product-design
6 cases — ← All topics
| Case | Title | Lower Court | Docketed | Status | Flags | Tags | Question Presented |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25-286 | Six4Three, LLC v. Facebook, Inc., et al. | California | 2025-09-11 | Denied | Response Waived | communications-decency-act developer-apis liability-immunity online-platform product-design section-230 | Whether Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act immunizes an online platform for its own conduct, speech, and product design choices? |
| 25-217 | CeramTec GmbH v. CoorsTek Bioceramics LLC, fka C5 Medical Werks, LLC | Federal Circuit | 2025-08-22 | Denied | Response Waived | design-functionality evidence-standard intellectual-property product-design trademark-law utility-patent | Whether under this Court's decision in TrafFix Devices, Inc. v. Marketing Displays, Inc., 532 U.S. 23 (2001), a utility patent that produces a product… |
| 24-1202 | John Doe v. Grindr Inc., et al. | Ninth Circuit | 2025-05-23 | Denied | Amici (3)Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (3) | algorithmic-recommendation communications-decency-act minor-protection platform-liability product-design section-230 | 1. Does Section 230(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act immunize apps from liability for their own conduct in marketing and designing defective pr… |
| 23-194 | Trendily Furniture, LLC, et al. v. Jason Scott Collection, Inc. | Ninth Circuit | 2023-08-31 | Denied | Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (2) | consumer-confusion intentional-copying lanham-act pass-off product-design secondary-meaning trade-dress | Whether, and to what extent, a competitor's intentional copying alone —without any intent to confuse consumers or pass off its products as plaintiff's… |
| 19-462 | A Top New Casting Incorporated v. Bodum USA, Incorporated | Seventh Circuit | 2019-10-08 | Denied | apple-v-samsung circuit-split cost-advantage design-simplicity functionality manufacturing-cost manufacturing-costs manufacturing-process materials product-design trade-dress | This is a trade dress case. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the decision of the District Court that Plaintiff-Appellee Bodum USA, Inc. owned a trade dres… | |
| 18-615 | Bruce Munro, et al. v. Lucy Activewear Inc., et al. | Eighth Circuit | 2018-11-13 | Denied | circuit-split civil-procedure copyright copyright-law intellectual-property lanham-act physical-products preemption product-design standing trade-dress | Does copyright preclude Lanham Act product design trade dress claims for physical products, and if so, under what circumstance(s)? |