The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida found that anticipation of an existing design patent application invalidated a later design patent of the shoe style popularized by Crocs, Inc. In International Seaway Trading Corp. v. Walgreens Corp., S.D. Fla., No. 08-cv-80163-KLR (S.D. Fla. Jan. 22, 2009), the court granted defendant Walgreens' motion for summary judgment and invalided a design patent held by International Seaway. In doing so, the court applied the precedent from the recently decided Egyptian Goddess v. Swisa, 543 F.3d 665 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (en banc), which guards against the risks of comparing verbal descriptions of similar designs in an anticipation analysis. The court reviewed the shoe designs as a whole, and as they would be viewed by the public, finding that the later patent was essentially a "knock-off" of Crocs' trendy foam shoe. The recent holding in Egyptian Goddess should be considered a warning to trial courts against placing too much emphasis on certain features when comparing verbal descriptions of a design and failing to consider the overall impression of the design. If courts continue to follow this lead, future patent petitioners can expect a holistic approach to anticipation analysis.