Congratulations to our very own Karl P. Kilb III, Partner at Dunnington, Bartholow & Miller LLP on his appointment to the American Arbitration Association panel! Given his impressive background, we are confident he will be a phenomenal contributor.
If you have not yet met Karl Kilb, visit his online profile: https://dunnington.com/karl-p-kilb/
Dunnington partner Olivera Medenica recently penned an article for the New York State Bar’s NY Litigator publication.
This article, available below, explores the procedural complexities faced by litigators when judges “decline to sign” orders to show cause. It examines the resulting legal challenges, explains why such orders are not appealable, and outlines possible remedies for navigating this procedural purgatory.
Click HERE to read this article.
Fast fashion is front and center in a noteworthy legislative development in the EU that applies to all textile producers selling in the EU. Under growing political and consumer pressure, governments are stepping in to confront the environmental toll of fast fashion. Compliance is critical and penalties run high. We break it down for you here.
What is Fast Fashion?
Fast fashion refers to the business model of producing inexpensive, trendy clothing at breakneck speed to meet consumer demand. Brands like Zara, H&M, and Shein have popularized this approach by replicating high-fashion designs and delivering them to stores within weeks. The appeal lies in affordability and constant novelty—shoppers can refresh their wardrobes frequently without breaking the bank.
Dunnington Bartholow & Miller LLP is pleased to welcome Karl P. Kilb III as a partner in our Corporate, Privacy & Cybersecurity, Intellectual Property and Employment practice groups. Mr. Kilb’s full bio can be read here.
Imagine walking into a store and spotting a sleek, curvy soda bottle or a chair so distinct you’d recognize it in your sleep. That “aha” moment is no accident—it’s the magic of intellectual property designed to protect the look and feel of products. Two key players in this visual world are trade dress and design patents. They’re like cousins at the family reunion of IP: related, overlapping, but with distinct personalities.
Trade dress is all about perception. It’s the overall appearance of a product or its packaging that signals its source to consumers. Think of the iconic Coca-Cola bottle or the whimsical shape of a Toblerone chocolate bar. Trade dress isn’t about patents or technical drawings; it’s about recognition, uniqueness, and sometimes even color schemes. But there’s a catch: to be protected, trade dress must be “distinctive” and, in many cases, have acquired secondary meaning—consumers must associate the look with a particular brand. You can’t just pick a random zigzag bottle and claim trade dress if nobody knows it’s yours.
Design patents, on the other hand, are the legal equivalent of a high-security vault for creativity. They protect the ornamental design of a functional item, often granting up to 15 years of exclusive rights in the U.S. Once granted, a design patent lets the inventor prevent others from making, using, or selling an object with a substantially similar appearance. Unlike trade dress, design patents don’t require proving that consumers recognize the design—they’re awarded based on novelty and non-obviousness. That sleek Apple device or fancy chair sketch you see in a patent database? That’s design patent territory.
Here’s where it gets fun: the two can overlap, but they behave differently in court. Trade dress is about consumer perception and likelihood of confusion. If someone copies your look and customers are misled into thinking it’s your product, trade dress infringement may have occurred. Design patents focus on the eye of a more technical judge: does the accused item look substantially the same as the patented design? It’s less about what consumers think and more about visual comparison.
Another twist is timing. Design patents offer a fixed term but require early filing; they’re like planting a flag on your creative mountain. Trade dress can potentially last forever, as long as the look remains distinctive and associated with your brand. So one is a sprint, the other a marathon—both can be strategically valuable.
Ultimately, trade dress and design patents are tools for the same goal: protecting what makes your product memorable. One relies on consumer recognition, the other on legal novelty. Together, they form a dual shield, guarding both the eye-catching charm and the exclusive design behind the products we love. So next time you reach for that curvy bottle, that quirky chocolate, or that stylish gadget, remember—you’re witnessing the subtle art of IP at work. And in the world of product aesthetics, looking good isn’t just a bonus; it’s a legally protected superpower.
Dunnington partners Olivera Medenica and Padmaja Chinta, along with associate Maaike Angulo Vrij presented a CLE this past Tuesday covering the evidentiary burdens of proving fame in challenging litigations in both federal courts and before the TTAB. The presentation covered the legal standards for showing fame and distinctiveness, and attendees were treated to plenty of edible props such as Oreo cookies, Toblerone chocolates, Pocky sticks and a refreshing bottle of Coke!
On August 19, Dunnington, Bartholow & Miller LLP partner Padmaja Chinta will be moderating a webinar hosted by the FBA Int
ellectual Property Law Section. Register for “Pet Peeves in IP Litigation” to hear a candid conversation with Judges Beth L. Freeman, Maryellen Noreika, Paul J. Oetken, and Anuraag Singhal as they discuss what litigators should avoid (and do more of) when advocating in their courtrooms.
Register here: https://www.fedbar.org/event/webinar-pet-peeves-in-ip-litigation/
On July 30, Dunnington partners Padmaja Chinta, Raymond Dowd and Olivera Medenica will be presenting “Cease & Desist Letters and Declaratory Judgment Actions – What Copyright, Trademark and Patent Practitioners Need To Know,” a webinar hosted by the Federal Bar Association’s Intellectual Property Law Section. 1 CLE credit is available.
Dunnington Bartholow & Miller LLP is pleased to announce that an interview with partner Brenda Gill is featured in the Spring Issue of ‘The Fordham Lawyer.’ Ms. Gill currently serves as the President of the Fordham Law Alumni Association (FLAA) and is the first person of color to hold that title in the FLAA’s 100-year history.
Read the full Q&A here: https://digital.law.fordham.edu/issue/spring-2025/leading-with-purpose/
Dunnington Bartholow & Miller LLP partner Raymond Dowd is featured on a recent episode of the Center for Art Law’s podcast “Art in Brief.” Mr. Dowd sat with Paris Quetzal Sistilli and Andrea Konigs to discuss his work in Nazi-looted art restitution, navigating conflicting international legal systems, and the postwar incentives that fueled the acquisition of stolen art.
Listen here: https://open.spotify.com/episode/2DwCIQgGaOwpZeiT6jdnv1?si=0381d3f21ee34735&nd=1&dlsi=c8e97f57ded2497e
