CAFC Reverses Summary Judgment of Copyright and Design Patent Infringement re Furniture Designs
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today reversed a California federal district court's grant of summary judgment in a copyright and design patent infringement case involving several bedroom furniture designs. The court concluded that the district court had misapplied the applicable tests for infringement. Amini Innovation Corp. v. Anthony California, Inc., Appeal No. 05-1159 (Fed. Cir. March 3, 2006).
US Design Patent D475,218
BED FRAME
On the copyright side, the district court mistakenly decided "the fact intensive question of the total concept and feel of the carvings in the furniture." Applicable 9th Circuit law disfavors the grant of summary judgment on that issue. The CAFC found that "a reasonable jury could conclude that at least some of the accused designs satisfy the substantial similarity standard." Therefore summary judgment was inappropriate.
On the design patent side, in considering the infringement issue the district court analyzed each element of the design separately insted of analyzing "the design as whole from the perspective of an ordinary observer." The CAFC could not agree that a reasonable jury could not find that the designs in question are substantially similar. Again, the granting of summary judgment on this issue was in error.
The case was remanded to the district court for further proceedings.