Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Tech. Consumer Prods. v. Lighting Sci. Grp. Corp.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

April 8, 2020, Decided

2019-1361

Opinion

 [*17]  Stoll, Circuit Judge.

Technical Consumer Products, Inc., Nicor, Inc., and Amax Lighting (collectively, "TCP") petitioned for inter partes review of several claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,201,968. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board determined that TCP did not demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 1-4, 6, 14, and 15 of the '968 patent were anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 7,670,021 ("Chou") or that claims 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 16, 17, and 19-23 would have been obvious over Chou alone or in view of other prior art references. The Board based its determinations exclusively on its finding that Chou does not disclose a single limitation (hereinafter, the "H/D limitation") in claims 1 and 20 of the '968 patent, the only independent claims at issue.

The Board's conclusions regarding the H/D limitation resulted from an erroneous interpretation [**2]  of the claim language and a misunderstanding of our case law. The Board did not address any of the parties' other arguments regarding the other limitations of claim 1 or of the rest of the challenged claims. Because claims 1, 11, 14, 15, 17, and 19-23 of the '968 patent were found to be unpatentable on other grounds not at issue on appeal, we vacate the Board's decision of no anticipation or obviousness solely as to claims 2-4, 6-8, 12, and 16 and remand for consideration of the parties' remaining arguments pertaining to those claims.

Background

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

955 F.3d 16 *; 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 11010 **; 2020 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 10303

TECHNICAL CONSUMER PRODUCTS, INC., NICOR, INC., AMAX LIGHTING, Appellants v. LIGHTING SCIENCE GROUP CORPORATION, Appellee

Prior History:  [**1] Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in Nos. IPR2017-01287, IPR2018-00263, IPR2018-00269.

Tech. Consumer Prods. v. Lighting Sci. Grp. Corp., 2018 Pat. App. LEXIS 9225 (P.T.A.B., Oct. 31, 2018)

Disposition: VACATED AND REMANDED.

CORE TERMS

heat, sink, outer, spreader, trim, flange, anticipate, housing, ratio, prior art, dissipated, light fixture, calculation, coupled, optic, disclose, specification, dimension, luminaire, recessed, patent, height-to-diameter, replacement, disclosure, embodiment, invention, includes, enabled, height, light source

Patent Law, Infringement Actions, Claim Interpretation, Anticipation & Novelty, Fact & Law Issues, Jurisdiction & Review, Standards of Review, Substantial Evidence, De Novo Review, Elements, Specifications, Enablement Requirement, Standards & Tests