Sarah Fackrell
LightNews LightNews
banner
design-law.bsky.social
Sarah Fackrell
@design-law.bsky.social
19K followers 4.3K following 11K posts
Professor of Law at Chicago-Kent College of Law, Illinois Tech. Currently writing about "Schedule A" litigation.

For more on #ScheduleA, see Part II(B) here: https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-138/the-counterfeit-sham/
Posts Replies Media Videos
design-law.bsky.social
D657,559 - issued in 2012 for a design for a "wine bottle carrier." #DesignPatents
wine bottle carrier shaped like a snowman. all the snowman parts are disclaimed
November 28, 2025 at 5:51 PM
design-law.bsky.social
D597,850 - issued in 2019 for a design for a "shopping bag with instructional graphic." #DesignPatents
design patent drawings showing an unclaimed shopping bag decorated with a tiny picture showing the bag buckled up on a car seat
November 28, 2025 at 1:48 PM
design-law.bsky.social
D581,208 - issued in 2008 for a design for a "turkey pan." #DesignPatents
item that appears to be something like one of those mini bundt pans except it makes little turkey-shaped items
November 27, 2025 at 2:23 PM
design-law.bsky.social
Only the best for the goodest boy or girl in your life:
Haute Diggity Dog SNUGGLY cup-shaped plush tog toy
November 26, 2025 at 5:08 PM
design-law.bsky.social
D27,815 - issued in 1897 for a design for a cranberry scoop. #DesignPatents
apparatus with a handle, scoop, and holding reservoir
November 26, 2025 at 3:31 PM
design-law.bsky.social
D1,021,329 - issued in 2024 for a design for a "turkey costume." #DesignPatents
nightmare image of a garment that looks sort of like a snowman put on a pilgrim hat and a winged cape
November 26, 2025 at 3:06 PM
design-law.bsky.social
I would have omitted this paragraph.
To comport with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, Plaintiff will be brief and make a plain statement of grounds for jurisdiction, without lengthy exposition on the prevalence of intellectual property infringement and supposed behaviors of sellers on platforms common in Schedule A complaints. The Court is well aware of the common elements of Schedule A litigation. However, here, thorough pre-filing investigation shows jurisdiction and venue are appropriate.
November 26, 2025 at 2:35 PM
design-law.bsky.social
It's unclear to me whether this plaintiff understands that they cannot treble a § 289 award.
38. Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages adequately compensating for the infringement, including, but not limited to, Defendant’s profits, $250, or a reasonable royalty, whichever is greater. See 35 U.S.C. § 289. 39. Defendant’s conduct has been, is, and continues to be willful. So, Plaintiff is entitled to treble damages. 35 U.S.C. § 284. F. That Plaintiff be awarded damages in an amount to be proven at trial, in no event less than Defendant’s profits, a reasonable royalty, or $250, whichever is greater, together with interests and costs. G. That Plaintiff be awarded treble damages for Defendant’s willful infringement of the Patent.
November 26, 2025 at 2:32 PM
design-law.bsky.social
From the complaint in case 1:25-cv-14400: "As part of Plaintiff’s pre-filing efforts, Plaintiff submitted numerous reports to the
platform hosting the ecommerce store to no avail."

Maybe it was "to no avail" because the accused products didn't infringe.
18. Further, Plaintiff did not immediately rush to this Court to resolve its concerns. As part of Plaintiff’s pre-filing efforts, Plaintiff submitted numerous reports to the platform hosting the ecommerce store to no avail. 19. As such, Defendant’s conduct along with the platform’s inaction have forced Plaintiff to bring this suit to protect its rights.
November 26, 2025 at 2:24 PM
design-law.bsky.social
The D'900 patent claims a design for a "blanket pouch with rear sleeve":
pouch with a zipper and some lines
November 26, 2025 at 2:22 PM
design-law.bsky.social
Des. 300,380 - issued in 1989 for a design for cheesecake on a stick. #DesignPatents
a wedge of cheesecake with an almost fuzzy-looking coating, shown from various points of view
November 25, 2025 at 10:32 PM
design-law.bsky.social
D226522 - issued in 1973 for a design for a "packaged pie." #DesignPatents
from the spec: "My design for a packaged pie is characterized by the E. of the container and the edge crust of the pie overhanging the supporting ring, and the transparent wrapper covering the heaped, top portion flowing over the top of the pie and over the edge crust where it curves inwardly adjacent the support ring following its surface to the underside of the pie where it curves upwardly toward the bottom of the container"
November 25, 2025 at 10:28 PM
design-law.bsky.social
Just so we're all clear here:

No, you're not entitled to recover DESIGN patent damages for UTILITY patent infringement.

That is not a thing.
25. Unless a preliminary and permanent injunction is issued enjoining Defendants and all others acting in concert therewith from infringing the **314 Patent, Plaintiff will be significantly and irreparably harmed. 26. The Plaintiff is entitled to recover damages adequate to compensate for the infringement, including the Defendants' profits, under 35 U.S.C. § 289. Plaintiff is entitled to recover any other damages as appropriate pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284.
November 25, 2025 at 1:45 PM
design-law.bsky.social
Wait, they're actually alleging that some of the defendants are *not* foreign?

That has implications for both venue and personal jurisdiction.
"The Defendants are individuals and business entities who, upon information and belief, reside in the People's Republic of China or other foreign and domestic jurisdictions."
November 25, 2025 at 1:40 PM
design-law.bsky.social
Also, I haven't gone back to compare the exact wording, but these allegations sound a lot like the allegations that got this attorney sanctioned in the Onbrill case:
highlight: Defendants attempt to conceal both their identities and the full scope and interworking of their operation
November 25, 2025 at 1:39 PM
design-law.bsky.social
The plaintiff has filed a second case, Kotyk v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identfied in Schedule A, Docket No. 1:25-cv-14271 (N.D. Ill. Nov 21, 2025).

It alleges infringement of a utility patent, which the plaintiff abbreviates in a nonstandard way:
INTRODUCTION 3. The Plaintiff filed the action to combat the online sellers who sell the same knock-off product that infringes upon Plaintiffs U.S. Utility invention Patent No. 7,527,314 ("**314 Patent") entitled "VEHICLE GAP GUARD" (attached as Exhibit A), filed on November 6, 2006, issued on May 5, 2009. The Defendants individually and collectively created the Defendants' Internet Stores by the dozens and created them to appear as if selling licensed products while actually and knowingly marketing, selling, and/or distributing the same knock-off products. The Defendants' Internet Stores sell the same knock-off products, establishing a logical relationship between them and suggesting that the Defendants' operation arise out of the same series of occurrences. Defendants attempt to conceal both their identities and the full scope and interworking of their operation. Plaintiff is forced to file these actions to combat the Defendants' continuous infringement of its patented utility invention. The Plaintiff has been and continues to be irreparably damaged and harmed by the loss of its patent rights to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering for sale, and importing its patented utility invention THE BACKGROUND 4. Plaintiff Jonathan Kotyk is a resident of Atlantic Beach, FL (U.S.), and a citizen of the United States. Plaintiff is the assignee of U.S. Utility invention Patent No. 7,527,314 ("**314 Patent") entitled "VEHICLE GAP GUARD" (attached as Exhibit A), filed on November 6, 2006, and issued on May 5, 2009. A copy of the public notice of assignment is shown at Exhibit A-2. 5. Plaintiff entered into an assignment contract with the inventor of the **314 Patent, R. Dale Pelfrey, on December 29, 2023, and lawfully exercised his right as the patent assignee to sell, market, and distribute **314 Patent products. 6. The Plaintiff is the lawful assignee of all rights, title, and interest in the **314 Patent entitled "VEHICLE GAP GUARD" (attached as Exhibit A), filed November 6, 2006, issuing May 5, 2009. 7. The Plaintiff has established the product as the first to market, with a well-earned reputation for quality and innovation. An image of the claimed utility invention is shown in the image below: 3
November 25, 2025 at 1:37 PM
design-law.bsky.social
Interesting. Plaintiff (represented by Robert M. DeWitty) files a #ScheduleA complaint, along with a motion to seal. The case is assigned to Judge Gettleman. The judge does nothing for over a month. The plaintiff dismisses the case.
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby stipulates that Plaintiff’s claim is to be dismissed in its entirety without prejudice, with the parties to bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees. The Defendants have not made an appearance in this matter. The dismissal shall be effective upon filing of this motion.
November 25, 2025 at 1:30 PM
design-law.bsky.social
It's not clear to me what, exactly, the plaintiff is claiming as its unregistered trade dress. But here are the two products. Likely to confuse?
plaintiff's timer, labeled "THE - TIMER" accused product, labeled "THE CADDY"
November 25, 2025 at 1:24 PM
design-law.bsky.social
Here's the expired DP, which claims a design for a "wildlife feeder timer": patents.google.com/patent/USD51...
apparatus shaped like a rounded rectangle with a rounded rectangular screen with rounded rectangular buttons
November 25, 2025 at 1:21 PM
design-law.bsky.social
Chism v. Sendero Outdoors, Inc., Docket No. 5:25-cv-01557 (W.D. Tex. Aug 27, 2025): New trade dress case over a design claimed in an expired design patent.
NATURE OF THE CASE 1. Over 20 years ago, Stan Chism, owner of WTFS, introduced into the market the now-iconic The-Timer deer feed timer. Its aesthetic design (also referred to as product configuration) was novel yet simple and stood out from the timers that were available at the time. 2. The product configuration of The-Timer timer was so novel that the United States Patent and Trademark Office granted Stan Chism and WTFS a design patent for the aesthetic Case 5:25-cv-01557-LS Document 1 Filed 08/27/25 Page 1 of 6 2 appearance of The-Timer timer. That patent was U.S. Patent No. D517,930, and has now expired.
November 25, 2025 at 1:19 PM
design-law.bsky.social
D583,131 - issued in 2008 for a design for an "airplane shaped slipper." #DesignPatents
slipper shaped like a big puffy plane with little tiny wings
November 24, 2025 at 9:40 PM
design-law.bsky.social
D639,006 - issued in 2011 for a design for a "bamboo open trash can." #DesignPatents
rectangular container with a hole. nothing interesting here
November 22, 2025 at 3:27 PM
design-law.bsky.social
D805,151 - issued in 2017 for a design for "an engagement ring-shaped floatation [sic] device." #DesignPatents
blow-up ring shaped like a diamond solitaire ring
November 21, 2025 at 8:43 PM
design-law.bsky.social
D169,379 - issued in 1953 for a design for a badge. Listed prior art: "National Geographic Magazine, June 1943, pages 428 and 429, items Coast Guard Good Conduct, Sharpshooter's badge." #DesignPatents
badge featuring a heart decorated with hug-emoji-like hands, holdig up three triangles. the whole thing is hanging from a safety pin
November 21, 2025 at 2:30 PM
design-law.bsky.social
Mood:
figure 1 from D1,065,667, which claims a design for a flamethrower
November 20, 2025 at 11:19 PM