HOME > IP INFORMATION > Design > Examples > 5. Example of Related Design (2) ---Variations added to dotted lined parts
5. Example of Related Design (2)
---Variations added to dotted lined parts
Case9. Design registration No. 1079976, et al “Block for A Breast Wall”
This design relates to a faceplate of a breast wall block. There are a principal design( A) and two related designs (B and C) for this case. All of them have been registered. Note that there are differences between the designs in the parts shown by dotted lines and in the parts shown by solid lines. The official guidelines read, “when judging similarity of partial designs, the following elements shall be considered:
- The article to which the design is applied;
- Function and use of the part for which a design registration is sought as partial design;
- Location, size and scope of the part for which a design registration is sought as partial design in proportion of the whole article; and
- Shape of the part itself for which a design registration is sought as partial design.
According to an interpretation of item 3 above, the shape of the part shown by dotted lines may affect judgment of similarity of designs. Examples are shown below where these designs will be considered different in location or size (but this is not always mean that the designs are dissimilar to each other). If one wishes to confirm whether designs, which are different in the shape of the dotted-lined part, are within the scope of one’s own design right, it is effective to file design applications for designs that have variations in the dotted-lined part as well. For example, in the figure below, design 1 should be filed as a principal design and design 2 should be filed as a related design.
Turning back to the illustrated case, since design registrations have been granted for related designs having considerably different rear portions, it is reasonable to assume that the scope of similarity for this design is broad. If these designs were filed as whole designs, the examiner may deem each design to be dissimilar to the others in view of the fact that the scope of similarity for this type of articles is rather narrow.
Case 9 <Principal Design A> Design registration No. 1079976 “Block for A Breast Wall”
Case 9 <Related Design B> Design registration No. 1080357 “Block for A Breast Wall”
Case 9 <Related Design C> Design registration No. 1080358 “Block for A Breast Wall”
Case 10 Design Registration No. 1107402, et al. “Container for Transportation”
This design relates to the label attached to one side of the container. There are a principal design A and a related design B for this design. Both designs have been registered.
In this example, in addition to major modifications in the shape of the dotted- lined part, there are significant modifications directed to the location of the label shown by solid lines. Remember item 3 in the above official guidelines.
One may wonder whether a design registration is enforceable against an object that is similar to the solid-lined part of the registered design but dissimilar to the dotted lined part of the registered design. However, to answer this question, it is necessary to wait for relevant court decisions. Even the JPO’s views on this point are not yet fixed.
Because of such unclear circumstances, filing design applications for designs having wide variations in the dotted-lined parts as related designs is strongly recommended in the hope of effective enforcement in the future. Such trials by applicants will steer the partial design system in the desirable direction.
Case 10 <Principal Design A> Design Registration No. 1107402 “Container for Transportation”
Case 10 <Releated Design A> Design Registration No. 1107560 “Container for Transportation”
