Bates Industries, Inc. v. Daytona Sports Co. And Daytona Products, Inc., and Paulson Manufacturingcorporation

This is an appeal from the granting of a summary judgment in a patent infringement action which held invalid a utility patent and a related design patent, both of which covered a motorcycle-type protective helmet with a pivotally attached flip-up face shield. The district court found that the patented invention was not really inventive over the prior art, but merely a combination of old elements which did not accomplish a new result. According to both parties herein, the district court found, in effect, that the helmet in question was “obvious” in light of the prior art ( 35 U.S.C. § 103 ). The action arises out of the patent laws of the United States. Jurisdiction is based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1338 (a).

Daytona Sports Co. and Daytona Products, Inc. (Daytona) contend the appellant’s utility patent and design patent are invalid. Daytona asserts that the utility patent was obvious from an unpatented visor assembly commonly known and sold publicly more than a year prior to the date of plaintiff’s application.. It was produced and sold by McHal Enterprises. Daytona contends that the design patent is invalid because the distinctive features relied upon by the plaintiff are essentially…