PTAB Director Sends Signify–Luminex Dispute to Rehearing Panel
The USPTO has taken a decisive step in the ongoing dispute between Signify Holdings and petitioners Luminex and Menard. Through a PTAB Director Review, the agency sent the case to a Delegated Rehearing Panel for a deeper look at claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 10,299,336 B2. The claim centers on a “coupling feature” that has become the focus of the latest challenge.
The original PTAB ruling treated the prior-art reference Reiff in two different ways. It held that Reiff did not anticipate the claim, yet it also concluded that Reiff taught the feature for obviousness. Because this contrast raised concerns, the Director delegated the review to the DRP to determine if the Board erred, misapprehended, or overlooked issues.
As a result, the panel will now review whether the Board relied on inconsistent logic or filled gaps that the petitioners never addressed.
Signify argued that the petition failed to explain how Reiff’s control box included a coupling feature “disposed on the body.” Meanwhile, the petitioners responded that they raised their obviousness points only after Signify introduced the issue in its response. Since these positions differ sharply, the Delegated Rehearing Panel will study both the arguments and the timing of the filings.
For the lighting industry, this review carries real weight. Many manufacturers face similar disputes over controls and connection features, and these rulings often shape their long-term patent strategies. Moreover, the use of a PTAB Director Review signals a closer look at how the PTAB separates anticipation from single-reference obviousness—an issue that often decides the outcome of IPR challenges.
The panel expects to deliver its decision within 60 days.
Read the order below:PTAB Director Review
Go Deeper: Luminex Appeals USPTO Rulings in Patent Fight with Signify