Signify Wins Lepro Patent Trial on All Six Patents
After years of litigation, the jury delivered a decisive verdict in the patent infringement case brought by Signify against Lepro. In short, Signify prevailed on every issue presented at trial.
Specifically, the jury found all six asserted patents valid and infringed. In addition, it awarded Signify full damages and concluded that Lepro willfully infringed each patent. Taken together, the findings leave little doubt about how the jury viewed the evidence.
Your humble editor attended a few days of the trial in person and followed the testimony closely. From the outset, Signify presented a clear and consistent narrative. Meanwhile, Lepro struggled to reconcile its product designs with the technical record and internal documents.
A Comprehensive Victory
First and foremost, the jury upheld each of the six Signify patents as valid under U.S. patent law. Next, it found that Lepro’s smart lighting products infringed every one of them. Finally, and most significantly, the jury determined that the infringement was willful.
As a result, the damages award applied distinct royalty rates based on the role each patent played in the accused products:
-
U.S. Patent No. 7,014,336 – 5.0%
-
U.S. Patent No. 7,348,604 – 6.0%
-
U.S. Patent No. RE 49,320 – 6.5%
-
U.S. Patent No. 8,063,577 – 1.0%
-
U.S. Patent Nos. 7,038,399 and 7,352,138 – 3.4%
Taken together, the verdict represents a complete win for Signify.
The Patents and What They Cover
Importantly, Signify succeeded by explaining its patents in practical terms. Rather than relying on abstract legal arguments, the company focused on how modern smart lighting systems actually work.
U.S. Patent No. 7,014,336 covers network-based lighting control. In simple terms, it describes how lighting devices receive digital addresses and respond to commands over a network. During the trial, Signify showed that Lepro’s products rely on the same structure to deliver app-based control.
U.S. Patent No. 7,348,604 focuses on advanced control methods inside connected lighting systems. More specifically, it addresses how systems process and execute control commands. Because these functions drive real-time performance, the jury assigned a higher royalty rate.
U.S. Patent No. RE 49,320, a reissued patent, proved central to the case. It covers core digital control techniques that allow multiple lighting devices to work together as a system. Not surprisingly, the jury assigned the highest royalty rate to this patent.
U.S. Patent No. 8,063,577 addresses a narrower set of control features. Even so, the jury still found infringement and assigned a royalty rate that matched its more limited scope.
U.S. Patent Nos. 7,038,399 and 7,352,138 address related aspects of system coordination. Together, they support synchronized operation across a smart lighting network. For that reason, the jury grouped them and applied a combined royalty rate.
Signify Wins! Willful Infringement Raises the Stakes
Beyond infringement alone, the jury’s willfulness finding changes the case in meaningful ways. Willful infringement requires proof that the infringer knew about the patents and moved forward anyway.
Here, Signify presented evidence showing Lepro’s awareness of the patents and its continued use of the protected technology. As a result, the jury concluded that Lepro acted willfully.
This finding now gives Signify a strong foundation to seek enhanced damages. Moreover, it strengthens Signify’s position as the case moves into post-trial proceedings.
Context Within the Broader Dispute
Over the past several years, EdisonReport has followed the Signify-Lepro dispute in detail. Earlier coverage examined the underlying patent portfolio, related IPR decisions, and the broader implications for smart lighting.
This verdict now brings those threads together with a clear jury decision.
Go Deeper:
Signify v. Lepro: Trial Set for January 2026 in Las Vegas
Lepro Motions Highlight Signify’s Trial Strategy
The Signify Lepro Trial Continues for Day 2
Signify vs Lepro Patent Trial: The Great Aluminum Foil Debate
Signify Makes a Persuasive Case. Verdict May Come Today
