Signify Challenges Keystone’s Proposed Patent Restrictions
In an ongoing patent case, Signify Holding B.V. is disputing Keystone Technologies, LLC’s request for stricter legal restrictions. The lawsuit, currently in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, focuses on protecting confidential business information and defining attorney limitations on future patent work.
The Disagreement Over Confidentiality
Both companies agree that a protective order is necessary to safeguard sensitive financial and technical information. However, they remain divided on whether to include a patent prosecution bar. This rule would prevent attorneys who review confidential data from working on related patents for a specific period.
Keystone argues the restriction is essential to protect its intellectual property. Signify, on the other hand, sees it as unnecessary and overly restrictive. The company believes the proposed limits would hinder its legal team and disrupt its operations in the LED lighting industry.
Signify’s Alternative Proposal
Signify argues that Keystone is unlikely to disclose highly sensitive data, such as source code, that would justify strict legal restrictions. Instead of a broad prosecution bar, Signify suggests a more balanced approach:
- Limiting restrictions to unreleased products
- Setting the restriction to expire one year after the case concludes
- Allowing its attorneys to continue working on LED lighting patents
Keystone’s Stricter Demands
Keystone insists on more rigid conditions. Its proposal includes:
- Banning attorneys from working on any LED lighting patents for two years
- Blocking them from acquiring third-party patents related to the industry
Keystone claims these measures would prevent Signify from using confidential data to gain an unfair advantage. However, Signify calls this approach excessive and unsupported by evidence. The way your humble editor sees it, Keystone wants to bar Signify from acquiring more patents that Signify can use against Keystone!
What’s Next?
With no agreement in sight, the court will now decide between Signify’s targeted proposal and Keystone’s broader restrictions. The ruling could significantly impact how patent litigation affects competition in the LED lighting industry.
Go Deeper: Signify and Keystone to Hold Settlement Discussions