In re Carletti - 51 C.C.P.A. 1094, 328 F.2d 1020 (C.C.P.A. 1964)

Rule:

When a configuration is the result of functional considerations only, the resulting design is not patentable as an ornamental design for the simple reason that it is not "ornamental" - it was not created for the purpose of ornamenting.

Facts:

Appellant inventors were denied an ornamental design patent under 35 U.S.C.S. § 103 by appellee patent board. Appellee found that appellants' design was obvious based on prior art references. Appellants sought review of appellee's decision.

Issue:

Did the patent board err in denying appellant’s application for a design patent? 

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court affirmed on different grounds and held that appellants' design failed to meet the requirements under 35 U.S.C.S. § 171 for an ornamental design patent. The appearance of appellants' design was dictated by functional requirements, not an ornamental design. When appellants' product was the result of functional considerations only, the design was not patentable as an ornamental design because it was not created for an ornamental purpose. Appellants' design did not have an unobvious appearance distinct from its functional considerations.