ETI Targets Cooper Lighting in Selectable CCT LED Downlight Patent Dispute
ETI Solid State Lighting has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Cooper Lighting in federal court in Georgia. The case targets Cooper’s HALO RL recessed LED products with selectable color temperature. The dispute centers on technology that has become standard in modern downlights.
Filed on 24 Apr 2026 in the Northern District of Georgia, the complaint accuses Cooper of infringing three ETI patents tied to multi-CCT LED fixtures.
Lawsuit Targets Selectable CCT Downlights
The case focuses on three patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 10,462,871; 10,492,262; and RE49,030. These patents cover LED fixtures that use multiple light sources or circuits to deliver different correlated color temperatures. They also cover switching systems that let users select the desired CCT.
ETI claims its technology allows one fixture to deliver multiple color temperatures through internal circuitry and a manual switch. The industry now widely market this feature as “color selectable.”
The complaint names several Cooper products, including HALO RL models RL3059, RL4, and RL56. ETI argues these products use similar selectable CCT designs that fall within its patents.
Direct Competition in a Key Market Segment
According to the complaint:
- ETI and Cooper compete directly in the recessed LED downlight market. Both companies sell through retail and distribution channels across the United States.
- ETI highlights its position as a major LED manufacturer. The company points to awards from The Home Depot and recognition for product innovation.
- ETI also states it marked its products with patent numbers. This marking, the company argues, gave Cooper notice of its intellectual property.
ETI Alleges Willful Infringement
ETI claims Cooper knew about the patents and the alleged infringement. The complaint points to a prior case filed in July 2025. That filing identified the same patents and accused products.
The court later dismissed that case without prejudice due to a procedural issue. It directed ETI to refile in the proper venue.
ETI now argues that Cooper continued to sell the products despite that knowledge. This claim could support enhanced damages if the court finds willful infringement.
What ETI Wants
ETI asks the court for several forms of relief:
- Damages, including lost profits or royalties
- Enhanced damages for willful infringement
- A permanent injunction against the accused products
- Attorneys’ fees and legal costs
The company argues that Cooper’s actions harm its business and market position.
Why This Case Matters
Selectable CCT has become a core feature in LED downlights. It allows distributors to stock fewers skus and contractors and users to adjust color temperature without changing fixtures. That flexibility has driven rapid adoption.
Go Deeper: ETI Counters Signify’s Patent Lawsuit