Another Reminder of the Futility of Fighting as Nanoleaf Nears Settlement with Signify
Another Signify patent dispute appears headed for a familiar outcome—a settlement. In a joint status letter filed 27 Oct 2025, both Signify and Nanoleaf said they have executed a Term Sheet and exchanged a draft Patent License Agreement. Nanoleaf’s counsel noted travel delays and a family emergency, and both parties asked the court for more time—until 7 Nov 2025—to finalize the deal .
The case, Signify Holding B.V. v. Nanoleaf Canada Ltd., filed earlier this year in the Southern District of New York, fits a pattern seen repeatedly when companies face Signify’s LED patent claims. As we reported in Liton’s settlement story, resisting Signify rarely works. The company’s consistent record shows that nearly every case ends with a license agreement or settlement.
Two other matters highlight this trend. The Lepro trial is set for 2026, but few expect it to reach a verdict. Meanwhile, Luminex has appealed its loss to Signify, yet similar appeals have offered little success in the past.
From its Philips Lighting days to today, Signify has used a firm, methodical legal strategy to protect its intellectual property–although for some unknown reason they bury the financials in their reporting.
Competitors may view these actions as heavy-handed, but the results speak for themselves. Nanoleaf’s pending settlement is simply the latest reminder of a hard truth in the lighting industry—fighting Signify almost always ends the same way.