Golfers, are you a golf bag patent infringer? If you use the Callaway Warbird XTT, Warbird HOT, Terra Firma X, Terra Firma XI, or the Hyper-X, then you just might be a patent infringer (but that is for a court to decide). On Tuesday...... << MORE >>

Last Valentine’s Day I wrote about a golf ball with heart shaped dimples (click here). Ahh, so sappy and sweet! I have been keeping a published patent application a secret just for a Valentine’s Day post; or more appropriate, I doubt anyone was looking for it. Nonetheless, the application title “Sweetheart Putter” got my attention. The following figure comes from published application US Pub. No. 20080009361....... Interesting design.... I am guessing this one will be marketed to the ladies! << MORE >>

Here comes the softball of the year! The figure below comes from a US golf club iron head design patent that issued this week to a major producer of clubs. Can you identify the brand of irons?..... << MORE >>

Marketing types always say… it is all about brand recognition. I suppose “brand recognition” is slightly different than “design patent drawing recognition,” (ok, more than slightly) but they are not entirely unrelated. The following drawings come from a driver design patent that issued today to one of the big guys. Do you recognize this club?....... So, does this club have good brand recognition?<< MORE >>

Last week I posted about an interesting Nike patent application directed to golf clubs incorporating a fluid-filled bladder. Imagine my surprise this week when a patent issued to Fu Sheng Industrial, the world’s largest OEM manufacturer of golf club heads, directed to a remarkably similar design. The Fu Sheng patent is USPN 7326127 titled “Golf Club Head with Gas Cushion.” Check out these drawings from the patent...... Compare the Fu Sheng patent (USPN 7326127 titled “Golf Club Head with Gas Cushion”) to Nike’s published application (US Pub. No. 20080015050 titled “Golf Clubs and Golf Club Heads Having Fluid-Filled Bladders and/or Interior Chambers”). Turns out that great minds do think alike. Looks like we probably will see a club make it to market with a fluid-filled bladder.<< MORE >>

Would a patent application titled “Mouse Putter” get your attention? It got mine. So, do you putt mice with it or what? The application published as US Pub. No. 20080009367 titled “Mouse Putter.” Check out this putter design...... << MORE >>

OK golfers, how well do you know your drivers? These drawings come from a driver design patent that issued Tuesday to a major club maker. Do you recognize this club?..... You can click here for the answer, and click here to check out USPN D561284 titled “Golf Club Wood Head.” << MORE >>

I didn’t think last week’s post regarding the 3-wheeled bag-riding golf cart could be outdone, but boy was I wrong. Last week an amazing patent issued titled “Collapsible Golf Scooter Cart Having Fold Out Balance Wheels” (USPN 7322434). A what? A golf scooter! Check out this drawing of the scooter....... How would you feel cruising around the course on this beauty?<< MORE >>

The Golf-Patents blog has tested your knowledge of iron club head design in the past. Today, let’s see if you can identify another set of irons. For frequent readers of this blog, I rate the level of difficulty of this one as ridiculously difficult. Good luck. The figures below come from a US golf club iron head design patent that issued today to a major producer of clubs. Can you identify the brand of irons?.... << MORE >>

High surface friction golf balls… more spin or less spin? Would it make any difference whether you hit the ball with a wedge or a driver? Interesting questions, right? Well a recently published Acushnet patent application provides us with the answer. The published patent application is US Pub. No. 20080015055 titled “Golf Ball Having High Surface Friction.” Before I give you the answer, here is an interesting little bit of trivia disclosed in the patent application....... Now, for the real analytical type of golfer that may want to know more about what is meant by coefficient of friction (COF), the application explains....... And now, the answer to the questions asked above...... << MORE >>

If I searched patents for the term “fluid-filled bladder”… the last thing I would expect to find would be a patent application for golf irons! But that is exactly what I stumbled across recently. More specifically, it was a published patent application directed to a Nike Slingshot design containing a fluid-filled bladder. The application published as US Pub. No. 20080015050 with the title “Golf Clubs and Golf Club Heads Having Fluid-Filled Bladders and/or Interior Chambers.” The application describes the invention as...... So what fills the fluid-filled chamber? The application states that it could be filled with air, inert gases, or liquids. Check out these figures from the application....... It will be interesting to see if a patent issues from this application, and whether such a product ever makes it to market.....<< MORE >>

Another golf invention that words just don’t do justice! Check out these figures......... The drawings come from a recently published patent application US Pub. No. 20080023236 titled “Combined Golf Caddie And Golf Cart.” Am I nuts, or wasn’t there some problems with the roll-over potential of 3-wheel ATV’s on uneven terrain? Surely that won’t be an issue for this invention..... (I mean it looks pretty stable, right?) << MORE >>

I knew that title would get you interested… but seriously, this post may contain the next hot new golf shoe design and perhaps a glimpse into future FootJoy offerings. Yesterday Acushnet was granted 6 golf shoe design patents. The patents are USPN's D560338, D560339, D560340, D560341, D560342, and D560343; all titled "Golf Shoe Upper." Recognize any of these styles?.....<< MORE >>

On Friday Stroke Solutions, Inc., maker of the SuperStroke putter grip that KJ has made famous, filed patent infringement lawsuits against Tacki-Mac Grips, Inc. and Energy Grip, Inc. in the Eastern District of Wisconsin. The actual Complaints filed with the court do not contain much information, but you can check them out HERE and HERE. The patent at the center of the dispute is USPN 6626768 titled “Putter Grip.” A few figures from the patent are found below..... I will keep you posted on this gripping patent infringement lawsuit.... << MORE >>

Last week’s post titled “Callaway Seeks Permanent Injunction… Is There A Risk That Titleist ProV1’s Will No Longer Be Available?” has obtained the distinction of being the most widely read Golf-Patents blog post of all time! Well, this one should beat it. This post is not related to Callaway’s Motion for a permanent injunction; because Acushnet has not yet filed their response. Rather, this post is directed to Acushnet’s requests for “post-trial” relief. Back on January 7th Acushnet filed a document entitled “Acushnet Company’s Motion for Post-Trial Relief.” (Click HERE to read the actual document) In this motion Acushnet renewed its motion for “judgment as a matter of law” as to the invalidity of Callaway’s patents-in-suit, and moved, in the alternative, for a new trial (and/or to alter or amend the Court’s judgment as to such claims). In this motion Acushnet stated:....... Basically the January 7th “Acushnet Company’s Motion for Post-Trial Relief” asserts that no reasonable jury could have come to the verdict that this particular jury came to, and it enumerates several alleged errors of the Court. Now, this week Acushnet filed a brief in support of their January 7th motion. The brief is titled “Acushnet’s Opening Brief in Support of Its Motion for Post Trial Relief.” (Click HERE to read the entire brief in support)........ While the Brief in Support included 6 exhibits, one exhibit in particular is very interesting (click HERE to view Exhibit 4). Exhibit 4 contains almost 60 slides used during Callaway’s opening statement at trial. Any golfer will enjoy skimming through these slides. Check them out......... << MORE >>

As you will recall, last month Dogleg Right sued TaylorMade Golf alleging infringement of two of patents directed to CG customizable golf clubs. Click HERE to read a prior post on the subject. Today TaylorMade filed their Answer (click HERE to read) to the Dogleg Right Complaint (click HERE to read). TaylorMade’s Answer states that they do not infringe the Dogleg Right patents and allege that the patents are invalid. Frankly, the Answer is pretty boring and doesn’t contain any interesting tidbits of information. Essentially a boilerplate answer in response to a boilerplate complaint. Come on guys... where is the passion, the disgust, the outrage, the mudslinging... you know, the stuff that keeps a golf blog interesting?... << MORE >>

I often think… “man, serving as an agent to a few of the guys out on the PGA Tour must be a sweet life.” Negotiate some contracts, arrange some cool endorsement deals, travel to the best courses, and perhaps arrange for a cab ride home after a client has a late night performing " Knockin' on Heaven's Door." The real fun starts when you ask yourself… if I could represent 5 of the top 150 players in the world, who would it be? Now, forget about Tiger or Phil… in fact, assume that the top 5 players aren’t eligible for your selection; it makes the selection process much more interesting. A starting point in the selection process should be a review of the Golf Digest 50. Obviously you want golfers that can play, but let’s face it… players that have a little personality generally make more money off the course than they do from tournament earnings. In fact, I would go as far as saying that there is some sort of problem if a golfer’s on-course earnings exceed their off-course earnings. Scrolling down the Golf Digest 50 the first time a player’s on-course revenues exceed their off-course revenues occurs with KJ Choi ($5.8 mill on-course versus $3.7 mill off-course). Still, not a bad off-course number. The next occurrence of off-course revenues being less than on-course revenues occurs with Rory Sabbatini ($6.3 mill on-course versus $2.85 off-course). Rory’s discrepancy is worse than KJ’s, but is nothing compared Steve Stricker ($7.6 mill on-course versus $1.5 mill off-course). Heck, I would be honored to represent any of these guys; but they did not make my top 5 wish list. The lazy man would simply pick good golfers that already have a high off-course income stream. Not me. I would actually want to make a difference. How great would it be to say to a golfer… “look, I increased your off-course revenues by $1.5 million this past year, heck… you would have to win the Masters to increase your on-course revenues by that much.” So, who is on my dream team? … drum roll please... (list)... Who is in your top 5 dream team?<< MORE >>

I have received several emails recently inquiring as to the status of the GPS patent infringement litigation against SkyHawke (maker of SkyCaddie), and others. As you may recall from these prior posts (initial, update 1, update 2, update 3, and update 4), on May 11th GPS Industries and Optimal IP Holdings filed a patent infringement lawsuit against 10 defendants (3:07CV0831-K, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division). GPS Industries then singled out SkyHawke (maker of SkyCaddie) and filed a motion for a preliminary injunction. In response, SkyHawke filed a pretty compelling response to the preliminary injunction motion. The court then denied the preliminary injunction motion. Now the case will enter the slow-motion stage of the litigation, and we have the schedule to prove it. On January 14th the parties filed a Joint Status Report (click here to read) laying out a proposed litigation schedule from now until a November 2, 2009 jury trial date. That’s not a typo… November 2, 2009! Don’t worry....<< MORE >>

Golf-Patents.com has repeatedly used putter design patents to test your knowledge of putter designs (example 1, example 2, example 3, example 4, example 5, example 6, example 7, example 8, and example 9). Today a unique golf putter design patent issued that is directed to the profile of a groove that runs across the top of the putter. Check out the drawings below and pay particular attention to the groove cross-section. Can identify the make and model? (I could not) ... << MORE >>

Regular readers of the Golf-Patents blog know that Callaway and Acushnet are slugging it out regarding golf balls and golf clubs. Click here to brush up on the background of the golf club patent infringement lawsuit. The most recent interesting event in the club lawsuit involves a subpoena being served on the USGA by Acushnet (click here to read the original subpoena). The key points from the subpoena are: .... (complete list requesting tons of information).... I don't know if the USGA has been in this position before, although I suspect that they have. If not, I hope they handle this issue very carefully or every golf equipment patent infringement lawsuit will include a subpoena to the USGA for every test performed by the USGA, and all data gathered, since the beginning of time. Further, if the USGA turned over all the information requested above they would essentially be giving Acushnet and Callaway leads as to which other club makers may be infringing their patents. From a golfer's perspective, this subpoena makes me mad... after all, why should my USGA membership dollars be wasted helping any golf equipment manufacturer's legal actions! From a lawyer's perspective, I can appreciate that the USGA has a treasure trove of information that any equipment company would love to get their hands on. A cynic could take this further and say... "why should a manufacturer spend millions on an R&D department gathering critical performance data on every club ever made... just orchestrate a lawsuit every few years so you can subpoena the USGA and see what type of information they have gathered." Unfortunately for the USGA, I suspect that they will end up flushing tens of thousands of dollars down the drain just formulating a plan and responding to the subpoena. It will take a lot of $15 memberships to offset the costs associated with this one subpoena!....<< MORE >>

As you will recall from the prior post regarding the verdict in the Callaway v. Acushnet… last month a jury found that 8 of the 9 claims at issue are valid… and therefore infringed by Acushnet. Then, a Callaway spokeswoman said… "We have now established in court that our golf ball patents are valid, and that Titleist Pro V1 golf balls infringe those patents. We will immediately start the process of requesting an appropriate remedy, including injunctive relief and damages." Ouch! Well, it has happened… Callaway has filed a motion for a PERMANENT injunction (motion, proposed order, and redacted supporting brief). Check out these two paragraphs from Callaway’s proposed order!...... Can you imagine if the court issued an Order containing those two paragraphs! I must admit, the “redacted supporting brief” is pretty compelling… any golfer that plays ProV1’s should read this brief, it is fascinating... << MORE >>

As I expressed in this prior post, I love golfers’ commitment to the belief that golf club heads should have fins and wings! Recently a patent application published that espouses all the perceived benefits of wings. The application is US Pub. No. 20070293333 titled “Golf Club.” Check out these amazing designs!....The application describes the invention as:....I don’t know how this patent application “flew” under my radar! << MORE >>

I was honored to be a guest on the nationally syndicated Small Business Advocate® radio show this morning. Jim Blasingame and I discussed piracy, counterfeiting, and employer-employee intellectual property issues. I have been a fan of Jim’s show for close to 10 years and highly recommend it. I encourage you to listen to the interview here. << MORE >>

The title of the post instructs you to read this week's Golfweek magazine very carefully for a very important reason... because if you don't, you will miss a short comment by me regarding patents and USGA club adjustability (page 78), as well as a reference to the Golf-Patents blog. Check it out. The edition contains several great articles by Adam Schupak regarding various issues associated with the loosening of USGA adjustability rules.<< MORE >>

Was it Cisco, Nokia, Texas Instruments, Toshiba, IBM, or Intel? Additionally, how many patents do you think this company was granted in 2007? (under 500, 501-1000, 1001-2000, 2001-3000, or more than 3000)..... (list) ..... Interestingly, U.S. companies only hold 7 of the top 25 spots in the list. Don't worry... I will have several similar posts directed specifically to companies in the golf industry very soon!... << MORE >>

Would you strap yourself into this contraption to improve your game?<< MORE >>

Which top 5 golfer is listed as an inventor on a golf club patent? (Woods, Mickelson, Stricker, Furyk, or Els) … and who owns the patent? (Nike, Callaway, Acushnet, Srixon, or PING)<< MORE >>

Words don’t do this invention justice… you just have to check out these figures. The patent is USPN 6991556 titled “Golf Swing Training Hat.”...... Interesting. Think you could keep the ball on the tee throughout your swing? << MORE >>

Does the title “Method of Playing a Game with a Telescopic Putter Mounted to Headband” peak your interest? It should. The patent is USPN 6846244. Check out this figure from the patent.... I would love to know how many of these have been sold!<< MORE >>

Have you ever wondered if you should orient the hexagonal symmetry of your club’s alpha case crystals in a specific manner? Of course you have... I mean who hasn’t? What kind of golfer would you be if you couldn’t sketch out a hexagonal closely packed crystal structure (as seen below) in 30 seconds or less!...... Well, thankfully for all of us… there are engineers working in the golf industry that think about things such as the hexagonal symmetry of a club face’s alpha case crystals. Interestingly, according to a patent application that published yesterday, the orientation of the alpha case crystals in a club face plays a major role in the durability of the club head. In fact a table in the application indicates that a club head with a poor orientation may actually only have one-half the life span of a club head with good orientation. Amazing stuff! The application was filed by....<< MORE >>

As you may recall from this prior post, Callaway recently accused a handful of clone club makers of (1) infringing one UTILITY patent, (2) infringing three DESIGN patents, (3) infringing two trademarks, (4) trademark dilution, (5) breach of contract, (6) common law unfair competition, and (7) false advertising! One of the defendants has responded to the Complaint. The following affirmative defenses are included in King Sports' Answer (click here to review the complete Answer):.... (list).... Check out King Sports' website and see if you agree with their affirmative defenses! << MORE >>

One year ago today I posted my first real blog entry. Check it out here. What a year! Hopefully the Golf-Patents blog has provided golfers with a better understanding of just how important intellectual property is to the golf industry. As always... I like to hear from readers regarding the topics and content that they enjoy most, so don't hesitate to email me your thoughts. I am looking forward to a great second year in 2008! << MORE >>

The close of another fiscal year at the USPTO brings forth some interesting statistics. For instance, the number of new patent applications filed in FY 2007 rose to 467,243; up over 4.8% from the 445,613 applications filed in FY 2006. (and those numbers don’t even include the 132,352 provisional applications filed in 2007!) Additionally, despite the USPTO again hiring over 1200 new patent examiners in the past year, the number of pending patent applications increased over 10% in the past year to 1,112,517. According to the statistics, an applicant, on average, will not receive a first office action until 25.3 months after their application is filed (up from 22.6 months in 2006). Furthermore, the average total pendency of an application in the USPTO has risen to over two and a half years! Did you know...<< MORE >>

IPLaw360 has reported that patent litigation increased by 6% in 2007, despite overall intellectual property litigation decreasing 8% in 2007. There were 2942 patent infringement cases filed in 2007 (up 6% from 2006, 9% from 2005, and 2% from 2004)! While it would be easy to say that the only segment of the population that benefits from this litigation are attorneys; that would simply be incorrect. I have observed that most intellectual property naysayers have never contributed anything innovative to society. Everyone should ask themselves… “why is the United States the most innovative country in the world?” Few experts would disagree that one of the key reasons is that innovation can be protected in the US (which includes enforcement). Hooray for the U.S.A… but how am I going to buy those ProV1’s if the price goes any higher due to patent litigation ( post 1, post 2)?.... << MORE >>

I love inventions intended to reduce the number of lost golf balls… primarily because I can’t help asking myself the question… “how many golf balls would this device have to prevent me from losing just to pay for itself?” This week a patent application published (US Pub. No. 20080000364) with the title “Golf Ball Locating System and Methods of Use,” so I had to check it out. The invention is directed to magnetic ink on the golf ball and a handheld device using modified pulse induction technology and a beat-frequency oscillator. Sounds incredible right? Well, unfortunately the effective range seems to be 20 feet. That’s right… 20 feet! I think I will have to pass on this one, but I encourage you to check out the application because it is fairly interesting. (surely I am not the only one that would feel just a little embarrassed carrying one of these out on the course)... The following drawings come from the patent application..... << MORE >>

Remember those shrink-wrap decorative sleeves from the Fore Inventors Only show on The Golf Channel? The sleeves were referred to as ShaftSkinz and were designed to slide over your club’s shaft and shrink tight when exposed to the heat of a high-output hair dryer. While I don’t ever see myself using such a product, I can imagine that they may be popular with the youngsters and golf teams. Yesterday a patent application published with a title that got my attention; namely “Protective Barrier for a Golf Course Flag Stick.” A what? Why would a flag stick need a protective barrier? Well, the patent application explains that the flag stick needs protection from ambient environmental damage and damage that may occur from workers or golfers handling of such poles or flag sticks. I would have never guessed. Check out this claim from the patent application... << MORE >>

A second counterfeit golf club bust in less than a month! (click here to read about a prior bust) The latest bust included a raid on December 14th in Plano Texas. Click here to check out the press release........ PS - Just my luck... I was actually playing golf in Plano Texas on December 14th and no one tipped me off so that I could ride along for the bust. No respect! << MORE >>

Yesterday I authored a post regarding irons with a nanocrystalline plating on their nonmetallic face. Keeping with the theme… an interesting “nano” related golf ball patent issued to Acushnet on January 1st. The patent is USPN 7314896 titled “Nano-Particulate Blends with Fully-Neutralized Ionomeric Polymers for Golf Ball Layers” and describes the invention as... Wow, that is a mouthful… and explains why I don’t do too many golf ball patent posts… because they would put most of the Golf-Patents readers to sleep! Still pretty interesting....<< MORE >>

You may recall from one of my prior posts titled “I Don’t Perform My Own Dentistry… “The Perfect Golf Tee” Patent Application Illustrates Why Most People Should Not Attempt to Draft Their Own Patent Applications” that some people are under the impression that applying for a patent is like applying for a drivers license. Guess what… it is not! As I have previously mentioned, not a week goes by in which I don’t receive a call from an inventor that believes that filing a patent application is similar to completing a driver’s license application (i.e. just a matter of completing some forms). Such inventors are often disgusted and mad that preparing a patent application is a lot of work, and therefore not inexpensive. I frequently direct them to self-help legal books on patent application drafting and tell them that if they read it from cover-to-cover at least twice, and follow the directions step-by-step, then they should be able to draft their own patent application. I have yet to see someone actually do it (let alone do it well). Since patent law is a pretty dry complex subject, one must find comic relief whenever possible. A recently published patent application provides just such comic relief. The published patent application is US Pub. No. 20070287559 titled “EcoSmart Golf Tee.” Experienced inventors know ...<< MORE >>

Would you consider playing irons that have a non-metallic face? How about a non-metallic face plated with nanocrystalline material? Does it just sound too futuristic? Within the past 2 weeks Callaway had an interesting patent application publish directed to just such a set of irons. The published patent application is US Pub. No. 20070293348 titled “Iron Golf Club with Nanocrystalline Face Insert.” The patent application is directed to an iron with... << MORE >>

'Tis the season of New Year resolutions. As we all know, New Year resolutions are rarely successfully carried out past March or April. Therefore, successful companies have New Year goals, not resolutions. Such goals are infinitely more likely to be successfully implemented if they are written down in a specific quantifiable fashion. If you have specific quantifiable goals directed toward intellectual property (IP) then congratulations, you are in the minority. We have identified 10 New Year goals relating to intellectual property that each and every company should consider annually, regardless of size or industry.... << MORE >>

Until recently golf shoes were not considered high-tech, but that is rapidly changing. For instance, on Christmas day Acushnet was granted a fascinating golf shoe patent that may give us a look at the future of golf shoes. Can you imagine a shoe that automatically knows when you are walking and when you are hitting, then adjusts the shoe accordingly? Amazing, right! So amazing in fact that you may not believe that the invention disclosed in USPN 7310895 titled “Shoe with Sensors, Controller and Active-Response Elements and Method for Use Thereof” can actually be implemented in a consumer product. The patent describes the invention as....... Check out these figures from the patent.... << MORE >>

This is the first Golf-Patents post directed to a golf ball retriever! Pretty exciting? Not really; but it is mildly interesting. The patent is USPN 7311345 titled “Golf Ball Retriever” and describes the invention as...(description)... I bet you never thought about posterior and anterior fingers as you fished a ball out of the local water hazard! Check out these figures from the patent.... << MORE >>

Interesting golf glove patents are few and far between. In fact, there have only been a handful of posts related to golf gloves in the past year (here, here, here, and here). Today an interesting design patent issued on a single finger golf glove… a what? That’s right… a single finger golf glove. The patent is USPN D558405 titled “Single Finger Golf Glove.” Check out this figure from the patent... << MORE >>

Last month I reported on Callaway taking on the clones (click here to review); this week Nike filed a lawsuit taking on the clones (Illinois Northern District Court; 07-c-7108). On December 18th Nike sued King Sports, Inc. dba Turbo Power Golf, Hung Ying Chang, Krookedstix, Inc., and Gigagolf, Inc.. Thus, King Sports is now defending itself against Callaway and Nike! How would you like to be in that position? Click HERE to read the Complaint. I encourage you to check it out because it includes lots of drawings and photographs showing the allegedly infringing products next to the design patent drawings. The 15 design patents involved in the lawsuit include.... Could the lawsuits by Callaway and Nike be the demise of the clone golf club industry? << MORE >>

Are you familiar with the Wolf Creek Golf Club in Mesquite Nevada? I had the pleasure of playing Wolf Creek a few years ago and it truly is an amazing course. That said, on Tuesday the owners of Wolf Creek filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against the owners and developers of a 750 acre planned residential community that is adjacent to Wolf Creek. The problem is that the development is named “Hidden Wolf.” (District Court of Nevada, 2:07-cv-01701) Click HERE to view the Complaint, and click HERE to view the associated exhibits. Apparently this is not the first lawsuit involving these two parties. Originally the developers planned to call the community “Wolf Creek Estates,” which resulted in a lawsuit ending with two Temporary Restraining Orders and a Stipulated Permanent Injunction. The current lawsuit alleges Unfair Competition (False Advertising), Unfair Competition (False Designation of Origin), Trademark Infringement (federal, state, and common law), and Deceptive Trade Practices. Looks like a nice place to live ...<< MORE >>

The Court has ruled on GPS Industries’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction … DENIED! (Click HERE to read the Order)...... I gave GPS Industries a 25% chance (at best) of success on the preliminary injunction and stated that I would purchase a handheld GPS unit from a licensee of GPS Industries if I were wrong. Needless to say, I will not have to make that purchase. Now, don’t read too much into this ruling… it is very difficult to obtain a preliminary injunction....<< MORE >>

In the past I have commented on my surprise at the lack of patents directed to golf bags. This is particularly true for design patents; which are a perfect way to protect unique ornamental design features of golf bags. Well, yesterday two interesting design patents issued that are related to golf bags… more specifically, the patents are directed those hard plastic dividers at the top of carry bags that keep your sticks nicely separated and organized. Karsten Manufacturing (aka PING) was granted USPN D557501 and USPN D557502, both titled “Golf Bag Divider Top.” The following figures come from the patents....(figures).... Great illustration of smart design patent utilization!<< MORE >>

Recently, The Grip Master Co. Pty Ltd. of Australia filed a lawsuit against TheGripMasterUSA of Texas alleging willful patent and trademark infringement (in addition to an allegation of fraud on the USPTO). Click HERE to review the actual Complaint. The patent at the center of the dispute is USPN 6449803 titled “Grip for a Handle or Shaft.” The patent is directed to an underlisting (or core) designed for wrapped grips, as seen below... << MORE >>

After 7 days of trial the verdict is in and the jury has ruled that 8 out of 9 of Callaway’s patent claims are valid! Acushnet already stipulated that it did infringe the claims of the patents; therefore the issue for the jury was whether or not the claims are valid. Unfortunately for Acushnet, patents are presumed valid and the burden of proof required to establish invalidity is high. In fact, the jury was instructed that Acushnet has the burden of proving that each one of the asserted claims of the patents-in-suit ...<< MORE >>