In the last month several green patent complaints
were filed in the fields of LEDs, advanced batteries and smart grid.
Bayco Products, Inc. v. Philips Intellectual
Property & Standards
Bayco Products (Bayco), a Texas company
that makes lighting products including LED flashlights, brought a declaratory
judgment action against Philips requesting a judgment that three Philips
patents are invalid and/or not infringed.
Filed February 26, 2013 in federal court in Dallas,
Texas, the complaint alleges
that Philips is "seeking to exact ill-deserved royalty payments" from Bayco in
connection with its
XPP-5450 Series Dual Function Headlamps.
The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent No. 6,234,648, entitled "Lighting system," U.S. Patent No. 6,250,774, entitled "Luminaire" and U.S. Patent No. 6,692,136, entitled "LED/phosphor-LED
hybrid lighting systems."
Trustees of Boston University v. Seoul
Trustees of Boston University v. Samsung
Electronics Co., Ltd.
In October of 2012, Boston University
(BU) sued Korean LED maker Seoul Semiconductor (Seoul) in U.S.
District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The original complaint
was covered here and asserted U.S. Patent No. 5,686,738 ('738 Patent).
The '738 Patent is entitled "Highly insulated
monocrystalline gallium nitride thin films" and directed to gallium nitride
semiconductor devices and methods of preparing highly insulating GaN single
crystal films in a molecular beam epitaxial growth chamber.
amended complaint, filed March 6, 2013, adds U.S. Patent No. 6,953,703, entitled "Method of making a
semiconductor device with exposure of sapphire substrate to activated
The accused devices include gallium nitride thin film
LEDs and LEDs made by exposing a sapphire substrate to activated nitrogen and
depositing Group III nitride semiconductor material.
BU also asserted the '738 Patent against Samsung in a complaint
filed in the District of Massachusetts on March 21, 2013.
Celgard, LLC v. Sumitomo Chemical Company,
Celgard is a North Carolina company that
manufactures specialty membranes and separators for lithium ion
batteries. On February 22, 2013, Celgard filed a patent
infringement complaint against Sumitomo Chemical Company
(Sumitomo) in federal court in Charlotte, North Carolina.
The complaint alleges that Sumitomo is inducing
infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,432,586 ('586 Patent) by selling
lithium ion battery separators to its customers knowing that the separators
will be incorporated into finished lithium ion batteries.
The '586 Patent is entitled "Separator for a high energy
rechargeable lithium battery" and directed to a separator including a ceramic
composite layer and a polyolefinic microporous layer. The ceramic layer
has a matrix material and is adapted to block dendrite growth and prevent
Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom, S.A.
In July of 2012 Electric Power Group
(EPG), a Pasadena, California, developer and distributor of electric grid
monitoring solutions sued the
French conglomerate Alstom and its U.S. division Alstom Grid in
the Central District of California for alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,060,259 ('259 Patent).
The '259 Patent is entitled "Wide-area, real-time
monitoring and visualization system" and directed to a wide-area real-time
performance monitoring system for monitoring and assessing dynamic stability of
an electric power grid.
EPG filed a first
amended complaint against Alstom on February 19, 2013 in which it added
a claim for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,233,843, entitled "Real-time
performance monitoring and management system." The accused products are
Alstom's "PhasorPoint" and "e-terravision" solutions alone or in combination
with other wide area measurement systems-based smart grid offerings.
View more from the Green Patent Blog.
For more information about LexisNexis
products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.