Justyn Trott
Associate
Engineering + Design
Justyn Trott is an associate focusing on design patent prosecution.
Prior to joining Saidman, Justyn was a Patent Examiner for the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In this role, he evaluated software related patents, conducted detailed examinations of patent applications, researched foreign and domestic patent databases, and prepared office actions. In addition, Justyn was a student attorney for the Intellectual Property and Entrepreneurship Clinic at Suffolk University Law School, where he represented start-up companies and entrepreneurs on various patent and trademark matters.
During law school, Justyn interned with Hologic, Inc. as an intellectual property associate, where he focused on patent and trademark protection for medical devices, software and electronics. Justyn also served as the lead articles manager of Suffolk University Law School’s Journal of High Technology Law and student affairs liaison for the Black Law Students Association.
Admitted:
- New Jersey
- District of Columbia
Education:
- D., Suffolk University Law School
- S., cum laude, Biomedical Engineering, University of Hartford
Articles
DesignLaw Knowledge
Obviousness
On May 21, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decided LKQ v. GM, abolishing the long-standing Rosen-Durling test for design patent obviousness, which required a primary reference, something in existence which must appear basically the same as the claimed design, and combining with secondary references that are “so related” (in visual appearance and type).
Now, in order to rejected a claimed design as obvious, there must be a primary reference which is something analogous, in existence that is “visually similar” and secondary reference also must be analogous and although it need to come from the references themselves, there must be a record-supporting reason why a person of ordinary skill would have a motion to combine.
USPTO Updated Guidance and Examination Instructions for Making a Determination of Obviousness in Designs in light of LKQ v. GM.
USPTO Design Patent Examiner Materials and Resources – Impacts on Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. 103 for Designs in Light of LKQ Corp. V. GM Global Technology Operations LLC
WIPO DAS
The WIPO Digital Access Service (DAS) for electronic priority document exchange facilitates an applicant requirement to provide certified copy of priority documents to meet Paris Convention priority requirements.
For US design patents, late provision of an access code or retrieval failure presents system challenges and filing by mail may become necessary, presenting its own challenges as IP Offices go digital only; the DAS access code should be provided in an Application Data Sheet (ADS) and confirmed on filing receipt.
For accessing priority to a US document the WIPO DAS code is the same 4-digit US application “confirmation code” provided that the Applicant has opted in to electronic access.
WIPO provides a list of participating members and a system to obtain a certificate of availability to confirm that Offices should be able to retrieve the priority document.
Name and Likeness
A person’s name, image and likeness (NIL) are attributes that identify a specific person, including their name, image, voice, signature and other personal identifiers. NIL rights are generally protected under state law, and student-athletes and professional athletes and entertainers can protect and commercialize their NIL.
