Jiaxing Super Lighting Electric Appliance Co., Ltd. and its affiliate Obert, Inc. (collectively “Super Lighting”) filed a patent infringement lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Central District of California against MaxLite, Inc. on May 8, 2019 for infringing six of Super Lighting’s U.S. patents, including Pat. Nos. 9,807,826; 9,723,662; 9,897,265; 9,689,536; 9,841,174; and 10,208,897 (see chart below). In response, MaxLite (whose product providers are CH Lighting Technology Co., Ltd. and Ruising Lighting) petitioned for Inter Partes Reviews (IPR) with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on three of the six patents (U.S. Pat. Nos. 9,897,265; 9,723,662; and 9,807,826) seeking to invalidate these patents. Furthermore, MaxLite filed a motion to stay the lawsuit in the District Court.

Though MaxLite represented its IPRs would be successful, the USPTO denied institution of an IPR as to the ‘662 and ‘826 patents (IPR2020-00181) (IPR2020-00208), again confirming the validity of Super Lighting’s patents. And the District Court also denied MaxLite’s motion to stay the patent infringement lawsuit. The lawsuit will thus continue with all six patents-in-suit.

Accordingly MaxLite’s IPRs have no actual impact on the scope of the case against it, as shown below:

Super Lighting is pleased with the USPTO’s decisions rendered on May 26 and June 24 once again confirming that Super Lighting’s patents are valid and enforceable. This further strengthens Super Lighting’s confidence that the patents it makes available in its licensing program are of a very high quality. In order to create a fair and competitive market and to protect the interests of our customers and strategic partners, Super Lighting will continue patent enforcement and licensing efforts to prevent manufacturers, distributors and retailers from selling infringing products.

*Disclaimer: The aforementioned description is intended to be a simple explanation for general readers' understanding and is for reference only. The scope of Super Lighting’s patents are set forth in the actual claims of its issued patents.

嘉兴山蒲与 Obert 取得阶段性胜利MaxLite 的反击徒劳无功

嘉兴山蒲照明及其关联公司 Obert 在 2019 年 5 月对 MaxLite 在中加州区的美国联邦法院提起专利侵权诉讼，其中涉及六件专利(9,807,826 ; 9,723,662 ; 9,897,265 ; 9,689,536; 9,841,174; 和10,208,897)列表如下。MaxLite (LED直管灯产品供应商为晨辉光宝与瑞新照明)在 2019 年 11 月起分别针对其中的三件专利 ‘265 , ‘662 , ‘826 向美国专利局提出无效复审(IPR)，振振有词的要求重新审查这三件专利的可专利性，并在 2020年 5 月藉此向中加州法院提出暂停审理的请求。

尽管MaxLite曾表示其IPR将获得成功，但目前三件无效的结果都已公布，其中 ‘662 与 ‘826 （IPR2020-00181）（IPR2020-00208）MaxLite被美国专利局判定为『不予立案』(原因 : 无法说服专利局，此专利有无效的可能，不予审理)，因此，美国专利局再次认定山蒲的专利合法有效；法院也拒绝 MaxLite 将案件暂停的请求，案件将继续审理产品侵权事宜，而且原先起诉的六件专利，将一件都不少的继续诉讼，可以说 MaxLite 提出的这一系列无效复审，对山蒲提出的诉讼并未造成实质上的影响，说明如下：

美国专利局在5月26日和6月24日重新审理后再次证明山蒲的专利合法有效，这进一步增强了山蒲对其专利许可计划中的专利质量信心。山蒲在此呼吁，为了建立公平竞争的市场并保护我们的客户和战略合作伙伴的利益，山蒲将继续执行专利主张与许可工作，以防止制造商，分销商和零售商销售侵权产品。

*特别声明：前述内容为针对一般读者所做的简要解释和参考，内文所提及山蒲所拥有的专利类型，以所核发之证书与内容为准。