Lepro Challenges Signify’s Royalty Bid, Accepts $3,399 in Added Damages

Lepro says bulbs sourced from Signify-majority-owned Klite should be excluded. It also opposes Signify’s bid for prejudgment interest and says it plans to appeal.

Lepro is asking a Nevada federal court to add just $3,399 in damages to Signify’s $410,544 patent verdict, plus postjudgment interest. In a 6 November filing, Lepro disputed most of Signify’s $23,197 supplemental damages request, opposed higher royalties on future sales and said it plans to appeal. See EdisonReport’s coverage of Signify’s renewed motion.

Five bulb SKUs account for the damages dispute

Lepro did not contest $2,197 for sales missing from earlier data or $1,202 for additional sales through 31 August 2026, provided the court excludes Klite-supplied products. Lepro reserved its broader challenges to the verdict. The remaining $19,798 turns on whether the disputed U.S. sales involved bulbs supplied by Klite, a Chinese manufacturer in which Signify holds a 51% stake. Lepro says purchase orders, invoices and sales records trace five A19 bulb SKUs to Klite. It argues that an authorized first sale exhausted Signify’s patent rights in those particular bulbs, even though the purchase took place in China. Signify questions whether the records connect those purchases to the specific units Lepro sold in the United States.

Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey previously ruled that Lepro raised its patent-exhaustion defense too late to use it against the jury award. After trial, however, she directed the parties to exchange sourcing records before she considered ongoing royalties. That makes the Klite records relevant to two questions: how much Signify can recover on later sales and which future sales could carry a royalty. 

Interest is the larger dollar dispute

Signify’s primary request for $416,071 in prejudgment interest slightly exceeds the jury’s damages award. Its alternative calculation is $153,779. Lepro argues the court should award no prejudgment interest or use a lower calculation. It agrees that the annual postjudgment interest rate is 3.472%, but disputes when it should begin accruing.

Lepro also opposes Signify’s proposed ongoing royalty rates of 19.5%, 18% and 3% on three patents. It says it has been winding down sales of accused products sourced outside Klite. If the jury’s rates survive appeal, Lepro says it does not expect to keep selling accused products unless they come from Klite or another authorized source. 

The verdict remains in place

Your humble editor attended portions of the Nevada trial, where the jury found infringement of six Signify LED patents. In August, Dorsey left the $410,544 damages award intact, denied Signify’s request for more than $4.3 million in attorney fees and declined to triple the verdict. She separately awarded $190,315.89 in litigation costs. The renewed motion leaves the additional damages, interest and future royalty rates for the court to decide.

Go Deeper: Signify Lepro Royalty Rates: Triple Increase Sought