Range of Motion Products, LLC v. Armaid Company Inc.

Summary

The Federal Circuit, per curiam, denied Range of Motion Products' petitions for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc in this design patent case, leaving intact the panel decision affirming summary judgment of non-infringement of a design patent for a handheld massage device. Judge Cunningham, joined by Judge Hughes, concurred in the denial, reasoning that the panel decision is consistent with longstanding Supreme Court and Federal Circuit precedent: the Egyptian Goddess 'sufficiently distinct' sentence follows Gorham, and claim construction—including subsidiary functionality determinations—remains a question of law for the court under Markman. Chief Judge Moore, joined by Judge Reyna, dissented from the denial, arguing that functionality, ornamentality, and substantial similarity are quintessential jury questions and that Egyptian Goddess's 'plainly dissimilar' language has inverted Gorham and usurped the jury's role; Judges Stoll and Stark dissented without opinion.