Clean Tech in Court: Green Patent Complaint Update
There were many new green patent complaints filed in March and April in the areas of advanced batteries, fuel efficiency, green cleaning solvents, LEDs, smart grid, and solar power.
Advanced Batteries
Somaltus LLC v. Johnson Outdoors, Inc.
On March 14, 2017 Somaltus, a non-practicing entity, filed a patent infringement complaint against Johnson Outdoors in federal court in Marshall, Texas.
The lawsuit asserts U.S. Patent No. 7,657,386, entitled “Integrated battery service system (‘386 Patent).
The ‘386 Patent is directed to an integrated battery service system that performs a plurality of services related to a battery, such as battery testing, battery charging, and the like. In addition, the integrated service system provides services to devices/components that are coupled to the battery, such as starters, alternators, etc.
The accused products are Minn Kota Digital Onboard Chargers.
Fuel Efficiency
Transtex LLC et al. v. WABCO Holdings Inc.
In this lawsuit involving aerodynamic trailer skirts for improving the efficiency of truck trailers, Transtex has asserted eight patents against WABCO.
The patents are as follows:
U.S. Patent No. 7,748,772, entitled “Resilient aerodynamic trailer skirts “
U.S. Patent No. 7,887,120, entitled “Aerodynamic trailer skirts”
U.S. Patent No. 7,942,467, entitled “Aerodynamic skirt support member”
U.S. Patent No. 7,942,469, entitled “Aerodynamic skirt panel”
U.S. Patent No. 7,942,471, entitled “Aerodynamic skirt shape”
U.S. Patent No. 8,292,351, entitled “Resilient strut for aerodynamic skirt”
U.S. Patent No. 8,449,017, entitled “Aerodynamic skirt resilient member”
U.S. Patent No. 8,678,474, entitled “Self-repositioning aerodynamic skirt”
The accused products are the TrailerSkirt TS248 and TS259 flat panel trailer skirts.
Green Cleaning Solvents
GreenEarth Cleaning, LLC v. Natomas Fresh Cleaners, Inc.
This action for patent infringement, trademark infringement, and breach of contract was filed April 18, 2017 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri.
Although the complaint lists nine patents, there is only one count of patent infringement asserting U.S. Patent No. 5,942,007 (‘007 Patent).
The ‘007 Patent is entitled “Dry cleaning method and solvent” and directed to dry cleaning methods comprising the steps of immersing clothes in a dry cleaning fluid including a cyclic siloxane composition, agitating the clothes in the composition, and then removing the cyclic siloxane composition by centrifugal action and air circulation.
According to the Abstract of the ‘007 Patent, the “cyclic-siloxane-based solvent allows the system to result in an environmentally friendly process which is, also, more effective in cleaning fabrics and the like than any known prior system.”
GreenEarth alleges that Natomas Fresh, which had a license from GreenEarth, continues to use liquid silicone as a dry cleaning solvent though it is no longer a licensee.
LEDs
Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Seoul Semiconductor Co. et al.
Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Everlight Electronics Co. et al.
Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Cree, Inc.
In three lawsuits filed April 13, 2017 in federal court in Marshall, Texas, Document Security Systems has sued Seoul Semiconductor (Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd. et al.), Everlight Electronics (Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.), and Cree (Document Security Systems, Inc. v. Cree, Inc.).
The combination of asserted patents varies by suit but comprise the following:
U.S. Patent No. 6,949,771, entitled “Light source”
U.S. Patent No. 7,256,486, entitled “Packing device for semiconductor die, semiconductor device incorporating same and method of making same”
U.S. Patent No. 7,279,355, entitled “Method for fabricating a packing device for semiconductor die and semiconductor device incorporating same”
U.S. Patent No. 7,524,087, entitled “Optional Device”
U.S. Patent No. 7,919,787, entitled “Semiconductor device with a light emitting semiconductor die”
The accused products include LED devices for the automotive market.
Epistar Corporation v. Lowe’s Companies, Inc.
Epistar sued Lowe’s for patent infringement on April 28, 2017 in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
The patents-in-suit are:
U.S. Patent No. 6,346,771, entitled “High power LED lamp”
U.S. Patent No. 7,560,738, entitled “Light-emitting diode array having an adhesive layer”
U.S. Patent No. 8,791,467, entitled “Light emitting diode and method of making the same”
U.S. Patent No. 8,492,780, entitled “Light-emitting device and manufacturing method thereof”
U.S. Patent No. 8,587,020, entitled “LED Lamps”
According to the complaint, the Kichler Lighting 60 W equivalent dimmable bulb, the Utilitech 60 W equivalent warm white bulb and similar products infringe the patents.
Golight, Inc. v. KH Industries, Inc. et al.
Filed March 1, 2017 in the U.S.District Court for the District of Colorado, Golight’s lawsuit asserts U.S. Patent No. 9,255,687, entitled “LED system and housing for use with halogen light fixtures” (‘687 Patent).
The complaint alleges that KH’s LED NightRay line of lighting products infringes the ‘687 Patent.
The ‘687 Patent is directed to an optical projection lens for mounting in front of LEDs. The lens has a plurality of protrusions of varying thickness wherein the outermost edges of each protrusion has the thickest measurement, the center of each protrusion has the thinnest measurement, and the protrusions merge individual beams of light into a single beam of light.
Lemaire Illumination Technologies, LLC v. LG Electronics USA, Inc. et al.
Lemaire Illumination Technologies sued LG for alleged infringement of three patents relating to LED lighting technology.
The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent Nos. 6,095,661 (‘661 Patent), 6,488,390 (‘390 Patent) and 9,119,266 (‘266 Patent).
The ‘661 Patent is entitled “Method and apparatus for an L.E.D. flashlight” and the ‘390 Patent is entitled “Color-adjusted camera light and method” and these related patents are directed to an LED flashlight including a control circuit for maintaining a predetermined light output level of the LED units as a charge on a battery varies.
The ‘266 Patent is entitled “Pulsed L.E.D. illumination apparatus and method” and directed to an illumination source for a camera including one or more LEDs and a control circuit for driving the LEDs with electrical pulses at a frequency high enough that light produced has an appearance to a human user of being continuous rather than pulsed.
Filed in federal court in Marshall, Texas on April 14, 2017, the complaint lists the LG G3 and G4 smartphones as accused devices.
Philips Lighting North America Corporation et al. v. Deco Enterprises, Inc.
In a lawsuit filed April 12, 2017 in U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Philips asserted five patents related to LED drivers and circuits against Deco.
The patents-in-suit are:
U.S. Patent No. 6,094,014, entitled “Circuit arrangement, and signaling light provided with the circuit arrangement”
U.S. Patent No. 6,586,890, entitled “LED driver circuit with PWM output”
U.S. Patent No. 7,038,399, entitled “Methods and apparatus for providing power to lighting devices”
U.S. Patent No. 7,262,559, entitled “LEDS driver”
U.S. Patent No. 8,070,328, entitled “LED downlight”
The accused devices listed in the complaint include the Lucera series surface-mounted LED lighting fixtures.
Putco, Inc. v. Metra Electronics
This lawsuit involves LED headlight technology. Putco alleges that Metra’s Heise Lighting Ssystems LED headlight replacement kits infringe U.S. Patent No. 9,243,796, entitled “LED lamp with a flexible heat sink” (‘796 Patent).
The ‘796 Patent is directed to an LED lamp with a flexible heat sink and a method of installing the lamp into a light fixture.
The complaint was filed March 10, 2017 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.
Blackbird Tech v. Civilight North America
Blackbird Tech v. Euri Lighting
Blackbird Tech v. Great Eagle Lighting
Blackbird Tech v. MSI Lighting
Blackbird Tech v. Satco Products
Blackbird Tech v. S.E.L.S.
Blackbird Tech initiated several new lawsuits April 19, 2017 in U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.
The asserted patent in these suits is U.S. Patent No. 7,114,834 (‘834 Patent). Entitled “LED lighting apparatus,” the ‘834 Patent is directed to a light comprising a housing, a plurality of LED lights coupled in an array inside of the housing, and a reflective protrusion for reflecting light from the LED lights out of the housing.
The LED array receives a consistent flow of DC current that will not result in the LED lights burning out. To prevent the LED array from burning out there is also a current regulator for controlling a current flowing through this LED array.
The complaints can be found here: Blackbird Tech LLC v. Civilight North America Corp.; Blackbird Tech LLC v. Euri Lighting; Blackbird Tech LLC v. Great Eagle Lighting Corporation; Blackbird Tech LLC v. MSI Lighting, Inc.; Blackbird Tech LLC v. S.E.L.S. USA, LLC; Blackbird Tech LLC v. Satco Products, Inc..
Smart Grid
Clean Energy Management Solutions, LLC v. ABB Inc.
Clean Energy has asserted infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,577,962 (‘962 Patent). The complaint was filed March 1, 2017 in federal court in Marshall, Texas and names ABB as the sole defendant.
Entitled “System and method for forecasting energy usage load,” the ‘962 Patent is directed to systems and methods for forecasting energy usage load for a facility including a parameter identification module for determining periodic energy load usage of the facility and a load prediction module for generating energy usage load forecast profiles for the facility. A set of matrices may include a matrix for storing coefficients for determining periodic changes in energy load usage, and a model parameter matrix for storing load parameter information.
The accused product is ABB’s Energy Management Software with Energy Management and Optimization Solution.
Solar Power
Allsop, Inc. v. Ambient Lighting, Inc.
Allsop sued Ambient for alleged infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,657,461 and 8,192,044, both entitled “Solar-powered collapsible lighting apparatus” and directed to a solar-powered lighting apparatus having a light transmissible spherical shade coupled to a housing that receives a solar cell, a battery and at least a portion of a lighting element assembly.
The complaint was filed April 10, 2017 in federal court in Seattle.
The accused product are several models of Ambient’s collapsible lanterns, including the “Coastal Blues 12” solar lanterns.
Rillito River Solar LLC v. Ecolibrium Solar Inc.
Rillito River Solar sued Ecolibrium March 22, 2017 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.
The complaint alleges that Ecolibrium’s EcoX line of products infringe U.S. Patent No. 9,422,723, entitled “Roofing grommet forming a seal between a roof-mounted structure and a roof” (‘723 Patent).
The ‘723 Patent is directed to a roof mount assembly including a piece of flashing positioned on the substrate. The flashing includes a first surface, a second surface opposite the first surface and an aperture extending through the flashing. A fastener extends through the flashing aperture, a bracket is connected to the flashing via the fastener, and a water-tight seal is positioned between the flashing aperture and the fastener.
This article was originally published on Eric's Green Patent Blog.