Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 1 of 18 PageID #: 793
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`LIGHTING SCIENCE GROUP CORP.,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`SIGNIFY N.V. (F/K/A PHILIPS LIGHTING
`N.V.) & SIGNIFY NORTH AMERICA
`CORPORATION (F/K/A PHILIPS
`LIGHTING NORTH AMERICA
`CORPORATION)
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`CA No. 19-807-LPS
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
` 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CORRECTED ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`Plaintiff Lighting Science Group Corp. files this Corrected Complaint against Defendants
`
`Signify N.V. (F/K/A Philips Lighting N.V.) and Signify North America Corporation (F/K/A
`
`Philips Lighting North America Corporation) for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271.
`
`The corrections include minor typographical edits and the removal of U.S. Patent No. 8,672,518
`
`as an asserted patent. Plaintiff alleges, based on its own personal knowledge with respect to its
`
`own actions and based upon information and belief with respect to all others’ actions, as follows:
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`For nearly two decades, Lighting Science Group Corporation (“LSG”) has been at
`
`the forefront of innovation in the light-emitting diode (“LED” or “LEDs”) lighting space. LSG
`
`was the first U.S.-based manufacturer to make an LED light commercially available. In the ensuing
`
`years, LSG proved instrumental to the proliferation of LED lighting across American residences.
`
`{01450734;v1 } 
`
` 
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 2 of 18 PageID #: 794
`
` 
`
`In May 2010, through a relationship with The Home Depot, LSG released a 40-watt equivalent,
`
`429 lumen LED bulb under The Home Depot’s EcoSmart brand for $20. In an article titled, “The
`
`Home Depot takes LED lighting mainstream with $20 bulbs,” Endgaget celebrated the product for
`
`making high-quality LED lighting more economically accessible, noting that LSG’s product was
`
`“cheaper and nearly as powerful as the 450 lumen, $40-$50 design industry heavyweight GE
`
`unveiled” the month before, and concluding, “[h]onestly, we’re starting to wonder what the catch
`
`is.”1
`
`2.
`
`By 2011, LSG’s winning combination of innovation, quality, and accessible pricing
`
`had led the company to become the largest North American producer of LED lights, selling 4.5
`
`million LED lights in 2011 alone, and increasing sales by 450-percent over the prior year.2 That
`
`success, in turn, led LSG to become a significant American employer. For three consecutive years,
`
`from 2012 to 2014, LSG was named on Deloitte’s Technology Fast 500™ as one of the top 500
`
`fastest growing companies in North America.3
`
`3.
`
`Meanwhile, as LSG continued to advance the field of LED lighting both
`
`commercially and technologically, it simultaneously protected and disclosed its innovative
`
`intellectual property through hundreds of issued U.S. patents. Those patents, in turn, further
`
`advanced the LED lighting space, garnering thousands of citations from later patents filed by
`
`                                                            
`1 Sean Hollister, “The Home Depot Takes LED Lighting Mainstream with $20 Bulbs,” Engadget (May 11,
`2010),
`https://www.engadget.com/2010/05/11/the-home-depot-takes-led-lighting-mainstream-with-20-
`bulbs/.
`2 Jasmine Zhuang, “Lighting Science Group Becomes North American Largest LED Lights Producer,”
`LEDinside
`(Jan.
`31,
`2012),
`https://www.ledinside.com/news/2012/1/lighting_science_group_north_american_largest_producer_2012
`0131.
`3 “Lighting Science Group Corporation Ranked in Top 500 Fastest Growing Companies for Third
`Consecutive Year in North America on Deloitte’s 2014 Technology Fast 500™,” Pegasus Capital Advisors
`(Nov. 17, 2014), http://www.pcalp.com/lighting-science-group-corporation-ranked-top-500-fastest-
`growing-companies-third-consecutive-year-north-america-deloittes-2014-technology-fast-500/
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-2-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 3 of 18 PageID #: 795
`
` 
`
`LSG’s competitors.
`
`4.
`
`But in recent years, an explosion of products which infringe LSG’s innovative
`
`patents has eroded LSG’s market position. Thus, in order to protect its valuable intellectual
`
`property rights and substantial investments in innovating the LED lighting space, LSG files this
`
`complaint for patent infringement.
`
`5.
`
`This matter is a companion case to an ITC proceeding, captioned In the Matter of
`
`Certain Light-Emitting Diode Products, Systems, and Components Thereof, filed concurrently
`
`herewith by the same Plaintiff, naming the same Defendants as respondents. Plaintiff hereby
`
`incorporates by reference the relevant portions of the Complaint filed in that ITC proceeding as if
`
`restated herein.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`Lighting Science Group Corp. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
`
`6.
`
`business located at 801 N. Atlantic Avenue, Cocoa Beach, FL 32931.
`
`7.
`
`Both directly and through its subsidiaries, LSG is in the business of manufacturing,
`
`researching, developing, and selling devices and systems that use LEDs as the light source.
`
`8.
`
`Signify N.V. (f/k/a Philips Lighting N.V.) is a publicly traded company organized
`
`under the laws of the Netherlands. It has its principal place of business at High Tech Campus 48,
`
`5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands. Signify N.V. recently changed its name from Philips
`
`Lighting N.V. and will continue to sell products under the Philips brand name.
`
`9.
`
`Signify N.V. designs and manufactures, among other things, LED lighting
`
`products. Upon information and belief, Signify N.V. manufactures certain Accused Products
`
`abroad, including in manufacturing facilities in China and Mexico.
`
`10. On information and belief, Signify N.V., directly or through its affiliates, imports
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-3-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 4 of 18 PageID #: 796
`
` 
`
`into the United States, sells for importation into the United States, and/or sells after importation
`
`into the United States certain Accused Products and/or knowingly induces such activity.
`
`11.
`
`Signify North America Corporation (f/k/a Philips Lighting North America
`
`Corporation), is a privately held corporation organized under the laws of the State of Delaware. It
`
`has its principal place of business at 200 Franklin Square Drive, Somerset, New Jersey 08873.
`
`Signify North America Corporation recently changed its name from Philips Lighting North
`
`America Corporation.
`
`12. On information and belief, Signify North America Corporation is a wholly-owned
`
`subsidiary of Signify N.V. and it, directly or through its affiliates, imports into the United States,
`
`sells for importation into the United States, and/or sells after importation into the United States
`
`certain Accused Products, including products manufactured abroad by Signify N.V. On
`
`information and belief, Signify North America Corporation will continue to import and sell
`
`products under the Philips brand name and/or knowingly induces such activity.
`
`13.
`
`Signify N.V. and Signify North America Corporation collectively are referred to as
`
`the “Signify Defendants.”
`
`14. As a result of the above, Signify N.V. and Signify North America Corporation are
`
`liable jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to the same series of transactions or
`
`occurrences, and questions of fact common to both of them will arise in this action, consistent with
`
`35 U.S.C. § 299.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`15. This action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United
`
`States Code. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
`
`1338(a).
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-4-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 5 of 18 PageID #: 797
`
` 
`
`16. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Signify in this action because Signify has
`
`committed acts within this district giving rise to this action, and has established minimum contacts
`
`with this forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over Signify would not offend traditional
`
`notions of fair play and substantial justice. Signify, directly and through subsidiaries or
`
`intermediaries, has committed and continues to commit acts of infringement in this district by,
`
`among other things, importing, offering to sell, and selling products that infringe the asserted
`
`patents. Signify North America Corporation is a resident of this district. Signify N.V. controls
`
`the products sold by Signify North America Corporation, and controls or acts jointly with Signify
`
`North America Corporation in the marketing and sale of the accused products.
`
`17. Venue is proper as to Defendant Signify in this district under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b),
`
`1391(c), and 1400(b). Defendant Signify North America Corporation is organized under the laws
`
`of Delaware, and thus resides in this district, and commits acts of infringement in this district.
`
`18. Venue is proper as to Defendant Signify N.V., which is organized under the laws
`
`of the Netherlands. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(3) provides that “a defendant not resident in the United
`
`States may be sued in any judicial district, and the joinder of such a defendant shall be disregarded
`
`in determining where the action may be brought with respect to other defendants.”
`
`COUNT ONE: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’483 PATENT
`
`19. U.S. Patent No. 7,098,483 (“the ’483 Patent”), titled “Light Emitting Diodes
`
`Packaged for High Temperature Operation,” was issued on August 29, 2006, naming Joseph
`
`Mazzochette and Greg Blonder as the inventors. Ex. 1 (’483 Patent).
`
`20. LSG owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in the ’483 Patent, and holds
`
`all substantial rights pertinent to this suit, including the right to sue and recover for all past, current,
`
`and future infringement.
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-5-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 6 of 18 PageID #: 798
`
` 
`
`21. On information and belief, Signify imports, sells for importation, and/or sells after
`
`importation into the United States certain Accused Products (“Signify Accused Products”) that
`
`infringe the ’483 Patent, including products sold as the Philips LUMEC Roadfocus LED
`
`Luminaire (RF1739601/1).
`
`22. The Signify Accused Products directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, at least claims 11 and 14-16 of the ’483 Patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`Signify directly infringes at least these claims by importing, selling for importation, and/or selling
`
`after importation into the United States the Signify Accused Products. The Signify Accused
`
`Products satisfy all claim limitations of at least claims 11 and 14-16 of the ’483 Patent at the time
`
`of importation into the United States.
`
`23. Moreover, on information and belief, one or more of the Defendants knowingly and
`
`intentionally induces infringement of the ’483 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by actively
`
`encouraging others to offer to sell, sell, use, and/or import Signify Accused Products into the
`
`United States (that is, by actively encouraging others to directly infringe). On information and
`
`belief, with knowledge and intent, or with willful blindness, one or more of the Defendants is
`
`encouraging and facilitating infringement by others. For example, on information and belief, one
`
`or more of the Defendants sells the Signify Accused Products or otherwise provides the Signify
`
`Accused Products to another Defendant or to distributors knowing that these distributors intend to
`
`import and/or sell the Signify Accused Products in the United States. On information and belief,
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint or earlier, the Defendants have had knowledge of, or have been
`
`willfully blind toward, the Asserted Patents and the infringement of the Asserted Patents by
`
`making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the Signify Accused Products.
`
`24. A claim chart comparing claims 11 and 14-16 of the ’483 Patent to a representative
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-6-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 7 of 18 PageID #: 799
`
` 
`
`Signify Accused Product, the Philips LUMEC Roadfocus LED Luminaire (RF1739601/1),4 was
`
`filed as Exhibit 2 to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint (D.I. 2), and is incorporated herein by reference.
`
`COUNT TWO: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’053 PATENT
`
`25. U.S. Patent No. 7,095,053 (“the ’053 Patent”), titled “Light Emitting Diodes
`
`Packaged for High Temperature Operation,” issued on August 22, 2006, naming Joseph
`
`Mazzochette and Greg Blonder as the inventors. Ex. 3 (’053 Patent).
`
`26. LSG owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in the ’053 Patent, and holds
`
`all substantial rights pertinent to this suit, including the right to sue and recover for all past, current,
`
`and future infringement.
`
`27. On information and belief, Signify imports, sells for importation, and/or sells after
`
`importation into the United States certain Accused Products (“Signify Accused Products”) that
`
`infringe the ’053 Patent, including products sold as the Philips LUMEC Roadfocus LED
`
`Luminaire (RF1739601/1).
`
`28. The Signify Accused Products directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, at least claims 7, 11, 14, 22, 26, and 29 of the ’053 Patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 271(a). Signify directly infringes at least these claims by importing, selling for importation,
`
`and/or selling after importation into the United States the Signify Accused Products. The Signify
`
`Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of at least at least claims 7, 11, 14, 22, 26, and 29
`
`of the ’053 Patent at the time of importation into the United States.
`
`29. Moreover, on information and belief, one or more of the Defendants knowingly and
`
`intentionally induces infringement of the ’053 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by actively
`
`encouraging others to offer to sell, sell, use, and/or import Signify Accused Products into the
`
`                                                            
`4 Upon information and belief, this product was manufactured by or for Signify.
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-7-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 8 of 18 PageID #: 800
`
` 
`
`United States (that is, by actively encouraging others to directly infringe). On information and
`
`belief, with knowledge and intent, or with willful blindness, one or more of the Defendants is
`
`encouraging and facilitating infringement by others. For example, on information and belief, one
`
`or more of the Defendants sells the Signify Accused Products or otherwise provides the Signify
`
`Accused Products to another Defendant or to distributors knowing that these distributors intend to
`
`import and/or sell the Signify Accused Products in the United States. On information and belief,
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint or earlier, the Defendants have had knowledge of, or have been
`
`willfully blind toward, the Asserted Patents and the infringement of the Asserted Patents by
`
`making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the Signify Accused Products.
`
`30. A claim chart comparing 7, 11, 14, 22, 26, and 29 of the ’053 Patent to a
`
`representative Signify Accused Product, the Philips LUMEC Roadfocus LED Luminaire
`
`(RF1739601/1),5 was filed as Exhibit 4 to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint (D.I. 2), and is
`
`incorporated herein by reference.
`
`COUNT THREE: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’421 PATENT
`
` 
`
`31. U.S. Patent No. 7,528,421 (“the ’421 Patent”), titled “Surface Mountable Light
`
`Emitting Diode Assemblies Packaged for High Temperature Operation,” issued on May 5, 2009,
`
`naming Joseph Mazzochette as the inventor. Ex. 5 (’421 Patent).
`
`32. LSG owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in the ’421 Patent, and holds
`
`all substantial rights pertinent to this suit, including the right to sue and recover for all past, current,
`
`and future infringement.
`
`33. On information and belief, Signify imports, sells for importation, and/or sells after
`
`                                                            
`5 Upon information and belief, this product was manufactured by or for Signify.
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-8-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 9 of 18 PageID #: 801
`
` 
`
`importation into the United States certain Accused Products (“Signify Accused Products”) that
`
`infringe the ’421 Patent, including products sold as the Philips Hue White 9.5W (60W Equivalent)
`
`Dimmable A19 Smart LED Light Bulb (9290011369B).
`
`34. The Signify Accused Products directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, at least claims 1-2 and 6-7, and 10 of the ’421 Patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. §
`
`271(a). Signify directly infringes at least these claims by importing, selling for importation, and/or
`
`selling after importation into the United States the Signify Accused Products. The Signify Accused
`
`Products satisfy all claim limitations of at least claims 1-2 and 6-7, and 10 of the ’421 Patent at the
`
`time of importation into the United States.
`
`35. Moreover, on information and belief, one or more of the Defendants knowingly and
`
`intentionally induces infringement of the ’421 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by actively
`
`encouraging others to offer to sell, sell, use, and/or import Signify Accused Products into the
`
`United States (that is, by actively encouraging others to directly infringe). On information and
`
`belief, with knowledge and intent, or with willful blindness, one or more of the Defendants is
`
`encouraging and facilitating infringement by others. For example, on information and belief, one
`
`or more of the Defendants sells the Signify Accused Products or otherwise provides the Signify
`
`Accused Products to another Defendant or to distributors knowing that these distributors intend to
`
`import and/or sell the Signify Accused Products in the United States. On information and belief,
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint or earlier, the Defendants have had knowledge of, or have been
`
`willfully blind toward, the Asserted Patents and the infringement of the Asserted Patents by
`
`making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the Signify Accused Products.
`
`36. A claim chart comparing claims  1-2 and 6-7, and 10 of the ’421 Patent to a
`
`representative Signify Accused Product, the Philips Hue White 9.5W (60W Equivalent) Dimmable
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-9-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 10 of 18 PageID #: 802
`
` 
`
`A19 Smart LED Light Bulb (9290011369B),6 was filed as Exhibit 6 to Plaintiff’s Original
`
`Complaint (D.I. 2), and is incorporated herein by reference.
`
`37. Additionally, on information and belief, including based on teardown analyses and
`
`imaging, at least the following additional products constitute Signify Accused Products that
`
`infringe the ’421 Patent for the reasons set forth above:
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`●
`
`●
`●
`
`Philips Hue White and Color 10W (60W Equivalent) A19 Smart LED Light Bulb
`(9290012575A) 
`Philips 8.5W (60W Replacement) Non-Dimmable A19 LED Light Bulb (Soft White)
`(9290011350A) 
`Philips 4.5W (40W Replacement) Dimmable B11 and E12 LED Light Bulb (Soft White)
`(9290012137C) 
`Philips 14W (100W Replacement) Non-Dimmable A19 LED Light Bulb (Daylight)
`(9290011351A) 
`Philips 6W (50W Replacement) MR16 and GU10 LED Light Bulb (9290012664) 
`Philips 8.5W (60W Replacement) Non-Dimmable A19 LED Light Bulb (Soft White)
`(9290011350A) 
`Philips 8W (60W Replacement) Non-Dimmable A19 LED Light Bulb (Daylight)
`(9290011352A) 
`Philips 11W (65W Replacement) Dimmable BR30 LED Light Bulb (Soft White)
`(9290013916) 
`Philips Dusk to Dawn 8W (60W Replacement) Non-Dimmable A19 LED Light Bulb
`(Soft White) (9290012615) 
`Philips 9W (60W Replacement) Dimmable A19 LED Light Bulb (Daylight)
`(9290018365A) 
`Philips 9.5W (75W Replacement) Non-Dimmable A19 LED Light Bulb (Daylight)
`(9290012194) 
`Philips 8W (60W Replacement) Non-Dimmable A19 LED Light Bulb (Daylight)
`(9290011352A) 
`Philips 4.5W (40W Replacement) Dimmable B11 LED Light Bulb (Soft White)
`(9290012137) 
`Philips 14.5W (100W Replacement) Non-Dimmable A19 LED Light Bulb (Soft White)
`(9290011349A) 
`Philips 5W (40W Replacement) Non-Dimmable A19 LED Light Bulb (9290012037) 
`Philips 10W (60W Replacement) Dimmable G25 LED Light Bulb (Soft White)
`(9290011898) 
`Philips 3-Way 5/8/18W (40/60/100W Replacement) A21 LED Light Bulb (9290011742) 
`Philips 7W (40W Replacement) Dimmable G25 LED Light Bulb (Soft White)
`(9290011817) 
`
`                                                            
`6 Upon information and belief, this product was manufactured by or for Signify.
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-10-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 11 of 18 PageID #: 803
`
` 
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`●
`
`Philips 9W (65W Replacement) Dimmable BR30 LED Light Bulb (Soft White)
`(9290011555) 
`Philips Hue 9.4W (72W Equivalent) 4” Retrofit Recessed LED Downlight (Cool White)
`(59950/11/U5) 
`Philips 13W (75W Equivalent) LED Downlight 4”, 5”, or 6” Surface Mounted Fixture
`(Soft White) (51111/31/49 (PC: 800144)) 
`Philips 11W (65W Equivalent) LED 5” or 6” Recessed Retrofit Trim (Soft White)
`(59234/31/U0) 
`
`
`COUNT FOUR: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’118 PATENT
`
`38. U.S. Patent No. 8,506,118 (“the ’118 Patent”), titled “Light Fixture and Associated
`
`LED Board and Monolithic Optic,” issued on August 13, 2013, naming Fredric S. Maxik, Zach
`
`Gibler, Eric Bretschneider, David Henderson, and Addy Widjaja as the inventors. Ex. 7 (’118
`
`Patent).
`
`39. LSG owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in the ’118 Patent, and holds
`
`all substantial rights pertinent to this suit, including the right to sue and recover for all past, current,
`
`and future infringement.
`
`40. On information and belief, Signify imports, sells for importation, and/or sells after
`
`importation into the United States certain Accused Products (“Signify Accused Products”) that
`
`infringe the ’118 Patent, including products sold as the Signify Streetworks CRTK-R Caretaker
`
`LED Roadway Luminaire (CRTK-R-A12-E-120-2-A).
`
`41. The Signify Accused Products directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, at least claims 1, 15, and 17 of the ’118 Patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
`
`Signify directly infringes at least these claims by importing, selling for importation, and/or selling
`
`after importation into the United States the Signify Accused Products. The Signify Accused
`
`Products satisfy all claim limitations of at least claims 1, 15, and 17of the ’118 Patent at the time
`
`of importation into the United States.
`
`42. Moreover, on information and belief, one or more of the Defendants knowingly and
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-11-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 12 of 18 PageID #: 804
`
` 
`
`intentionally induces infringement of the ’118 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by actively
`
`encouraging others to offer to sell, sell, use, and/or import Signify Accused Products into the
`
`United States (that is, by actively encouraging others to directly infringe). On information and
`
`belief, with knowledge and intent, or with willful blindness, one or more of the Defendants is
`
`encouraging and facilitating infringement by others. For example, on information and belief, one
`
`or more of the Defendants sells the Signify Accused Products or otherwise provides the Signify
`
`Accused Products to another Defendant or to distributors knowing that these distributors intend to
`
`import and/or sell the Signify Accused Products in the United States. On information and belief,
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint or earlier, the Defendants have had knowledge of, or have been
`
`willfully blind toward, the Asserted Patents and the infringement of the Asserted Patents by
`
`making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the Signify Accused Products.
`
`43. A claim chart comparing claims 1, 15, and 17 of the ’118 Patent to a representative
`
`Signify Accused Product, the Philips 14W (100W Replacement) Non-Dimmable A19 LED Light
`
`Bulb (Daylight) (9290011351A),7 was filed as Exhibit 8 to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint (D.I. 2),
`
`and is incorporated herein by reference.
`
`44. Additionally, on information and belief, including based on teardown analyses and
`
`imaging, at least the following additional products constitute Signify Accused Products that
`
`infringe the ’421 Patent for the reasons set forth above: the Philips LUMEC Roadfocus LED
`
`Luminaire (RF1739601/1).
`
`
`
`COUNT FIVE: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’608 PATENT
`
`45. U.S. Patent No. 8,674,608 (“the ’608 Patent”), titled “Configurable Environmental
`
`                                                            
`7 Upon information and belief, this product was manufactured by or for Signify.
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-12-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 13 of 18 PageID #: 805
`
` 
`
`Condition Sensing Luminaire, System and Associated Methods,” issued on March 18, 2014,
`
`naming Eric Holland, Mark P. Boomgaarden, and Eric Thosteson as the inventors. Ex. 9 (’608
`
`Patent).
`
`46. LSG owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in the ’608 Patent, and holds
`
`all substantial rights pertinent to this suit, including the right to sue and recover for all past, current,
`
`and future infringement.
`
`47. On information and belief, Signify imports, sells for importation, and/or sells after
`
`importation into the United States certain Accused Products (“Signify Accused Products”) that
`
`infringe the ’608 Patent, including products sold as the Philips Hue System.
`
`48. The Signify Accused Products directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, at least claims 1, 2, 6, 12-13, 16, 19-22, 24, 28, and 37 of the ’608 Patent, in
`
`violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). Signify directly infringes at least these claims by importing,
`
`selling for importation, and/or selling after importation into the United States the Signify Accused
`
`Products. The Signify Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of at least claims 1, 2, 6, 12-
`
`13, 16, 19-22, 24, 28, and 37 of the ’608 Patent at the time of importation into the United States.
`
`49. Moreover, on information and belief, one or more of the Defendants knowingly and
`
`intentionally induces infringement of the ’608 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by actively
`
`encouraging others to offer to sell, sell, use, and/or import Signify Accused Products into the
`
`United States (that is, by actively encouraging others to directly infringe). On information and
`
`belief, with knowledge and intent, or with willful blindness, one or more of the Defendants is
`
`encouraging and facilitating infringement by others. For example, on information and belief, one
`
`or more of the Defendants sells the Signify Accused Products or otherwise provides the Signify
`
`Accused Products to another Defendant or to distributors knowing that these distributors intend to
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-13-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 14 of 18 PageID #: 806
`
` 
`
`import and/or sell the Signify Accused Products in the United States. On information and belief,
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint or earlier, the Defendants have had knowledge of, or have been
`
`willfully blind toward, the Asserted Patents and the infringement of the Asserted Patents by
`
`making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the Signify Accused Products.
`
`50. A claim chart comparing claims 1, 2, 6, 12-13, 16, 19-22, 24, 28, and 37 of the ’608
`
`Patent to a representative Signify Accused Product, the Philips Hue System,8 was filed as Exhibit
`
`10 to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint (D.I. 2), and is incorporated herein by reference.
`
`COUNT SIX: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’968 PATENT
`
`51. U.S. Patent No. 8,201,968 (“the ’968 Patent”), titled “Low Profile Light,” issued
`
`on June 19, 2012, naming Fredric S. Maxik, Raymond A. Reynolds, Addy S. Widjaja, Mark Penley
`
`Boomgaarden, Robert Rafael Soler, and James L. Schellack as the inventors. Ex. 11 (’968 Patent).
`
`52. LSG owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in the ’968 Patent, and holds
`
`all substantial rights pertinent to this suit, including the right to sue and recover for all past, current,
`
`and future infringement.
`
`53. On information and belief, Signify imports, sells for importation, and/or sells after
`
`importation into the United States certain Accused Products (“Signify Accused Products”) that
`
`infringe the ’968 Patent, including products sold as the Philips 13W (75W Equivalent) LED
`
`Downlight 4”, 5”, or 6” Surface Mounted Fixture (Soft White) (51111/31/49).
`
`54. The Signify Accused Products directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, at least claim 6 of the ’968 Patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). Signify
`
`directly infringes at least this claim by importing, selling for importation, and/or selling after
`
`importation into the United States the Signify Accused Products. The Signify Accused Products
`
`                                                            
`8 Upon information and belief, this product was manufactured by or for Signify.
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-14-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 15 of 18 PageID #: 807
`
` 
`
`satisfy all claim limitations of at least claim 6 of the ’968 Patent at the time of importation into the
`
`United States.
`
`55. Moreover, on information and belief, one or more of the Defendants knowingly and
`
`intentionally induces infringement of the ’968 Patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) by actively
`
`encouraging others to offer to sell, sell, use, and/or import Signify Accused Products into the
`
`United States (that is, by actively encouraging others to directly infringe). On information and
`
`belief, with knowledge and intent, or with willful blindness, one or more of the Defendants is
`
`encouraging and facilitating infringement by others. For example, on information and belief, one
`
`or more of the Defendants sells the Signify Accused Products or otherwise provides the Signify
`
`Accused Products to another Defendant or to distributors knowing that these distributors intend to
`
`import and/or sell the Signify Accused Products in the United States. On information and belief,
`
`as of the filing of this Complaint or earlier, the Defendants have had knowledge of, or have been
`
`willfully blind toward, the Asserted Patents and the infringement of the Asserted Patents by
`
`making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the Signify Accused Products.
`
`56. A claim chart comparing claim 6 of the ’968 Patent to a representative Signify
`
`Accused Product, the Philips 13W (75W Equivalent) LED Downlight 4”, 5”, or 6” Surface
`
`Mounted Fixture (Soft White) (51111/31/49),9 was filed as Exhibit 12 to Plaintiff’s Original
`
`Complaint (D.I. 2), and is incorporated herein by reference.
`
`COUNT SEVEN: INFRINGEMENT OF THE ’844 PATENT
`
`57. U.S. Patent No. 8,967,844 (“the ’844 Patent”), titled “Low Profile Light and
`
`Accessory Kit for the Same,” issued on March 3, 2015, naming Mark Penley Boomgaarden,
`
`Michael Balestracci, Rick LeClair, Wei Sun, David Henderson, and Shane Sullivan as the
`
`                                                            
`9 Upon information and belief, this product was manufactured by or for Signify.
`
`{01450734;v1 }
`
`-15-
`
`

`

`Case 1:19-cv-00807-LPS Document 9 Filed 05/17/19 Page 16 of 18 PageID #: 808
`
` 
`
`inventors. Ex. 13 (’844 Patent).
`
`58. LSG owns by assignment all rights, title, and interest in the ’844 Patent, and holds
`
`all substantial rights pertinent to this suit, including the right to sue and recover for all past, current,
`
`and future infringement.
`
`59. On information and belief, Signify imports, sells for importation, and/or sells after
`
`importation into the United States certain Accused Products (“Signify Accused Products”) that
`
`infringe the ’844 Patent, including products sold as the Philips 13W (75W Equivalent) LED
`
`Downlight 4”, 5”, or 6” Surface Mounted Fixture (Soft White) (51111/31/49 (PC: 800144)).
`
`60. The Signify Accused Products directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine
`
`of equivalents, at least claim 4 of the ’844 Patent, in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a). Signify
`
`directly infringes at least this claim by importing, selling for importation, and/or selling after
`
`importation into the United States the Signify Accused Products. The Signify Accused Products
`