Patents

Patents in the U.S. and elsewhere

The following SPIbelt®/Overton Enterprises, LLC products are protected by patents in the U.S. and elsewhere. The following list of SPIbelt®/Overton Enterprises, LLC products may not be all inclusive, and other SPIbelt®/Overton Enterprises, LLC products not listed here may be protected by one or more patents.

Messenger Bag™

  • AU 3377725
  • AU 337724
  • EM 0011881186-0002
  • EM  001881186-0001
  • JP 1449139
  • KR 30631434
  • US D650589S

SPIband™

  • AU 341092
  • CA 124623
  • JP 1445181
  • US D659290
  • US D613057S

SPIbelt® Hydration System

  • US D784084

SPIbelt®

  • AU 2008216257
  • AU 201612479
  • CA 2677698
  • DE 6020080142157
  • DE 6020080294625
  • DE 2384662
  • EM 003120460-0001
  • EM 003120450-002
  • EP 8791500001
  • EP 2114195

SPIbelt®

  • EP 2384662
  • ES 2384662
  • FR 2114195
  • FR 2384662
  • FR 087297644
  • GB 2114195
  • GB 2384662
  • IT 2384662
  • JP 4929499
  • JP 1449139

SPIbelt®

  • JP 1386781
  • JP 1405238
  • US 8104654B2
  • US D618907S
  • US D779817
  • US D613057S
  • US D613500S
  • US D613501S

Patent Infringement Notices

December 12, 2019

(Copenhagen, Denmark) On December 12, 2019 The Maritime and Commercial High Court of Denmark rendered a judgement acknowledging that the manufacturer of Miiibelt products, Miiego ApS (Denmark) has been infringing the design rights held by Overton Enterprises LLC for the Spibelt product design as shown here:

SPIbelt product design

SPIBelt product design
SPIbelt Original
SPIBelt Original

Miiego ApS had been promoting three running belts, namely Miibelt (one pocket), Miibelt (two pockets) and Miibelt PRO.

Following unsuccessful attempts to have Miibelt voluntarily withdraw their products from the EU market, Overton Enterprises initiated court proceedings to resolve the conflict and end the infringement.  Overton Enterprises is happy to announce that the High Court has confirmed that the products of Miibelt are indeed infringing on the registered rights of Spibelt as registered under EU design registration No. 00879150-001 and has ordered a permanent, Europe wide injunction against all three Miibelt products as shown below:

Miibelt (one pocket)
Miibelt (one pocket)
Miibelt (two pocket)
Miibelt (two pockets)
Miibelt PRO
Miibelt PRO

The Court decision states as follows:

’..in terms of the design, there is a significant degree of similarity between the Miibelt products and Overton’s design registration, and the details in design differences that exist, do not provide the informed user with a different overall impression. Accordingly, MIIEGO’s MIIBELT products constitute an infringement of Overton’s design registration’.

To stop the infringement by Miibelt, the Miiego company has been ordered to recall and remove their products from their retailers and collaborators in the EU.

Overton Enterprises is encouraged by this important decision of the High Court, which is no longer appealable and this final. The decision of the High Court supports and defends the investments made by founder Kim Overton into the innovation, design and development of a unique and distinctive product created to solve a the longstanding problem of storing small personal items during running and other physical activities.

As we continue the journey into developing products solving other everyday – and potentially lifesaving – issues, Overton Enterprises wishes to thank our customers and loyal business partners for your continued support and cooperation.

The Court decision is available online (in Danish only) at the Court’s website http://domstol.fe1.tangora.com/Domsoversigt.16692/BS-51217-2018.2171.aspx

Should you have any questions on the decision or wish to share information with us on this matter, kindly contact us.

September 27, 2016

Notice on patent infringement settlement against Ouikiya Co., Ltd.,  the manufacturer of HOLDTUBE Overton Enterprises LLC the manufacturer of SPIbelt® and patent holder (plaintiff), had been in dispute with Oyukiya Co (defendant) over the defendants HOLDTUBE belt infringement of the plaintiff’s patent at the Tokyo District Courts.  On Sept 17th 2016, both parties agreed to a settlement.