Skip to main content

Commerce Under Secretary Awards 600,000th Design Patent

WASHINGTON – Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) David Kappos was joined by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) today to award design patent number 600,000 to Goal Zero, a subsidiary of Provo Craft and Novelty, and a small business located in Spanish Fork, Utah. The patent was granted for the design of a battery system, which works in conjunction with a solar briefcase that recharges the system using sunlight. This patent exemplifies the blending of green technology and appealing design.

"Today, small- and medium-sized businesses play a vital role in driving innovation and the growth of our economy," said Under Secretary Kappos. "Design patent protection can be a smart business strategy in a company’s intellectual property portfolio. They are an efficient and cost effective way to give an owner the right to prevent others from making, using, or selling a product that closely resembles the patented product."

“Small businesses such as Utah-based Goal Zero create 70 percent of all jobs in the U.S.,” Hatch said. “They are the economic engine that drives our economy, and they are largely responsible for the innovation that has kept our nation at the forefront of the world’s economy. I salute Goal Zero and Provo Craft and Novelty on the occasion of their being awarded design patent number 600,000. I think these two companies admirably reflect on the tremendously skilled, entrepreneurial and high-tech workforce that is increasingly making Utah the place to do business.”

Provo Craft and Novelty, Inc., was founded in 1964 and manufactures and distributes craft, hobby, and education products for school projects, as well as portable batteries, battery packs, and solar briefcases. Its products are sold worldwide. Goal Zero LLC is a subsidiary of Provo Craft and Novelty.

Design patents are granted for new, original, or ornamental designs for articles of manufacture. They are intended to give encouragement to the decorative arts and promote commerce by giving designers an incentive to make their products more aesthetically appealing to consumers. The first design patent was issued in 1842 to George Bruce of New York City for printing types. Design patents provide exclusive rights to their owners for a term of 14 years from the date of issuance. More than 23,400 design patents were issued in fiscal year 2009.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...