo: lawsuit over figure Käpt’n Iglo

Shipwreck for Iglo: lawsuit over figure Käpt’n Iglo

4. February 2022
Grill bowl design: patent drawings against design

Grill bowl design: patent drawings against design

31. January 2022
BGH Radiator Design: Right to be heard

BGH Radiator Design: Right to be heard

Contact us or request a call back

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]
Request a call back

Footer

Contact

Hanauer Landstrasse 287
D – 60314 Frankfurt am Main
Deutschland
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 199
[email protected]

Office Hours
Moday – Friday:   08:00-18:00

Fields of Law

  • Patent Law
  • Utility Model Law
  • Employees’ Inventions
  • Trademark Law
  • Design Law
  • Trademark and Product Piracy
  • Expert Opinions
  • Costs

Law Firm

  • Request non-binding call back
  • Company
  • Our Law Firm
  • ISO Certificate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Data handling for clients
  • Imprint

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • xing
  • Email

Newsletter Signup

Newsletter INT

© Meyer-Dulheuer MD Legal Patentanwälte PartG

Contact Form

 

Give us a call, send us an email or fill out the contact form.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf INT

Please note: If we deal specifically with your individual case, this is what is known as an initial consultation. In accordance with Section 34 of the Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz, this incurs one-off costs of 190 euros plus MwSt. We will be happy to assist you in a personal consultation after our telephone call.

Kontaktformular

 

Rufen Sie uns an, schicken Sie uns eine Mail oder füllen Sie das Kontaktformular aus.

+49 (0) 69 / 606 278 – 0
[email protected]

Rückruf

Um dieses Angebot nutzen zu können, müssen Sie der Speicherung Ihrer personenbezogenen Daten zustimmen. Wir behandeln diese streng vertraulich und verwenden sie nur zur Kontaktaufnahme mit Ihnen. Mehr dazu lesen Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.

Bitte beachten Sie: Wenn wir uns konkret mit Ihrem Einzelfall befassen, ist dies eine sogenannte Erstberatung. Für eine solche entstehen gemäß § 34 Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz einmalige Kosten in Höhe von 190 Euro plus MwSt. Gerne helfen wir Ihnen im Anschluss an unser Telefonat in einem persönlichen Beratungsgespräch weiter.