1503.01 Specification [R-07.2022]

37 CFR 1.153 Title, description and claim, oath or declaration (for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012).

(a) The title of the design must designate the particular article. No description, other than a reference to the drawing, is ordinarily required. The claim shall be in formal terms to the ornamental design for the article (specifying name) as shown, or as shown and described. More than one claim is neither required nor permitted.

(b) The inventor’s oath or declaration must comply with the requirements of § 1.63, or comply with the requirements of § 1.64 for a substitute statement.

*****

37 CFR 1.153 (pre-AIA) Title, description and claim, oath or declaration (for applications filed prior to September 16, 2012).

(a) The title of the design must designate the particular article. No description, other than a reference to the drawing, is ordinarily required. The claim shall be in formal terms to the ornamental design for the article (specifying name) as shown, or as shown and described. More than one claim is neither required nor permitted.

(b) The oath or declaration required of the applicant must comply with § 1.63.

*****

37 CFR 1.154  Arrangement of application elements in a design application.

  • (a) The elements of the design application, if applicable, should appear in the following order:
    • (1) Design application transmittal form.
    • (2) Fee transmittal form.
    • (3) Application data sheet (see § 1.76).
    • (4) Specification.
    • (5) Drawings or photographs.
    • (6) The inventor’s oath or declaration (see § 1.153(b)).
  • (b) The specification should include the following sections in order:
    • (1) Preamble, stating the name of the applicant, title of the design, and a brief description of the nature and intended use of the article in which the design is embodied.
    • (2) Cross-reference to related applications (unless included in the application data sheet).
    • (3) Statement regarding federally sponsored research or development.
    • (4) Description of the figure or figures of the drawing.
    • (5) Feature description.
    • (6) A single claim.
  • (c) The text of the specification sections defined in paragraph (b) of this section, if applicable, should be preceded by a section heading in uppercase letters without underlining or bold type.

¶ 15.05 Design Patent Specification Arrangement (Ch. 16 Design Application)

The following order or arrangement should be observed in framing a design patent specification:

  • (1) Preamble, stating name of the applicant, title of the design, and a brief description of the nature and intended use of the article in which the design is embodied.
  • (2) Cross-reference to related applications.
  • (3) Statement regarding federally sponsored research or development.
  • (4) Description of the figure or figures of the drawing.
  • (5) Feature description.
  • (6) A single claim.

Examiner Note:

Do not use this form paragraph in an international design application.

I. PREAMBLE AND TITLE

A preamble, if included, should state the name of the applicant, the title of the design, and a brief description of the nature and intended use of the article in which the design is embodied (37 CFR 1.154).

The title of the design identifies the article in which the design is embodied by the name generally known and used by the public and may contribute to defining the scope of the claim. See MPEP § 1504.04, subsection I.A. See Curver Luxembourg, SARL v. Home Expressions, Inc., 938 F.3d 1334, 1340, 2019 USPQ2d 341902 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (“[I]dentifying the article of manufacture serves to notify the public about the general scope of protection afforded by the design patent”). The title may be directed to the entire article embodying the design while the claimed design shown in full lines in the drawings may be directed to only a portion of the article. However, the title may not be directed to less than the claimed design shown in full lines in the drawings. A title descriptive of the actual article aids the examiner in developing a complete field of search of the prior art and further aids in the proper assignment of new applications to the appropriate class, subclass, and patent examiner, and the proper classification of the patent upon allowance of the application. It also helps the public in understanding the nature and use of the article embodying the design after the patent has been issued. For example, a broad title such as “Adapter Ring” provides little or no information as to the nature and intended use of the article embodying the design. If a broad title is used, the description of the nature and intended use of the design may be incorporated into the preamble. Absent an amendment requesting deletion of the description, it would be printed on any patent that would issue.

When a design is embodied in an article having multiple functions or comprises multiple independent parts or articles that interact with each other, the title must clearly define them as a single entity, for example, combined or combination, set, pair, unit assembly.

Since 37 CFR 1.153 requires that the title must designate the particular article, and since the claim must be in formal terms to the “ornamental design for the article (specifying name) as shown, or as shown and described,” the title and claim must correspond. When the article named in the title does not correspond to the article named in the claim, the examiner should object to the inconsistency under 37 CFR 1.153 and require correction.

However, it is emphasized that, under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) , the claim defines “the subject matter which the inventor or joint inventor regards as the invention” (emphasis added); (or for applications filed prior to September 16, 2012, under the second paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 the claim defines “the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention”), that is, the ornamental design to be embodied in or applied to an article. Thus, the examiner should afford the applicant substantial latitude in the language of the title/claim. The examiner should require amendment of the title/claim if the language is clearly misdescriptive, inaccurate, or unclear (i.e., the language would result in a rejection of the claim under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), (or for applications filed prior to September 16, 2012, pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph); see MPEP § 1504.04, subsection II). The use of language such as “or the like” or “or similar article” in the title when directed to the environment of the article embodying the design will not be the basis for a rejection of the claim under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), (or for applications filed prior to September 16, 2012, 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph). However, such language is indefinite when it refers to the area of articles defining the subject matter of the design. An acceptable title would be “door for cabinets, houses, or the like,” while the title “door or the like” would be unacceptable and the claim will be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), (or for applications filed prior to September 16, 2012, pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph). Ex parte Pappas, 23 USPQ2d 1636 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992). See also MPEP § 1504.04; subsection II.

Amendments to the title, whether directed to the article in which the design is embodied or its environment, must have antecedent basis in the original disclosure and may not introduce new matter. Ex parte Strijland, 26 USPQ2d 1259 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1992). If an amendment to the title is directed to the environment in which the design is used and the amendment would introduce new matter, the examiner should object to the amendment under 35 U.S.C. 132. If an amendment to the title is directed to the article in which the design is embodied and the amendment would introduce new matter, in addition to the objection under 35 U.S.C. 132, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) (or for applications filed prior to September 16, 2012, the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112).

Any amendment to the language of the title should also be made at each occurrence thereof throughout the application, except in the oath or declaration. If the title of the article is not present in the original figure descriptions, it is not necessary to incorporate the title into the descriptions as part of any amendment to the language of the title.

The practice set forth above regarding the title of the design is generally applicable to international design applications designating the United States. The requirement for a title in an international design application designating the United States is set forth in 37 CFR 1.1067 and corresponds to the requirement set forth in 37 CFR 1.153. See MPEP § 2920.04(a).

¶ 15.05.01 Title of Design Invention

The title of a design must designate the name of the article in which the design is embodied or applied to. In addition, the title must correspond with the claim. See MPEP § 1503.01 and 37 CFR 1.153 or MPEP § 2920.04(a) and 37 CFR 1.1067.

¶ 15.59 Amend Title

For [1], the title, and each occurrence of the language of the title, [2] amended throughout the application, original oath or declaration excepted, to read: [3]

Examiner Note:

  • 1. In bracket 1, insert reason.
  • 2. In bracket 2, insert –should be– or –has been–.
  • 3. When the applicant has furnished the application title, applicant’s authorization is required to make an examiner’s amendment to the application title. See MPEP § 1302.04. Where the changes are made by examiner’s amendment, this form paragraph should be preceded by form paragraphs 13.02 and 13.02.01. If an extension of time is required, use form paragraph 13.02.02 instead of form paragraphs 13.02 and 13.02.01.

II. DESCRIPTION

No description of the design in the specification beyond a brief description of the drawing is generally necessary, since as a rule the illustration in the drawing views is its own best description. In re Freeman, 23 App. D.C. 226 (App. D.C. 1904). While not required, such a description is not prohibited and may be incorporated, at applicant’s option, into the specification or may be provided in a separate paper. Ex parte Spiegel, 1919 C.D. 112, 268 O.G. 741 (Comm’r Pat. 1919). Descriptions of the figures are not required to be written in any particular format, however, if they do not describe the views of the drawing clearly and accurately, the examiner should object to the unclear and/or inaccurate descriptions and suggest language which is more clearly descriptive of the views.

  • (A) In addition to the figure descriptions, the following types of statements are permissible in the specification:
    • (1) Description of the appearance of portions of the claimed design which are not illustrated in the drawing disclosure. Such a description, if provided, must be in the design application as originally filed, and may not be added by way of amendment after the filing of the application as it would be considered new matter.
    • (2) Description disclaiming portions of the article not shown in the drawing as forming no part of the claimed design.
    • (3) Statement indicating the purpose of broken lines in the drawing, for example, environmental structure or boundaries that form no part of the design to be patented.
    • (4) Description denoting the nature and intended use of the claimed design, if not included in the preamble pursuant to 37 CFR 1.154 and MPEP § 1503.01, subsection I.
    • It is the policy of the Office to attempt to resolve questions about the nature and intended use of the claimed design prior to examination by making a telephone inquiry at the time of initial docketing of the application. This will enable the application to be properly classified and docketed to the appropriate examiner and to be searched when the application comes up for examination in its normal course without the need for a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112 prior to a search of the prior art. Explanation of the nature and intended use of the article may be added to the specification provided it does not constitute new matter. It may alternately, at applicant’s option, be submitted in a separate paper without amendment of the specification
    • (5) A “characteristic features” statement describing a particular feature of the design that is considered by applicant to be a feature of novelty or nonobviousness over the prior art (37 CFR 1.71(c)).
    • This type of statement may not serve as a basis for determining patentability by an examiner. In determining the patentability of a design, it is the overall appearance of the claimed design which must be taken into consideration. In re Rosen, 673 F.2d 388, 213 USPQ 347 (CCPA 1982); In re Leslie, 547 F.2d 116, 192 USPQ 427 (CCPA 1977). Furthermore, the inclusion of such a statement in the specification is at the option of applicant and will not be suggested by the examiner.

¶ 15.47 Characteristic Feature Statement

A “characteristic features” statement describing a particular feature of novelty or nonobviousness in the claimed design may be permissible in the specification. Such a statement should be in terms such as “The characteristic feature of the design resides in [1],” or if combined with one of the Figure descriptions, in terms such as “the characteristic feature of which resides in [2].” While consideration of the claim goes to the total or overall appearance, the use of a “characteristic feature” statement may serve later to limit the claim (McGrady v. Aspenglas Corp., 487 F. Supp. 859, 208 USPQ 242 (S.D.N.Y. 1980)).

Examiner Note:

In brackets 1 and 2, insert brief but accurate description of the feature of novelty or nonobviousness of the claimed design.

¶ 15.47.01 Feature Statement Caution

The inclusion of a feature statement in the specification is noted. However, the patentability of the claimed design is not based on the specified feature but rather on a comparison of the overall appearance of the design with the prior art. In re Leslie, 547 F.2d 116, 192 USPQ 427 (CCPA 1977).

  • (B) The following types of statements are not permissible in the specification:
    • (1) A disclaimer statement directed to any portion of the claimed design that is shown in solid lines in the drawings is not permitted in the specification of an issued design patent. However, the disclaimer statement may be included in the design application as originally filed to provide antecedent basis for a future amendment. See Ex parte Remington, 114 O.G. 761, 1905 C.D. 28 (Comm’r Pat. 1905); In re Blum, 374 F.2d 904, 153 USPQ 177 (CCPA 1967). See MPEP § 2909.02 regarding disclaimer statements in international design applications.
    • (2) Statements which describe or suggest other embodiments of the claimed design which are not illustrated in the drawing disclosure, except one that is a mirror image of that shown or has a shape and appearance that would be evident from the one shown, are not permitted in the specification of an issued design patent. However, such statements may be included in the design application as originally filed to provide antecedent basis for a future amendment. In addition, statements which attempt to broaden the scope of the claimed design beyond that which is shown in the drawings are not permitted.
    • (3) Statements describing matters that are directed to function or are unrelated to the design.

¶ 15.41 Functional, Structural Features Not Considered

Attention is directed to the fact that design patent applications are concerned solely with the ornamental appearance of an article of manufacture. The functional and/or structural features stressed by applicant in the papers are of no concern in design cases, and are neither permitted nor required. Function and structure fall under the realm of utility patent applications.

¶ 15.46.01 Impermissible Descriptive Statement

The descriptive statement included in the specification is impermissible because [1]. See MPEP § 1503.01, subsection II. Therefore, the description should be canceled as any description of the design in the specification, other than a brief description of the drawing, is generally not necessary, since as a general rule, the illustration in the drawing views is its own best description.

Examiner Note:

In bracket 1, insert the reason why the descriptive statement is improper.

¶ 15.60 Amend All Figure Descriptions

For [1], the figure descriptions [2] amended to read: [3]

Examiner Note:

  • 1. In bracket 1, insert reason.
  • 2. In bracket 2, insert –should be– or –have been-.
  • 3. In bracket 3, insert amended text.
  • 4. Applicant’s authorization is required to make an examiner’s amendment to the figure descriptions, and this form paragraph should be preceded by form paragraphs 13.02 and 13.02.01. See MPEP § 1302.04. If an extension of time is required, use form paragraph 13.02.02 instead of form paragraphs 13.02 and 13.02.01.

¶ 15.61 Amend Selected Figure Descriptions

For [1], the description(s) of Fig(s). [2][3] amended to read: [4]

Examiner Note:

  • 1. In bracket 1, insert reason.
  • 2. In bracket 2, insert selected Figure descriptions.
  • 3. In bracket 3, insert –should be– or –have been-.
  • 4. In bracket 4, insert amended text.
  • 5. Applicant’s authorization is required to make an examiner’s amendment to the figure descriptions, and this form paragraph should be preceded by form paragraphs 13.02 and 13.02.01. See MPEP § 1302.04. If an extension of time is required, use form paragraph 13.02.02 instead of form paragraphs 13.02 and 13.02.01.

¶ 15.61.01 Amend Specification to Add Reference to Color Drawing(s)/ Photograph(s) (Ch. 16 Design Application)

The application contains at least one color drawing or color photograph. To comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.84 for color drawings/photographs in design applications, the specification [1] amended to include the following language as the first paragraph of the brief description of the drawings section:

The file of this patent contains at least one drawing/photograph executed in color. Copies of this patent with color drawing(s)/photograph(s) will be provided by the Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee.

Examiner Note:

  • 1. Do not use this form paragraph in an international design application.
  • 2. In bracket 1, insert –must be– or –has been–.

III. DESIGN CLAIM

The requirements for utility claims specified in 37 CFR 1.75 do not apply to design claims. Instead, the form and content of a claim in a design patent application filed under 35 U.S.C. chapter 16 is set forth in 37 CFR 1.153:

37 CFR 1.153  … claim…

  • (a) … The claim shall be in formal terms to the ornamental design for the article (specifying name) as shown, or as shown and described. More than one claim is neither required nor permitted.

*****

A design patent application may only include a single claim. The single claim should normally be in formal terms to “The ornamental design for (the article which embodies the design or to which it is applied) as shown.” The description of the article in the claim should be consistent in terminology with the title of the invention. See MPEP § 1503.01, subsection I.

When the specification includes a proper descriptive statement of the design (see MPEP § 1503.01, subsection II), or a proper showing of modified forms of the design or other descriptive matter has been included in the specification, the words “and described” must be added to the claim following the term “shown”; i.e., the claim must read “The ornamental design for (the article which embodies the design or to which it is applied) as shown and described.”

Full lines in the drawing show the claimed design. Broken lines are used for numerous purposes. Under some circumstances, broken lines are used to illustrate the claimed design (i.e., stitching and fold lines). Broken lines are not permitted for the purpose of identifying portions of the claimed design which are immaterial or unimportant. See In re Blum, 374 F.2d 904, 907, 153 USPQ 177, 180 (CCPA 1967) (there are “no portions of a design which are ‘immaterial’ or ‘not important.’ A design is a unitary thing and all of its portions are material in that they contribute to the appearance which constitutes the design.”). See also MPEP § 1503.02, subsection III.

The form and content of a claim in an international design application designating the United States is set forth in 37 CFR 1.1025, which mirrors the claim requirements set forth in 37 CFR 1.153. See also MPEP Chapter 2900 for international design applications.

¶ 15.62 Amend Claim “As Shown”

For proper form (37 CFR 1.153 or 37 CFR 1.1025), the claim [1] amended to read: “[2] claim: The ornamental design for [3] as shown.”

Examiner Note:

  • 1. In bracket 1, insert –must be– or –has been–.
  • 2. In bracket 2, insert –I– or –We–.
  • 3. In bracket 3, insert title of the article in which the design is embodied or applied.

¶ 15.63 Amend Claim “As Shown and Described”

For proper form (37 CFR 1.153 or 37 CFR 1.1025), the claim [1] amended to read: “[2] claim: The ornamental design for [3] as shown and described.”

Examiner Note:

  • 1. In bracket 1, insert –must be– or –has been–.
  • 2. In bracket 2, insert –I– or –We–.
  • 3. In bracket 3, insert title of the article in which the design is embodied or applied.

¶ 15.64 Addition of “And Described” to Claim

Because of [1] — and described — [2] added to the claim after “shown.”

Examiner Note:

  • 1. In bracket 1, insert reason.
  • 2. In bracket 2, insert –must be– or –has been–.