By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Sue L. Robinson in Poly-America, L.P. v. API Industries, Inc., Civil Action No. 13-693-SLR (D.Del., April 10, 2014), the Court denied defendant API Industries, Inc.’s motion for judgment on the pleadings after concluding that the patented design and the accused design “are not plainly dissimilar” and refusing to pronounce, as a matter of law, that the overall visual differences between the accused design and patented design are greater than the differences between the patented design and the prior art. The Court noted that “the accused design and the patented design appear the same in general appearance and effect” but an issue of fact remains. Id. at 6.
A copy of the Memorandum Opinion is attached.