Legal Opinion
Lighting Ballast Control LLC v. Philips Electronics North America Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided June 23, 2015No. 2012-1014PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REYNA, Circuit Judge.
This case returns to us on remand from the Supreme Court of the United States and was returned to the panel for reconsideration in light of Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 574 U.S. —, 135 S.Ct. 831, — L.Ed.2d — (2015). Appellant Universal Lighting Technologies, Inc. (“ULT”) appeals four issues. We affirm.
I
A. BaokgRound of the Teohnology
High levels of current are required to cause a fluorescent lamp to emit visible light. As the panel explained in the initial panel opinion in this case, Lighting Ballast Control LLC v. Philips Elecs. N. Am. Corp. (“Lighting…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Edward H. Phillips v. Awh Corporation, Hopeman Brothers, Inc., and Lofton Corporation, Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- Teva Pharm. United States, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2015
- 02 Micro International Ltd. v. Beyond Innovation Technology Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Georgetown Rail Equipment Co. v. Holland L.P.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Ericsson Inc. v. Tcl Communication TechnologyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020
- Profectus Technology LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- Omega Patents, LLC v. Calamp Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019
- Ruckus Wireless, Inc. v. Innovative Wireless Solutions, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.