When a new Samsung product launches, can a patent-related lawsuit be far behind? BBC News reports that British manufacturer Dyson has filed a patent lawsuit against Samsung because its newest vacuum cleaner is allegedly a “cynical ripoff” of a Dyson vacuum cleaner model. At issue is an accusation that Samsung’s Motion Sync vacuum cleaner infringes upon a Dyson patent that describes a “steering mechanism for cylinder cleaners” in its own vacuums. Dyson founder Sir James Dyson says he finds it difficult to believe that Samsung didn’t know it was borrowing freely from his company’s designs when it made the Motion Sync. “Samsung has many patent lawyers so I find it hard not to believe that this is a deliberate or utterly reckless infringement of our patent,” he tells BBC News. “We have been forced to issue proceedings in the English High Court, but I would much rather invest in research to develop new technology than have to sue.” Samsung was successfully sued by Apple last year for allegedly infringing upon some of its design patents for the iPhone, so the company is no stranger to intellectual property controversies.

It will be interesting to see whether Samsung decides to quickly settle with Dyson over the alleged infringement or if it wants to drag the suit out in court.Now being a relatively clean and card-carrying severe allergy sufferer, I was already familiar with Dyson® vacuum cleaners. I had patiently waited for the right Black Friday sale and mistakenly purchased a Shark® vacuum cleaner, Dyson’s major competitor. I was initially drawn to the cool names such as “Dyson Animal®” and “Dyson Small Ball Multi Floor®” and sleek modern designs, but tragically, made a classic consumer mistake when shopping for home appliances. I bought the vacuum cleaner that had the biggest sale that day, which was the Shark® vacuum cleaner. Although I paid about $100 less than I would have had I bought a comparable Dyson® upright vacuum cleaner, I had severely cheated myself. I am sure my old Statics Professor/Graduate Student teachers in Engineering school would have lectured me as well. Even though my Shark® vacuum had pretty much sucked some of the loose fibers themselves off of the carpeting I have, my Shark® vacuum broke down and had to be repaired after 2 years.

I must confess that having severe environmental allergies had inspired my weekly vacuuming sessions throughout my spacious apartment, so I was not surprised at the worn state of my vacuum cleaner. Coincidently, I also found out the makers of the Shark® vacuum were also the makers of the Ninja® blender. They graciously agreed to repair my Shark® vacuum, free of charge. However, I had to resort to borrowing my friend’s old Dirt Devil Vacuum, which was pale in comparison, while my Shark® vacuum was being repaired. This simply would not have happened had I bought a Dyson®. Or as we say in the Patent Law game, this would have been obvious to one skilled in the art. Mr. Dyson, or more accurately Sir James Dyson, apparently got a perfect score on his Statics midterm and final, and is also very familiar with the Patent Law process. In reviewing the listing of the 18 pages of issued patent numbers for his various U.S. product lines and another 24 pages of issued patent numbers for his various British product lines, Mr. Dyson seems to be quite the patent juggernaut.

Being obviously well-versed and coached in the Patent Cooperation Treaty, use of various Trademarks, and doubly protecting his inventions with Design Patents, Mr. Dyson has used the U.S. and European Patent Offices as a foundation for building his industrial fortune. Having well over 400 issued patents has indeed been an important part of Mr. Dyson’s billionaire financial and engineering fairy tale success.samsung vacuum cleaner baby commercial Mr. Dyson also serves as a great example of how the Patent Law system, both U.S. and abroad, is still one of the last bastions of the free enterprise system where the truly inventive and talented can persist in protecting their ideas and prevent others from making, selling, using, or importing their precious and potentially lucrative inventions. vacuum cleaner paypal

If their inventions are good enough and their inventors have enough business acumen and toil, eventually their fortunes are built. Mr. Dyson seems to have expanded his various vacuum cleaner product lines that not only include various types of vacuum cleaners but also a robot vacuum. Mr. Dyson also seems to have not settled on capturing the vacuum cleaner market. vacuum cleaner floating ballHe also seems to be on his way to capturing the market of air treatment devices, hair dryers and desk and floor lamps. So as Sir James Dyson would say, “Let’s start inventing”. Disclaimer: This blog was in no way a promotional advertisement or endorsement of Dyson® products.This page is owned by Office of Patent Classification.Plans for a dog-shaped vacuum cleaner designed to make pooches more comfortable around the household cleaning device have come to light.The bizarre motorised cleaner was supposed to ease the fears of man's best friend while the chores are being carried out.

But although a patent application was submitted in the United Kingdom in 1973 the unusual device was never produced. Dog cleaner: The patent was issued in November 1973 - but the device was never produced Users would have grabbed onto a retractable suction nozzle located in the tail, which is designed to suck up dust and dog's hair.The vacuum cleaner itself is housed within the mechanical dog's body and minimises the noise that has troubled dogs since the first motorised one was invented in 1889.Its working title, submitted to the Patent Office in the UK, was 'toy dog and vacuum cleaner combination.' The patent, which was submitted in the UK, has only just come to light.Ann Margaret Zelski wrote in her application: 'In the past, vacuum cleaners have been devised for use on dogs for cleaning clipped hair and the like.'These have not met with success because of the fear instilled in a dog at the sight of a vacuum cleaner and because of its very loud noise.'An object of the present invention is to provide a novel combination of a toy dog and vacuum cleaner enclosed completely within the body of a toy dog

so as to overcome the above named disadvantages.' Novel idea: It remains unclear why Ann Margaret Zelski's idea did not get beyond the drawing board Ann goes on to explain that the device has several novel dog-related features. It can be set to blow in order to dry a pooch after a bath.Similarly, flea powder or talcum powder can be put inside the cleaner to be 'blasted' on to the mutt during a dog grooming session.In bizarre set of five drawings submitted with the application, a dog can be seen with a tube running from its tail to a motor located in its chest. No fear: Hidden inside a 'dog' the novel vacuum cleaner was supposed to be quiet to avoid frightening real pooches Obedient: A dog is not frightened of a modern James Dyson 'Groom tool' vacuum cleaner - unlike the motorised devices of the 1970s when the novel idea was patented Next to the dog's chest is an inlet grill to allow air to pass through the device.A heater is next to the motor to heat the air used for blow drying the owner's pet.