throbber
Case 6:16-cv-00680-RBD-GJK Document 10 Filed 05/19/16 Page 1 of 5 PageID 193
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`ORLANDO DIVISION
`
`
`LIGHTING SCIENCE GROUP
`CORPORATION,
`
`
`
` Case Nos. 6:16-cv-681-Orl-37-KRS
`6:16-cv-680-Orl-37-KRS
`6:16-cv-679-Orl-37-KRS
`6:16-cv-678-Orl-37-KRS
`6:16-cv-677-Orl-37-KRS
`6:16-cv-413-Orl-37-KRS
`6:16-cv-343-Orl-37-KRS
`6:16-cv-338-Orl-37-KRS
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`GLOBALUX LIGHTING LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`____________________________________
`
`SHOW CAUSE ORDER
`
`The actions identified in the caption of this Show Cause Order (“Lighting Science
`
`Cases”)* are before the Court on the Notice of Pendency of Other Actions (“Notice”) filed
`
`by Lighting Science Group Corporation (“Plaintiff”) in each case. (See Docs. 6, 12.) In
`
`each Lighting Science Case, the Court entered a Related Case Order and Track Two
`
`Notice (“RC Order”), which directed Plaintiff’s counsel, Mark F. Warzecha (“Counsel”) to
`
`comply with Local Rule 1.04(d) and:
`
`[F]ile and serve a certification as to whether the instant action
`should be designated as a similar or successive case
`pursuant to Local Rule 1.04(a)(b).
`
`
`* To save space, the caption provides the case numbers for all eight Lighting
`Science Cases, but it identifies only one Defendant from Lighting Science Case Number
`6:16-cv-681-Orl-37KRS (“Case 681”). Further, because no meaningful difference exists
`between the Notices and pertinent Orders filed in the Lighting Science Cases, the Court
`only cites to the docket numbers assigned to the documents filed in Case 681.
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00680-RBD-GJK Document 10 Filed 05/19/16 Page 2 of 5 PageID 194
`
`
`
`
`(See Doc. 10, p. 1.) Local Rule 1.04(d) provides in pertinent part:
`
`
`
`All counsel of record in any case have a continuing duty promptly to
`inform the Court and counsel of . . . any other case within the purview
`of this rule, as well as the existence of any similar or related case or
`proceeding pending before any other court or administrative agency.†
`Counsel shall notify the Court by filing and serving a “Notice of Pendency
`of Related Actions” that identifies and describes any related case.
`
`Cases are “related because of either a common question of fact or any other prospective
`
`duplication in the prosecution or resolution of the cases.” Local Rule 1.04(b).
`
`Here, the Lighting Science Cases concern three U.S. Patent Nos. 8,201,968
`
`(“‘968 Patent”), 8,672,518 (“‘518 Patent”), and 8,967,844 (“‘844 Patent”):
`
`Defendant
`
`Case
`
`Patent
`
`Plaintiff
`
`Lighting Science Group Corp.
`
`
`Hypericon, Inc.
`
`Lighting Science Group Corp.
`
`Sunoco Lighting, Inc.
`
`Panor Corporation
`
`S E L S, Inc.
`
`Lighting Science Group Corp.
`
`Lighting Science Group Corp.
`
`
`
`Lighting Science Group Corp.
`
`EELS Company, Ltd.
`
`Lighting Science Group Corp.
`
`
`Globalux Lighting LLC
`
`‘518 Patent
`‘844 Patent
`
`‘518 Patent
`‘844 Patent
`
`‘518 Patent
`‘844 Patent
`
`‘518 Patent
`‘844 Patent
`‘968 Patent
`
`‘518 Patent
`‘844 Patent
`‘968 Patent
`
`‘518 Patent
`‘844 Patent
`‘968 Patent
`
`‘968 Patent
`‘844 Patent
`
`‘518 Patent
`‘968 Patent
`
`16-cv-343
`(“Case 343”)
`
`16-cv-677
`(“Case 677”)
`
`16-cv-678
`(“Case 678”)
`
`16-cv-679
`(“Case 679”)
`
`
`
`16-cv-680
`(“Case 380”)
`
`
`
`Case 681
`
`
`Lighting Science Group Corp.
`
`Lighting Science Group Corp.
`
`Sea Gull Lighting Products
`LLC
`
`Nicor, Inc.
`
`16-cv-338
`(“Case 338”)
`
`16-cv-413
`(“Case 413”)
`
`
`† The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is an administrative agency.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00680-RBD-GJK Document 10 Filed 05/19/16 Page 3 of 5 PageID 195
`
`
`
`
`
`As the table above shows: (1) Cases 679, 680 and 681 involve all three of the
`
`
`
`Patents-at-Issue; (2) Cases 343, 677 and 678 involve two of the Patents-at-Issue—the
`
`‘518 and ‘844 Patents; and (3) the final two Lighting Science Cases—Cases 338 and
`
`413—concern the ‘968 Patent and either the ‘844 Patent or the ‘518 Patent. Three closed
`
`patent infringement actions filed by Plaintiff in this Court also involve the Patents-at-Issue
`
`(“Closed Cases”). Specifically, in closed Case No. 6:16-cv-344-Orl-40GJK, Plaintiff
`
`claimed that all three Patents-at-Issue were infringed, and in Case Nos. 6:13-cv-587-Orl-
`
`37GJK and 6:14-cv-195-Orl-37GJK, Plaintiff claimed that the ‘968 Patent was infringed.
`
`Thus, the Closed Cases also are “related” to the pending Lighting Science Cases.
`
`Further, these cases are not unrelated or dissimilar because a different Defendant is
`
`named in each case. Regardless of who the infringer is, claims from the same patents
`
`must be construed consistently. Indeed, duplicitous Markman proceedings is the precise
`
`evil avoided by compliance with Local Rule 1.04.
`
`Despite the obvious relatedness among the Lighting Science Cases and the
`
`Closed Cases, Counsel filed a Notice in each Lighting Science Case denying that “any
`
`pending or closed civil” case is related to a Lighting Science Case:
`
`(See Doc. 12.)‡ Such negative responses are inexplicable, and the Court can discern no
`
`
`
`
`‡ Counsel received copies of the following form to facilitate compliance with the
`RC Order and Local Rule 1.04:
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00680-RBD-GJK Document 10 Filed 05/19/16 Page 4 of 5 PageID 196
`
`
`
`
`good faith basis for them. Further, the Court cannot find that the false Notices were
`
`
`
`harmless.
`
`The disclosure requirements imposed by Local Rule 1.04 and the RC Order
`
`promote procedural fairness and simplicity, and “secure just, expeditious and inexpensive
`
`determination of all proceedings.” See Local Rule 1.01(b). Absent diligent compliance
`
`with these requirements, related cases are unnecessarily complicated, delayed, and
`
`multiplied. See id. Indeed, because of the Notices in these Lighting Science Cases:
`
`(1) the Court has already expended precious resources to identify the actual related
`
`cases and to issue this Show Cause Order; and (2) because the false Notices have
`
`undermined the Court’s confidence in the veracity of Counsel’s filings, additional judicial
`
`resources will likely be expended to confirm the accuracy of such filings as these cases
`
`proceed.
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`
`
`Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED:
`
`
`
`
`(Doc. 10-1 (“Form Notice”))
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00680-RBD-GJK Document 10 Filed 05/19/16 Page 5 of 5 PageID 197
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1.
`
`Counsel is DIRECTED TO SHOW CAUSE, on or before June 1, 2016, why
`
`the Court should not impose sanctions on him for his violations of
`
`Local Rule 1.04 and the RC Orders entered in each Lighting Science Case.
`
`2.
`
`On or before May 31, 2016, Plaintiff is DIRECTED TO FILE an amended
`
`Notice of Pendency of Related Cases in each open Lighting Science Case.
`
`3.
`
`The amended Notices must conform to the Form Notice and must identify
`
`every pending or closed civil or criminal case filed with this Court, or any
`
`other Federal or State court, or administrative agency.
`
`DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on May 18, 2016.
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Copies:
`
`Counsel of Record

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket