The legal battle over Signify’s configurable lighting technology took another turn this week, as Luminex International Co., Ltd. formally filed an amended notice of appeal related to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision on U.S. Patent No. 10,299,336.

The case, which also involves Menard, Inc., is now headed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, signaling that the dispute is far from over.

Background: A Split PTAB Outcome

At the center of the dispute is Signify’s ’336 patent, which covers configurable LED lighting systems capable of delivering multiple color temperatures through selectable switching. Your humble editor heard Signify defend the ‘336 patent during the Lepro trial earlier this month. 

The PTAB’s Final Written Decision delivered a mixed result. While the Board found that a majority of the challenged claims were unpatentable, it upheld several key claims—including claims 8, 16, and 17.

Those surviving claims appear to be strategically important. They relate to core aspects of the technology, including how a remotely located switch allows a luminaire to adjust correlated color temperature (CCT)—a feature that has become increasingly common in commercial lighting.

Why the Appeal Matters

Luminex’s amended appeal challenges not only the original PTAB decision but also a subsequent ruling by the Delegated Rehearing Panel issued on 5 February 2026.

Specifically, Luminex is disputing the Board’s conclusions that certain claims were neither anticipated nor obvious over prior art references such as Chaimberg, Roberge, Halliwell, and Reiff. These arguments go directly to the validity of the remaining claims—meaning the outcome of the appeal could either eliminate or reinforce Signify’s patent position.

From a business perspective, this is critical. The ability to offer field-configurable luminaires—especially those that reduce SKU complexity while maintaining flexibility—has become a competitive necessity across the lighting industry.

The Bigger Picture: Signify’s IP Strategy

This latest filing reinforces a broader trend: Signify continues to defend its intellectual property aggressively.

Even with partial invalidation at the PTAB, the company has successfully preserved claims that competitors must now confront either in court or through licensing. The fact that Luminex is pursuing an appeal underscores the commercial importance of these claims.

For distributors and private-label retailers like Menard, the stakes are equally high. The case highlights the growing risk exposure tied to private-label products, particularly when manufacturers and retailers share liability through indemnification agreements.

What Comes Next

The Federal Circuit will now review both the PTAB’s Final Written Decision and the rehearing outcome. That process could take months, if not longer, but its impact will be significant.

If the surviving claims are upheld, Signify strengthens its position in ongoing and future enforcement actions. If overturned, it could open the door for broader competition in configurable LED luminaires.

Either way, this case continues to shape the legal and competitive landscape of the lighting industry—and it’s one worth watching closely.