A product intended for the United States needs a protection strategy based on the law and procedure that actually apply there. This guide explains the national or regional registration route, the main procedural distinctions and the decisions businesses face when launching, licensing or defending a design.
The national position at a glance
Authority and legal framework: United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO); US patent law governing design patents.
Duration: For applications filed on or after 13 May 2015, fifteen years from grant.
Territorial starting point: An EU design does not automatically extend to this jurisdiction.
Filing and examination in the United States
US design patents protect qualifying ornamental designs for an article of manufacture. The drawings and the identification of the article are central to the claim. US examination and drawing practice differ from EU design registration, and the term runs from grant rather than filing.
For a US launch, prepare the US application as a substantive national filing even where it is submitted through the Hague System. Distinguish design-patent rights from utility patents, trade dress and copyright; each has different requirements and remedies.
US term and maintenance: a different portfolio model
For US design patent applications filed on or after 13 May 2015, the patent term is 15 years from grant. No maintenance fees are required for a US design patent. This differs from systems organised around repeated five-year renewals from filing. Older applications may follow the earlier term, so an acquired portfolio should be checked patent by patent.
In a portfolio database, record the actual grant date and calculate the applicable term from that record. Do not import a European renewal schedule and assume it applies in the United States. The absence of periodic maintenance fees also does not answer separate questions about ownership, validity, licence restrictions or the scope of the drawings.
A practical US acquisition and launch review
For a transaction involving a US design portfolio, match each patent to the products and variants sold by the target business. Separate pending applications from granted patents and distinguish design patents from utility patents. A commercial statement that a product is patented does not reveal which aspects of its appearance are actually claimed.
For a new launch, prepare consistent product drawings, identify the intended applicant and preserve the earlier filing and disclosure chronology. Agree who will handle US prosecution and office correspondence. For a dispute, provide the patent drawings and the accused product together; a product name or a marketing photograph alone is not an adequate basis for comparing the claimed appearance.
What should be protected?
Start with the appearance of the actual product and identify what customers recognise: its shape, lines, surface treatment, ornamentation or a distinctive part. For United States, the permissible subject matter, treatment of technical features and accepted representations must be checked under the local framework. A drawing used for an EU filing is not automatically suitable for a national application elsewhere. Decide whether colour, logos, environmental context or unclaimed components should appear in the submitted images.
A design filing also needs a clear owner. An invoice from a freelance designer, possession of CAD files or ownership of a factory mould does not by itself settle the chain of title. Review employment terms, commissions, assignments and earlier licences before naming the applicant.
Disclosure, priority and publication
Prepare a dated chronology: internal development, confidential presentations, exhibitions, social media, catalogues, offers and first sales. Where a Paris Convention priority claim is available, the six-month design priority period is a separate deadline from any disclosure grace period. Publication deferment does not move the filing date or automatically extend the priority period.
The United States route must be checked before relying on an exception for earlier disclosure. Supply copies of the actual material released and explain who could access it. If secrecy is commercially important, agree the publication instructions expressly and record any deadline for requesting publication or withdrawing the application.
Enforcement, defence and validity
A dispute in the United States starts by identifying the right invoked, its owner, status and territorial effect. Compare the protected representations with the accused product and investigate earlier designs independently. The country’s registration process described above matters: obtaining a certificate may involve less substantive examination than a business expects. Even an examined right can be challenged on the available legal grounds.
Keep evidence of manufacture, offering, importation, sales and the identity of the responsible parties. For online cases, preserve URLs, dates, seller details and test purchases rather than only screenshots of an isolated image. Urgent relief, ordinary proceedings, validity challenges and customs measures have different conditions. The appropriate forum, deadlines, security, recoverable costs and possible remedies must be checked for the particular national case.
Five practical situations
Before launching device housings
A business plans to release device housings in the United States. The first step is to assemble the exact product views, development history and intended launch date. We then compare the territorial routes described above and decide whether the whole product, an individual component or surface decoration warrants separate protection. Supplier presentations, online previews and samples sent without confidentiality terms belong in the disclosure record. The commercial objective is a filing that matches the product actually going to market, rather than a broad-sounding title unsupported by the images.
When graphical user interfaces are copied
A seller offers a product resembling graphical user interfaces already marketed by the rights holder. Obtain the register record, a reliable sample of the accused product and dated evidence identifying the seller. The assessment separates validity, the scope of the protected appearance and the acts committed in the United States. An online resemblance alone does not establish every element of infringement. The response may involve a negotiated undertaking, platform action or proceedings, but the available remedies and evidence requirements must be assessed under the applicable national law.
A supply or licensing project involving product components
The commercial arrangement concerns product components. The agreement should identify the owner of each design, the permitted manufacturers and sales territories, approval of modifications, use of drawings and control of tooling. Rights to further improvements and responsibility for third-party claims should be addressed before production starts. When the relationship ends, the contract should explain what happens to remaining stock, digital files and tools. Register ownership and contractual ownership must be reconciled before a licence or sale is completed.
A warning letter before a shipment
A company receives a demand relating to products intended for the United States. Keep the letter, attachments, envelopes and any court documents, and record the actual delivery date. Do not sign a standard undertaking before checking the asserted right, the accused version and the territorial acts. A short response deadline and a court deadline are not interchangeable. We organise the initial assessment and, where national proceedings require it, coordinate the response with local counsel.
Buying a product business
An acquisition includes a portfolio said to cover United States. Review each application or registration, its current status, the filed representations, renewal history and assignments. Match the portfolio to the products still sold and identify gaps in important variants or markets. Designer agreements, exclusive licences, disputes and security interests can affect value even where the register looks orderly. The transaction documents should allocate responsibility for corrective filings, outstanding payments and ownership defects.
Documents that help us assess the matter
Useful starting material includes product photographs or drawings, applicant and designer information, earlier filing numbers, disclosure dates, assignments, relevant contracts and the countries of manufacture and sale. For a dispute, add the complete warning letter or court papers, the register extract, the accused listing and a note of any imminent exhibition or shipment.
For an initial enquiry, you can send what is already available. We identify the missing information and confirm the scope, fees, official charges and any local-adviser work before the agreed steps are taken.
How we assist with the United States
We advise on German and EU design law and coordinate work in other jurisdictions with appropriately qualified local advisers where needed. The engagement identifies who handles filing, translations, office correspondence or local court proceedings. Foreign admission and local representation are not implied by this country guide.
General enquiry — all fields optional · Compare country guides · Infringement and defence · Licensing and ownership
Official sources and further reading
National authority or official legal resource · Legislation and treaty information. The outline above is intended for project planning; the applicable version of the law, transitional rules and the facts of the individual matter remain decisive.
Editorial review: 11 November 2026.