The ban + 140 million compensation will be increased again: Shanpu Lighting sues Chenhui Lightbao for infringement of LED patents in the United States-Industry News-Shenzhen deep trust patent Agency Co., LTD

News Updates

NEWS CENTER

Related News

There is currently no data available

Home

The ban + 140 million compensation will be increased again: Shanpu Lighting sues Chenhui Lightbao for infringement of LED patents in the United States

Release Time：

2022-08-22

On August 16, the U.S. Federal District Court for the Western District of Texas approved a motion by the Chinese LED lighting company Jiaxing Shanpu Lighting Electric Co., Ltd. to increase the amount of compensation. The final amount will be determined after negotiation between the two parties involved. The district court also granted Shanpu Lighting's other motion for a permanent injunction, but denied its third request that the court rule the case as an exceptional case and be entitled to attorney's fees and other legal costs. motion. The court used nine "Read factors" established by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in 1992 to determine whether the amount of compensation should be increased.

On August 2, the district court increased the amount of compensation awarded by a jury to US$21 million (approximately 140 million yuan). This is equivalent to an additional $0.45 in compensation for each infringing LED lamp sold by the defendant Chenhui Guangbao Technology Co., Ltd. within a specific period of time. This specific period refers to the time from when Shanpu Lighting notified Chenhui Lightbao of its patent infringement in early 2019 to when Chenhui Lightbao responded to the lawsuit.

In January 2020, Shanpu Lighting and its North American subsidiary Obert, Inc. sued its Chinese competitor Chenhui Guangbao, the company's subsidiary Shaoxing Ruixin Lighting Co., Ltd., and the company's U.S. seller in the district court. Elliott Electric Supply, Inc., alleged that they infringed eight of its patents: 10,295,125, 10,342,078, 10,352,540, 10,426,003, 9,939,140, 10,378,700, 10,448,479, and 10,560,989. During the trial, Shanpu Lighting narrowed down the number of patents and claims it asserted, and only accused Chenhui Lighting of infringing claim 1 of its patent No. 125, claim 1, and claim 1 of its patent No. 140. 4, 5, 24, 28, claims 13 and 14 of the '540 patent.

Shanpu Lighting was founded in 1993, headquartered in Jiaxing City, Zhejiang Province, and has subsidiaries in Lishui City, Zhejiang Province and Los Angeles City, the United States. The company focuses on the research and development of high-end LED light sources and lighting equipment, and its main markets are Europe, the United States and Japan. Chenhui Guangbao was founded in Shaoxing City, Zhejiang Province in 1994. It started from the production of traditional fluorescent lamps and began to transform into the production of LED lighting in 2010.

In November 2021, a jury in the district court issued a unanimous verdict, concluding that Chenhui Lite-On and Shaoxing Ruixin had "willingly" infringed all the rights claimed by Shanpu Lighting and were required to pay them approximately US$14 million in compensation. , Elliott needs to pay him approximately US$300,000 in compensation. Subsequently, Shanpu Lighting filed a motion to increase the amount of compensation in the district court. In the hearing on August 16 this year, the court used nine factors established by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in the 1992 case of "Read Corp. v. Portec, Inc." Determine whether the amount of compensation should be increased.

These nine factors are: 1. Whether the infringer intentionally copied other people's ideas or designs; 2. When the infringer knew that others were protected by patents, did he investigate the scope of his patent and believed that the patent was invalid or unavailable? The good faith of the infringed product; 3. The infringer’s behavior as a litigant; 4. The defendant’s size and financial status; 5. The similarity of the infringing products; 6. The duration of the defendant’s misconduct; 7. The defendant’s remedial measures; 8 .The defendant’s motive to harm others; 9. Whether the defendant attempted to conceal his misconduct.

The district court considered the case to be an “egregious case” as defined by the U.S. Supreme Court because: the jury found the defendant to have committed intentional infringement; Chenhui Guangbao and Shaoxing Ruixin ignored its evidence obligations to disclose; a Shaoxing Ruixin executive’s misinterpretation of the court’s ruling on the company’s inequitable conduct; aggressive press releases by that executive and another executive; and Chenhui Lite-On and Shaoxing Ruixin harmed the plaintiff's motive.

The district court agreed to Shanpu Lighting’s motion and will further increase the compensation amount to US$21 million. The court also issued a permanent injunction against Chenhui Guangbao.

Source: Internet Comprehensive

More intellectual property information and services

Follow the official subscription account of [Shenxin Intellectual Property] on the code

Follow the official service account of [Shentrust Intellectual Property Service Platform] on the code