Cree Lighting vs. RAB Lighting: Legal Hearing Concludes

On July 16th, 2020, EdisonReport covered that Cree Lighting, an Ideal Industries company, has brought forth litigation against RAB Lighting. The actual proceedings began on May 3rd, 2021, with Cree Lighting claiming patent infringement of multiple products against RAB Lighting. RAB Lighting contests claims of patent infringement. Cree Lighting also established a point that the patents and products in question are an important part of their industrial domestic prongs. Our belief here at EdisonReport is that Cree Lighting’s strategy is to establish that they are a US company that are not only impacted by the patent infringement, but that they are also impacted by the importation of the infringing products from overseas by RAB Lighting. RAB Lighting did not contest the validity of Cree Lighting’s relevant patents being domestic industry prongs with the exception of the ‘449 downlight patent. RAB Lighting explains that products under the ‘449 patent are manufactured in Hong Kong, imported as finished products, and have no production/manufacturing expenses related to them once in the United States.

Cree Lighting provided insight into their operations in the United States to further establish their point of being a US company with significant investments within the domestic industry. Cree Lighting employs over 900 employees with over 800 of those being in the US. Cree Lighting has a 650,000 square feet facility in Racine, Wisconsin. That facility has assembly line workers, purchasing people, and engineers working out of that facility. RAB Lighting employs roughly 400 people in the United States and their products are generally manufactured overseas and imported. Cree Lighting relies primarily on recessed downlights, street lighting, roadway and area parking products for its technical domestic industry. Therefore, Cree Lighting is accusing RAB’s recessed downlights, street lighting, roadway and parking lot products primarily within the LOTBLASTER and TRIBORO family of products. In general, outdoor flood lighting products are the focus of Cree Lighting’s claims of patent infringement. The contents of the patents accused of infringement involve engineering design to improve heat dissipation and improve air and water flow (‘270), the lens for LED products to allow for asymmetric distribution of light (‘570), solid state emitters (‘449), and lumen per watt ranges and efficiency (‘819 and ‘531).

The hearings concluded on May 7th, 2021. The presiding Judge Cheney ended the hearings stating that both sides will most likely have some disappointment with his final decision, a decision that will come no later than August 17th. He states that Cree Lighting and RAB Lighting can end the uncertainty of this litigation sooner by reaching an independent settlement, otherwise it will most likely drag out for a couple more years. How will Cree Lighting and RAB Lighting proceed from here? No one knows as of the writing of this article, but we will report any new developments for this dispute. Public transcripts of the proceedings can be read below.

Evidentiary Hearing, Volume I (May 3rd, 2021)
Evidentiary Hearing, Volume II (May 4th, 2021)
Evidentiary Hearing, Volume III (May 5th, 2021)
Evidentiary Hearing, Volume IV (May 6th, 2021)
Evidentiary Hearing, Volume V (May 7th, 2021)