Litepanels sues to stop all imports of LED Lighting!

Cool Lights said:
In other words, someone manufacturing something in the USA wouldn't be attacked in the same way. They'd go through traditional methods if they think you are infringing on a patent. That's based on what I know about all this.
Click to expand...

Is this process 'subject to judicial review', and as such, can't a stay/injunction to prevent any enforcement of any import ban, until the merits of the patent are decided. It seems to me that the way to 'deal' with this is to get the patent in for review, show prior art, and show that the 'patent' is not materially different from said art...

My personal experience in patent issues is ancient... But the way the 'patent' was worded, despite company A (my company) showing that prior art was used, company B (those who had quit company A, formed company B, added a slight difference), prevailed. As it was both companies A and B had Pyrrhic victories... and both faded into receiverships... and sold off to other entities...

The unfortunate consequence of this 'patent' business is that despite its being legally fragile, investors prefer to fund companies with 'intellectual portfolios' rather than 'actual products', when the companies are very small... It's cheaper to fund lawyers for licensing, than actual manufacturing...

Even if a patent is held valid, often a court review will require the patent holder to come up with 'reasonable' schedules for licensing... yet another ancient example. Another Company I worked for acquired a company in Tucson AZ. and maintained that company as a separate business entity, solely for the purpose of maintaining the infamous 'excluisve or' on a frame buffer for cursor management patent licensing which was based on that company's 'income' at the time of licensing, and could be renegotiated if the company made 'greater profits'.
 
That's right that patents and copyrights are two different things.

Yes this process is subject to judicial review by someone called an Administrative Law Judge. Here's what I know about the process from what I have learned in the past two months.

There are only like 4 to 6 of these ALJs at the ITC and one of them, Theodore Essex, is overseeing this case.

In a nutshell the way the process works is, complaining company decides to either attack competitors one by one in regular patent cases (in court) or if imports are involved they can also choose to go to the ITC to see if they can get the products banned from import. If they decide on this route, they have months to prepare all this and can even call ITC staff to bounce ideas off them and get help with the complaint. Then they actually file the complaint, which by this point is most likely very well polished. It is a petition to the ITC to have imports banned of a product and then the "why" behind their reasons for asking. It can be things like unfair competition through "dumping", patent violation, etc. If the respondents are lucky they hear about the case, but won't have an official notification yet at this point.

Then the ITC decides if it will hear the case. Usually decided within one month. They often at least hear it as they did in this case. So notices are served to the companies in question. Now they know officially of the complaint. The respondents then have about a month to file an initial response to the complaint. Can you imagine? Only one month and the complainer had months to prepare this assault. So research has to be done and defenses have to be mounted in one month. We have just passed that point and all the American companies except for one responded. Technically at any point if you don't file whatever it is you are supposed to file, you are in "default". Which means you could get a default judgment against you. It could also end up being very smart too. All the other companies could spend money on defending and if they win, then even the default respondents win and perhaps never paid a dime to defend like the others did.

The Chinese companies in question haven't filed yet and asked for an extension which was granted at least in part by ITC even though Litepanels objected. Their responses are due on the Oct 12th. They have our public responses at this point as well so they can use that information and research in their response. Not much time to complete the research necessary to file a novel response and defense different from the ones already filed. Should be interesting to see if they use the same exact arguments we did given the lack of time left. Our response had all the specific prior art in it (with patent numbers) that we claim invalidates the patents.

At this point, its up to the ITC and Litepanels to come back with requests for whatever other information they want to substantiate what we have filed. That process will go on for a while and then some closed hearings start between ITC and all the lawyers involved. In the meanwhile, everyone goes on as normal with business as usual. It will take months before some ban may be decided upon. Cool Lights (and as far as I know the other companies as well) for example is still selling our LED products and I believe we will prevail if we can hang in there through the process which is quite expensive.

Eventually it comes to a point where if things haven't settled "out of court" so to speak, then judgments in the case will start and decide for or against the complaint. It all hinges now on whether the ITC accepts the prior art to invalidate the patents in question and the other defenses we gave. Then, finally, the President of the United States has 60 days to disagree with the ruling given the potential ramifications on international relations and trade. After that 60 days, whatever the ruling is will go in effect. Average time for one of these cases at ITC is about 12 months. In effect, the future of LED lighting for photographic use (at least as regards imports and lets face it, a lot of it is coming from overseas) is up to the ITC and the President and who they decide for (that is, if the case isn't "settled" out of court).

That's an oversimplification of course but they are different from regular court cases in may respects and move along at a faster pace than court cases. Here's a website that describes the process in more detail for anyone interested:

http://www.sutherland.com/files/Pub...ction337ITCProceedingsforForeignAttorneys.pdf
 
Last edited:
Really feel for you, Richard - this is totally bogus. I have purchased from you in the past, will do so again in the future, and have happily recommended others to you many times. I know that is probably small consolation in the face of the outlandish expenses you are bearing right now, but for what it is worth, we're on your side.....
 
Can a patent be granted for a specific "use", even though the original patent may have long been expired ?
Can one take a television set (patent expired) or the LCD panel and patent the "use" of it on film sets instead of living room entertainment ?
Can one take a tripod and patent the "use" of it to support loudspeakers for DJ's instead of supporting cameras ?
Can one take a microphone and patent the "use" of it on top of video cameras instead of a desk or podium ?
Etc., etc., etc... ad infinitum... and last but not least...
Can a company take LEDS ( originally patented by GE 1962) and patent a "use" for it in video lighting instead of household or automotive use ?

If "yes" is the answer to all of the above questions, then the Patent Office will be soon swarmed with new patent applications for a specific "use" of existing products and many people will get very rich, very fast.
 
Norman99 said:
Can a patent be granted for a specific "use", even though the original patent may have long been expired ?
Can one take a television set (patent expired) or the LCD panel and patent the "use" of it on film sets instead of living room entertainment ?
Can one take a tripod and patent the "use" of it to support loudspeakers for DJ's instead of supporting cameras ?
Can one take a microphone and patent the "use" of it on top of video cameras instead of a desk or podium ?
Etc., etc., etc... ad infinitum... and last but not least...
Can a company take LEDS ( originally patented by GE 1962) and patent a "use" for it in video lighting instead of household or automotive use ?

If "yes" is the answer to all of the above questions, then the Patent Office will be soon swarmed with new patent applications for a specific "use" of existing products and many people will get very rich, very fast.
Click to expand...

I don't have time to give the details but one patent that is being used, looks like a light ring. That is US Patent 7,972,022.

Here's a link to the PDF

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CBwQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mikewoodconsulting.com%2Fpatentdb%2Fpdf%2F7972022.pdf&rct=j&q=patent%207%2C972%2C022&ei=UYOQTsioNcfmiAKuzIjNCA&usg=AFQjCNGwU_0uLpx8aszoqsAyi1sYznv6cA&sig2=xbpKEChiJy8IALuWQhCP8Q&cad=rja
 
Last edited:
A ring /doughnut/annular/shape of light fixture has been used in kitchen ceiling flo light for many years now. Just go to any lighting/hardware store and see them.I myself wondered how they can take a flourescent straight bulb and shape it into a doughnut ... Nothing novel. Using leds instead of flos or bulbs in them..nothing novel. Using a ringlight for photography, nothing novel as I have been using them for macro shadowless illumination as far back as the 70's with the Medical Nikkor micro 200mm F5.6 that has a built in ring flash on it...nothing novel. That one was imported from Japan.
Now, what would happen if a luminaire company from China that designs and manufactures a ceiling/desk/vanity cabinet ring light with leds it them..and an aspiring videographer sees that it sells at Home Depot on sale for 20 bucks, goes out and purchases a half dozen, and uses them for his blockbuster debut feature film ? Who may be on the infringement list ? The company from China that made and exported them, the store in US that sold them, or the cameraman that uses them ?
So, what really is the novel patent here ?
The ring shape, the technology used (leds), or the intended use (film,video and broadcast) ??
In my opinion, none of them are novel..but then again, it's only my opinion.
 
Norman99 said:
A ring /doughnut/annular/shape of light fixture has been used in kitchen ceiling flo light for many years now. Just go to any lighting/hardware store and see them.
Click to expand...

Yes of course. The problem is that when a patent is issued it requires money to show up in court to prove that the patent didn't meet the requirements of novelty or the like.
 
NVentive said:
Really feel for you, Richard - this is totally bogus. I have purchased from you in the past, will do so again in the future, and have happily recommended others to you many times. I know that is probably small consolation in the face of the outlandish expenses you are bearing right now, but for what it is worth, we're on your side.....
Click to expand...

Thanks Stephen for your kind words.
 
I can't believe that I was about to purchase from Litepanels a few months ago. I've been active on this board for some time now and have heard nothing but the best about Cool Lights. You've earned yourself a new customer and I can't wait to buy my Led fixtures from you once I have the budget.
 
All the best with this Richard. I wish I could dump all the Vitek equipment I own but they control a surprising amount of the market. I hope someone within Vitek is reading all the negative karma they are creating.

Regardless of the outcome, Cool Lights will remain on my vendor "A" list for delivering both great value and great service also.

Grant
 
Postmaster said:
We sold all our Litepanels quite a while ago. The price performance ratio went out of the window and the service is a disaster.
We had quite some isuues since they are sold to Vitec.
Today you can have much better quality panels, at a much better price.
 Litepanels was resting on their laurels much too long.

Looks like they following Apple in the trivial Patent-Troll business now.


Frank
Click to expand...

Any recommendations on Litepanels alternatives you can give?
 
Cool Lights is a sponsor here, the LED 600 is well appreciated and many comments about it can be found in this forum. Plus we are fighting this petition in the US ITC so money spent with us is money spent towards keeping the market open to all imports (which are the majority of LED instruments sold in the USA today) instead of closing it.
 
+ 1 from here also.

I have 5 of them. 3 x 600 and 2 x 256. They help me to make money on a daily basis.

Peter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top