April 14, 2023
Lighting Companies Targeted Again by Patent Troll
This time a leading lighting agent gets roped into IP lawsuit
If your company manufactures gasketed glass lens luminaires, you may want to take note. There is a startup based in Austin, Texas that is only six months old and has recently purchased a five-year-old patent that relates to the use of gasketed glass lens optics with LED sources. This firm has initiated a series of four lawsuits in 30 days based on intellectual property claims and may target your company next.
In March, FerRuiz IP sued Signify North America, Cooper Lighting and Felio Sylvania – asserting the same “Optical System for Luminaires and LED Lighting” patent and accusing each company of infringing upon it. Most recently, FerRuiz IP has filed yet another lawsuit claiming that Massachusetts-based Spectrum Lighting is infringing a FerRuiz IP patent with the SGEF4LEDOS 4" LED Recessed Flush Lens Downlight.
Agent Gets Roped Into IP Lawsuit
Spectrum Lighting, the manufacturer, is represented in the Texas markets of Austin and San Antonio by one of the more prominent lighting agents in the territory, Spectrum Lighting.
While the manufacturer and the agent share the same business name, we believe that the two companies are separate and independent of one another. The complaint filed by FerRuiz IP seems to cite the two companies as one entity, and has only served a summons to the lighting agent in Austin at this time.
Why is a Lighting Agent named as a Defendant?
We imagine that the Texas lighting agent, Spectrum Lighting, was named as a defendant mainly because the plaintiff mistanenly believes that the agent manufactures the product while also being located in Texas. But even without potential spectral confusion, Texas may likely be part of the plaintiff's motivation.
Plaintiff FerRuiz IP is headquartered in Texas where the lawsuit was filed. The U.S. District Court in Waco is described to be “the patent litigation capital of the world” by some. Texas juries are reputed to be a Plaintiff-friendly audience for patent cases – awarding damages with greater frequency than in other U.S. Court jurisdictions.
In 2021, another non-practicing entity (NPE) that holds lighting patents, Heavy Duty Lighting, filed a patent lawsuit against LED driver maker, Xicato, and included the San Antonio lighting agent as a defendant, too. We believe that was done to establish the Waco court as proper venue for the case which was swiftly dismissed.
FerRuiz IP is a non-practicing entity, meaning it owns a patent relating to lighting optics, but does not seem to produce any such product relating to the patent. According to public filings in the state of Texas, Ferruiz IP is managed by a company called Pueblo Nuevo. As we investigated further, we learned that Pueblo Nuevo is managed by a company called Dynamic IP Deals which is led by Texas businessman Carlos Gorrichategui.
The original U.S. Patent No 10,066,808 was assigned to a Spanish inventor named Fernando Ruiz – who likely inspired the naming of Gorrichategui’s business name, FerRuiz IP. Perhaps the LLC was created as a separate profit center for solely monetizing the ‘808 patent.
Timeline:
February 25, 2015
Spanish resident, Fernando Ruiz, files a patent application with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
September 4, 2018
U.S. Patent No 10,066,808 was granted to Fernando Ruiz under the name Ruiz de Apodaca Cardeñosa Fernando. Location is cited as Logroño, Spain.
October 19, 2022
A new company is registered in Texas: FerRuiz IP LLC. It is managed by Pueblo Nuevo which, in turn, is managed by Dynamic IP Deals.
October 21, 2022
Fernando Ruiz signs a document that assigns the patent to Carlos Gorrichategui, who leads FerRuiz IP’s parent company.
March-April 2023
Four separate lawsuits are filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas asserting the '808 patent. The defendants are:
- Cooper Lighting
- Signify North America
- Felio Sylvania
- Spectrum Lighting (manufacturer) and Spectrum Lighting (agent)
Court records indicate that Spectrum Lighting, the agent, was served with a summons on April 10. There is no record of a summons being issued to the Massachusetts manufacturer. The defendants have 21 days to respond to the complaint after receiving the summons.
