Several new green patent complaints were filed in July and August in the areas of LEDs, smart grid, and water meters.
But before we get to that, a significant green patent case settled during this period. Colorado-based Gevo and BP-DuPont joint venture Butamax announced that they entered into worldwide patent cross-license and settlement agreements.
The deal ends a massive patent dispute that began back in early 2011 and grew to comprise at least 17 lawsuits and 14 patents relating to methods of producing biobutanol.
The agreement grants both parties patent licenses to all fields for isobutanol and includes a combination of royalty-bearing and royalty-free fields for both parties. According to this piece from Biofuels Digest, it seems the core of the deal is that Butamax will take the lead in the on-road gasoline market and Gevo gets the jet fuel market.
The litigation was notable both for its size and as the first foray of big oil into biofuels patent lawsuits.
Feit Electric Company, Inc. v. Cree, Inc.
After Cree sued Feit for alleged infringement of 10 patents back in January, Feit fired back with this lawsuit filed July 7, 2015 in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.
The LED Lamp Patents are directed to LED light bulbs for replacing incandescents. The LED lamp has an elevated light source positioned above a screw-type base and two groups of LEDs connected in series with each LED mounted proximate a heat sink.
The accused products are Cree’s 4Flow LED lamps.
Koninklijke Philips N.V. et al. v. Amerlux LLC et al.
Philips has filed another patent infringement lawsuit, asserting six LED lighting patents against New Jersey lighting company Amerlux. The complaint was filed August 5, 2015 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
The patents-in-suit are:
U.S. Patent No. 6,094,014, entitled “Circuit arrangement, and signaling light provided with the circuit arrangement”
U.S. Patent No. 6,250,774, entitled “Luminaire”
U.S. Patent No. 6,577,512, entitled “Power supply for LEDs”
U.S. Patent No. 7,038,399, entitled “Methods and apparatus for providing power to lighting devices”
U.S. Patent No. 7,262,559, entitled “LEDs driver”
U.S. Patent No. 8,220,958, entitled “Light-beam shaper”
Philips alleges that a host of Amerlux products infringe one or more of the asserted patents, including accent display lighting products, task lighting products, wall wash and grazer lighting products, shelf lighting products, downlights, pendants, outdoor lighting products, and other luminaire-type lighting products.
Endeavor MeshTech, Inc. v. Redpine Signals, Inc.
Endeavor MeshTech, Inc. v. Atmel Corporation
Endeavor MeshTech (a wholly-owned subsidiary of patent monetization firm Endeavor IP) continued its patent enforcement campaign, filing two more lawsuits in July and August.
The first was filed against Redpine in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on July 1, 2015 (Endeavor Meshtech v. Redpine), the second against Atmel in U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on July 6, 2015 (Endeavor Meshtech v. ATMEL).
The two complaints accuse Redpine and Atmel, respectively, of infringing three patents in a family – U.S. Patent Nos. 7,379,981 (‘981 Patent), 8,700,749 (‘749 Patent), and 8,855,019 (‘019 Patent), each entitled “Wireless communication enabled meter and network.”
The patents-in-suit relate to a self-configuring wireless network including a number of vnodes and VGATES.
The accused products are Redpine’s n-Link, Connect-io-n, WiSeConnect, M2MCombo, SmartCombo, NetCombo and WinergyNet products and Atmel’s products sold under the brand names ZigBit, SmartConnect, BitCloud, and SMART.
Regen Energy Inc. v. eCurv Inc.
On August 19, 2015 Regen Energy, a Canadian corporation with operations in San Marcos, California, sued Massachusetts-based eCurv for alleged infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,918,223 (‘223 Patent) and 9,110,647 (‘647 Patent).
The ‘223 and ‘647 Patents are related patents entitled, respectively “Apparatus for managing an energy consuming load” and “Method and apparatus for managing an energy consuming load.” They are directed to energy management systems and methods that generate load state data from energy consuming loads, make enablement state decisions for the loads using the load state data, and implement the enablement state decisions.
Filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, the complaint alleges that eCurv’s QPAC line of energy management software and related products infringe the ‘223 and ‘647 Patents.
Green4All Energy Solutions, Inc. v. Flow Dynamics, LLC et al.
In this action for tortious interference, unfair competition and declaratory judgment, Chicago-based Green4All requests that the court declare Flow Dynamics’ U.S. Patent No. 8,707,981 (‘981 Patent) invalid.
The ‘981 Patent is entitled “System for increasing the efficiency of a water meter” and directed to a valve assembly that increases the efficiency of an upstream water meter by removing entrained water bubbles from the water supply.
Filed August 5, 2015 in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, the complaint alleges that Flow Dynamics’ prior filed patent infringement suit against Green4All (reported here) is without merit and the ‘981 Patent should be declared not infringed and invalid.