The back and forth between Current and Signify has led to another lawsuit, this time with Signify filing a patent infringement suit in Delaware.
For years, Signify has claimed Current, along with a number of other lighting companies, has infringed upon its patents related to a number of products. In the 51-page lawsuit filed last Friday, Signify claims “Current’s infringement of the Patents-in-Suit has been and continues to be willful.” The suit provides 6 specific claims of patent infringement. It filed the case in Delaware, where it claims, “Current offers its infringing products online and in brick and mortar locations, to sell and distribute products throughout the United States, including this District. For example, Current’s website lists Billows Electric Supply of Wilmington, Delaware as an authorized distributor of Current products, among other Wilmington locations.”
The lawsuit comes just weeks after Current filed its own lawsuit against Signify, claiming in it’s more than 650-page lawsuit that ““…over the last 14 years Signify has approached hundreds of lighting companies, accused them of infringing one or more of Signify’s patents, and demanded that they enter a broad, portfolio-wide license and pay royalties to Signify. Signify has sued several companies that failed to comply. Over that same timespan, however, many of the patents Signify previously highlighted in its licensing negotiations have expired. Over that same timespan, many of the patents Signify previously highlighted in its licensing negotiations have been narrowed and/or weakened through unfavorable claim constructions or, in other cases, by having key claims invalidated.” Current also described the patent infringement claims as “without merit”.
Signify’s lawsuit specifically states “Current makes, uses, offers to sell, sells, and/or imports” products that impact patents for “Power Factor Correction Control Methods and Apparatus”, “LEDS driver”, “Method and System for Improving Start-Up Time of a Light Emitting Diode (LED) Driver at Reduced Input Voltage”, “Directly Viewable Luminaire”, “Lighting Device”, and the “LED Collimator Element with an Asymmetrical Collimator”.
According to the lawsuit filed by Current on June 22, both Current and Signify had been discussing the patent infringement claims, and adds that there are “fundamental disagreements as to the scope, infringement, validity, and value” of the patent infringement claims. Current says Signify has recently stopped negotiations about the situation, so it filed its lawsuit as a way to “affirmatively engage and resolve Signify’s baseless contentions.”
Signify is asking for a jury trial with “An award of damages adequate to compensate Signify for Current’s patent infringement, and an accounting to adequately compensate Signify for the infringement, including, but not limited to, lost profits and/or a reasonable royalty, an award of pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the maximum rate allowed by law, an award of damages for willful infringement, an order finding that this is an exceptional case and awarding Signify its costs, expenses, disbursements, and reasonable attorneys’ fees related to Current’s patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and all other applicable statutes, rules and common law, and such other further relief, in law or equity, as this Court deems just and proper.”
Tagged with Current, lightED, Signify