This case was last updated from U.S. District Courts on 01/15/2022 at 10:10:52 (UTC).

CAO Lighting, Inc. v. Signify N.V. et al

Case Summary

On November 16, 2021, CAO Lighting, Inc. (“CAO Lighting” or “Plaintiff”), represented by Roya Rahmanpour of Barnes and Thornburg LLP, filed an intellectual property lawsuit against Signify N.V. (formerly known as Philips Lighting N.V.) and Signify North America Corporation (formerly known as Philips Lighting North America Corporation) (collectively, “Defendants”), seeking damages, pre-judgement and post-judgement interests and other reliefs for Defendants’ alleged infringement of the United States Patent owned by the Plaintiff. This case was filed in U.S. District Court in the Central District of California with Judge Andre Birotte Jr. and Judge Sheri Pym presiding.

 

This complaint arises from Defendant’s alleged unlawful infringement of the United States Patent owned by Plaintiff: United States Patent No. 6,465,961 titled “Semiconductor Light Source using a Heat Sink with a Plurality of Panels” (the ’961 Patent) (“Patent-in-suit”).

 

In the complaint, the Plaintiff alleged that, “Defendants infringed, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more claims of the ’961 Patent in this judicial district and elsewhere in the United States, including, at least, Claim 21 of the ’961 Patent, by making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing LED lighting products, including LED indoor luminaires, LED outdoor luminaires, and LED lamps (collectively, “Accused Products”).”

 

The Plaintiff also alleged that, “Defendants have directly infringed, literally or by the doctrine of equivalents, at least Claim 21 of the ’961 Patent in this District and elsewhere in the United States. Upon information and belief, Defendants have made, used, sold, or offered for sale, or imported into the United States, multiple lines of lighting products that fall within the scope of one or more of the claims of the ’961 Patent (including Claim 21), including, at least, the Accused Products, and further including at least the Philips-branded LED lamps, LED indoor luminaires, and LED outdoor luminaires, and also including any product numbers, SKUs, or item numbers of such lighting products offered for sale or sold at any time in the last six years, infringe, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least Claim 21 of the ’961 Patent.”

 

The Plaintiff further alleged that, “Defendants’ acts of infringement have been and continue to be willful, intentional, and deliberate. Upon information and belief, Defendants have intentionally and deliberately infringed the ’961 Patent and in disregard for the ’961 Patent by making, having made, using, importing, and offering for sale products that infringe the ’961 Patent.”

 

The only claim for relief laid down by the Plaintiff is for alleged infringement of the Patent-in-suit.

 

In its prayer for relief, the Plaintiff has requested the Court to pass a judgment that the Defendants have directly infringed the ’961 Patent along with an award for damages, and that such damages be trebled pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 including all prejudgment and post-judgment interest. Furthermore, the Plaintiff requested the Court for a judgment of costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 and any such further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 

 

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    2:21-CV-08972

  • Filing Date:

    11/16/2021

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Intellectual Property - Patent

Judge Details

Referral Judge

Sheri Pym

Presiding Judge

Andre Birotte Jr

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

CAO Lighting, Inc.

Defendants

Signify N.V.

Signify North America Corporation

Philips Lighting NV

Philips Lighting North America Corporation

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

Seth A. Gold

Attorney at Barnes and Thornburg LLP

2029 Century Park East Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90067

Jeffrey M. Barron

Attorney at Barnes and Thornburg LLP

11 South Meridian Street

Indianapolis, IN 46204

Todd G. Vare

Attorney at Barnes and Thornburg LLP

11 South Meridian Street

Indianapolis, IN 46204

Roya Rahmanpour

Attorney at Barnes and Thornburg LLP

2029 Century Park East Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90067-2904

Defendant Attorneys

Jason M. Dorsky

Attorney at Venable LLP

600 Massachusetts Avenue Nw

Washington, DC 20001

John D. Carlin

Attorney at Venable LLP

1290 Avenue Of The Americas, 20Th Floor

New York, NY 10020

Sarah S. Brooks

Attorney at Venable LLP

2049 Century Park East Suite 2300

Los Angeles, CA 90067

 

Court Documents

#33

(#33) ORDER by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. Granting Application of Non-Resident Attorney Jeffrey M. Barron to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc., designating Roya Rahmanpour as local counsel #29 . (gk) (Entered: 01/12/2022)

#32

(#32) ORDER by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. Granting Application of Non-Resident Attorney Jason M. Dorsky to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Signify N.V. (f/k/a Philips Lighting N.V.) and Signify North America Corporation (f/k/a Philips Lighting North America Corporation), designating Sarah S. Brooks as local counsel #27 . (gk) (Entered: 01/12/2022)

#31

(#31) NOTICE of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Pro Hac Vice Application RE: APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney John D. Carlin to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-32603842) #30 . The following error(s) was/were found: Local Rule 83-2.1.3.3(a) Application not complete: state courts to which the applicant has been admitted are not listed. (lt) (Entered: 01/11/2022)

30 #1

Proposed Order

30 #30

Main Document

29 #1

Proposed Order On Application Of Non-Resident Attorney To Appear Pro Hac Vice

29 #29

Main Document

27 #1

Proposed Order

27 #27

Main Document

#4

(#4) NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc., identifying CAO Group, Inc., Burford Capital Ltd., Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation. (Rahmanpour, Roya) (Entered: 11/16/2021)

3 #1

Supplement Proposed Summons to Signify N.V.

3 #3

Main Document

#2

(#3) Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Supplement Proposed Summons to Signify N.V.)(Rahmanpour, Roya) (Entered: 11/16/2021)

1 #4

Exhibit D

1 #3

Exhibit C

1 #2

Exhibit B

1 #1

Exhibit A

1 #1

Main Document

42 More Documents Available
View All Documents

 

Docket Entries

  • 01/12/2022
  • Docket(#34) Corrected APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney John D. Carlin to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Previously Paid on 1/11/2022, Receipt No. 32603842) filed by Defendants Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Brooks, Sarah) (Entered: 01/12/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#33) ORDER by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. Granting Application of Non-Resident Attorney Jeffrey M. Barron to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc., designating Roya Rahmanpour as local counsel #29 . (gk) (Entered: 01/12/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#32) ORDER by Judge Andre Birotte Jr. Granting Application of Non-Resident Attorney Jason M. Dorsky to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Signify N.V. (f/k/a Philips Lighting N.V.) and Signify North America Corporation (f/k/a Philips Lighting North America Corporation), designating Sarah S. Brooks as local counsel #27 . (gk) (Entered: 01/12/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#31) NOTICE of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Pro Hac Vice Application RE: APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney John D. Carlin to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-32603842) #30 . The following error(s) was/were found: Local Rule 83-2.1.3.3(a) Application not complete: state courts to which the applicant has been admitted are not listed. (lt) (Entered: 01/11/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#30) APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney John D. Carlin to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-32603842) filed by Defendants Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Brooks, Sarah) (Entered: 01/11/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/07/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#29) APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jeffrey M. Barron to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc. (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500.00 Previously Paid on 12/8/2021, Receipt No. 32445638) filed by Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order On Application Of Non-Resident Attorney To Appear Pro Hac Vice) (Rahmanpour, Roya) (Entered: 01/07/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/07/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#28) NOTICE Of Revised Pro Hac Vice Application filed by Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Of Barron In Support Of Notice Of Revised Pro Hac Vice Application)(Rahmanpour, Roya) (Entered: 01/07/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/07/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#27) APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Jason M. Dorsky to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-32588298) filed by Defendants Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Brooks, Sarah) (Entered: 01/07/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/07/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#26) Certification and Notice of Interested Parties filed by Defendants Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation, (Brooks, Sarah) (Entered: 01/07/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/05/2022
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#25) ORDER EXTENDING TIME TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT by Judge Andre Birotte Jr.: The Court GRANTS the Stipulation #24 . The time for Defendant Signify North America Corporation to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint shall be extended to and including 3/23/2022. (gk) (Entered: 01/06/2022)

    Read MoreRead Less
14 More Docket Entries
  • 11/17/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#10) 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendants Signify N.V. and Signify North America Corporation. (jtil) (Entered: 11/17/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/17/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#9) Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (jtil) (Entered: 11/17/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/17/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#8) NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil) (Entered: 11/17/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/17/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#7) NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge John F. Walter and Magistrate Judge Karen L. Stevenson. (jtil) (Entered: 11/17/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/16/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#6) REPORT ON THE FILING OF AN ACTION Regarding a Patent or a Trademark (Initial Notification) filed by CAO Lighting, Inc.. (Rahmanpour, Roya) (Entered: 11/16/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/16/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#5) NOTICE of Related Case(s) filed by Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc.. Related Case(s): 2:20-CV-4926-AB-SP; 5:20-CV-2367-AB-SP; and 2:21-CV-08912-RGK-AGR (Rahmanpour, Roya) (Entered: 11/16/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/16/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#4) NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc., identifying CAO Group, Inc., Burford Capital Ltd., Signify N.V., Signify North America Corporation. (Rahmanpour, Roya) (Entered: 11/16/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/16/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#3) Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Supplement Proposed Summons to Signify N.V.)(Rahmanpour, Roya) (Entered: 11/16/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/16/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#2) CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc.. (Rahmanpour, Roya) (Entered: 11/16/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/16/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#1) COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-32330932 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff CAO Lighting, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D) (Attorney Roya Rahmanpour added to party CAO Lighting, Inc. (pty:pla))(Rahmanpour, Roya) (Entered: 11/16/2021)

    Read MoreRead Less
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where SIGNIFY NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION is a litigant

Latest cases where CAO Lighting, Inc. is a litigant