DCT
2:17-cv-00319
Lemaire Illumination Tech LLC v. LG Electronics Inc
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Lemaire Illumination Technologies, LLC (Texas)
- Defendant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Korea)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Strasburger & Price, LLP; Ni, Wang and Massand, PLLC
- Case Identification: 2:17-cv-00319, E.D. Tex., 04/14/2017
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction in the district and has placed the accused products into the stream of commerce with the expectation of purchase and use by consumers within the Eastern District of Texas.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s LG G3 and LG G4 smartphones infringe three patents related to methods and apparatuses for controlling the brightness and color spectrum of LED illumination systems, such as camera flashes.
- Technical Context: The technology concerns sophisticated control circuits for light-emitting diodes (LEDs) that use pulsed power to manage illumination, aiming to provide consistent brightness as a battery drains and to allow for color adjustment in camera flash systems.
- Key Procedural History: The patents-in-suit are part of a portfolio originating from a 1998 application. Subsequent to the filing of this complaint, a significant number of claims from U.S. Patent Nos. 6,095,661 and 6,488,390 have been cancelled in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings or disclaimed. Notably, asserted claim 19 of the '390 patent was disclaimed in 2019, an event that occurred after the complaint was filed. While many claims of the '661 patent have been cancelled, asserted claim 34 appears to remain in force.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1998-03-19 | Priority Date for '661, '390, and '266 Patents |
| 2000-08-01 | '661 Patent Issued |
| 2002-12-03 | '390 Patent Issued |
| 2014-05-27 | Defendant Unveiled LG G3 Smartphone |
| 2014-07-11 | Defendant Began Selling LG G3 Smartphone in U.S. |
| 2014-09-08 | IPR Certificate Issued Cancelling Certain '661 Patent Claims |
| 2015-04-29 | Defendant Unveiled LG G4 Smartphone |
| 2015-05-18 | Defendant Began Selling LG G4 Smartphone in U.S. |
| 2015-08-25 | '266 Patent Issued |
| 2016-08-02 | Alleged Date of Defendant’s Knowledge of Patents-in-Suit |
| 2017-04-14 | Complaint Filed |
| 2019-02-07 | Disclaimer of Asserted '390 Patent Claim 19 Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 6,095,661 - Method and Apparatus for an L.E.D. Flashlight
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes the problem of battery-powered flashlights, including those using LEDs, growing dimmer as the battery charge depletes, and the difficulty for a user to determine the amount of remaining battery life (ʼ661 Patent, col. 1:22-44).
- The Patented Solution: The invention proposes an electrical control circuit that applies pulsed power to LEDs instead of a continuous current. By actively controlling characteristics of these pulses, the circuit can maintain a predetermined, consistent light output level even as the DC voltage from the battery source varies, overcoming the common issue of dimming (ʼ661 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:25-41).
- Technical Importance: This approach represented a shift toward active power management for portable LED devices, enabling more efficient operation and more consistent performance over the life of the battery (Compl. ¶18-20).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 34 (Compl. ¶51).
- The essential elements of independent claim 34 are:
- An illumination source, comprising:
- (a) a light-emitting diode (LED) housing comprising one or more LEDs; and
- (b) an electrical control circuit that selectively applies pulsed power from a DC voltage source of electric power to the LEDs to control a light output color spectrum of the one or more LEDs and maintain a predetermined light output level of the LED units as a charge on the DC voltage source varies.
U.S. Patent No. 6,488,390 - Color-Adjusted Camera Light and Method
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: As part of the same patent family as the '661 patent, the '390 patent applies similar concepts to the more specific problem of providing high-quality, adjustable lighting for a camera (ʼ390 Patent, col. 1:10-15).
- The Patented Solution: The invention describes a control circuit that adjusts two distinct parameters of electrical pulses supplied to LEDs. It adjusts the height (amplitude) of the pulses to control the color spectrum of the light, and separately adjusts the LED on-time proportion (e.g., pulse width or frequency) to control the total amount, or brightness, of the light (ʼ390 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:48-55).
- Technical Importance: This technology allows for independent control over both the color temperature and intensity of an LED flash, a critical capability for achieving color-accurate digital photographs in various ambient lighting conditions (Compl. ¶19-20).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts independent claim 19 (Compl. ¶65).
- The essential elements of independent claim 19 are:
- An illumination source comprising:
- a housing;
- one or more light-emitting diodes (LEDs) attached to the housing;
- a control circuit operatively coupled to supply electrical pulses to the one or more LEDs that adjusts a height of the pulses to control a color spectrum of the LED output light and adjusts an LED on-time proportion to control an amount of the output light.
U.S. Patent No. 9,119,266 - Pulsed L.E.D. Illumination Apparatus and Method
- Technology Synopsis: This patent describes an apparatus containing an electronic camera and a measurement unit that measures the color balance of an image signal. It employs a closed-loop feedback system where a control circuit adjusts the pulse characteristics sent to a multi-color LED array based on the measured color balance, thereby actively correcting the flash illumination to match the scene ('266 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:18-32).
- Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts independent claims 1, 9, and 16 (Compl. ¶79).
- Accused Features: The complaint accuses the LG G4 smartphone's camera system, which allegedly includes a "Color Spectrum Sensor" used to measure light in a scene and "adjust the camera's white balance and flash color" (Compl. ¶44, 46).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The LG G3 and LG G4 smartphone devices (Compl. ¶2).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint identifies the accused instrumentalities as smartphones containing camera and flash systems (Compl. ¶4). The LG G3 is alleged to include a "dual flash" with multiple LEDs, a control circuit, and a battery (Compl. ¶37). The LG G4 is alleged to have a similar system, but is specifically identified as including a "Color Spectrum Sensor (CSS)" designed to read ambient and reflected light to "adjust the camera's white balance and flash color" (Compl. ¶44). A screenshot from a promotional video contrasts the "LG G3 Flash ON" with a "Conventional Flash ON," highlighting the "Dual LED flash" feature (Compl. p. 10).
- The complaint alleges these were globally launched flagship products for the Defendant, suggesting significant commercial activity (Compl. ¶35, 41).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'661 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 34) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| (a) a light-emitting diode (LED) housing comprising one or more LEDs | The Accused Devices include a housing and a dual flash system with one or more LEDs. | ¶37, 43 | col. 2:50-57 |
| (b) an electrical control circuit that selectively applies pulsed power from a DC voltage source ... to the LEDs to ... maintain a predetermined light output level ... as a charge on the DC voltage source varies | The Accused Devices allegedly contain an electrical control circuit that provides a "set of pulses from the battery" to the flash, and that this circuit "adjusts an LED on-time, thereby controlling the light output as the DC voltage source (i.e., the battery) charge varies." | ¶38, 45 | col. 2:33-41 |
| ... and to control a light output color spectrum of the one or more LEDs ... | The complaint alleges this "set of pulses changes to control a color spectrum of the light output of the one or more LEDs of the dual flash." | ¶38, 45 | col. 7:37-43 |
'390 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 19) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| An illumination source comprising: a housing; one or more light-emitting diodes (LEDs) attached to the housing | The Accused Devices comprise a housing with an attached flash system containing one or more LEDs. | ¶37, 43 | col. 2:51-52 |
| a control circuit operatively coupled to supply electrical pulses ... that adjusts a height of the pulses to control a color spectrum of the LED output light | The Accused Devices’ control circuit allegedly provides a "set of pulses" that "changes to control a color spectrum of the light output." | ¶38, 45 | col. 2:52-54 |
| and adjusts an LED on-time proportion to control an amount of the output light. | The control circuit in the Accused Devices allegedly "adjusts an LED on-time, thereby controlling the light output." | ¶38, 45 | col. 2:54-55 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Technical Questions: A primary technical question for the '390 patent is whether the accused devices actually "adjust[] a height of the pulses" to control color, as the claim requires. The complaint alleges control over the color spectrum but does not specify that it is achieved via adjusting pulse amplitude, as opposed to other known techniques like pulse-width modulation of different colored LEDs.
- Scope Questions: For the '661 patent, a key question is whether the accused devices' alleged functionality meets the limitation of "maintain[ing] a predetermined light output level" as the battery drains. The complaint alleges control over the light output but offers no facts suggesting this control is used to maintain a predetermined level, which is a specific functional goal recited in the claim.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
Term: "adjusts a height of the pulses" (from '390 Patent, Claim 19)
- Context and Importance: This term recites a specific physical mechanism (amplitude modulation) for achieving the claimed function of controlling the color spectrum. The infringement analysis will likely turn on whether the accused devices employ this exact mechanism. Practitioners may focus on this term because modern dual-tone flash systems often use other techniques, such as Pulse Width Modulation (PWM), to blend light from two differently colored LEDs.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A party might argue the term should be interpreted in light of the patent's overall objective to control color, potentially encompassing any method of varying the power delivered in a pulse. The specification links current to color changes, and pulse height is directly related to the current delivered ('390 Patent, Fig. 6).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim language is precise. The specification explicitly teaches that adjusting current (and thus pulse height) for certain LEDs can shift their color spectrum, directly linking the claimed structure ("height of the pulses") to the claimed function ("control a color spectrum") ('390 Patent, col. 11:51-56). This supports a literal interpretation limited to amplitude modulation.
Term: "control a light output color spectrum" (from '661 Patent, Claim 34)
- Context and Importance: The scope of this term is critical because the '661 patent's primary focus appears to be on maintaining brightness, not actively adjusting color. Defendant may argue the term is limited to preventing unintentional color shifts as voltage drops, while Plaintiff may argue it covers the active color mixing allegedly performed by the accused "dual flash" systems.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
- Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification contemplates using combinations of colored LEDs to "produce a white light source," which implies active control and mixing of different colors ('661 Patent, col. 7:37-43).
- Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent is titled Method and Apparatus for an L.E.D. Flashlight, and its background and primary embodiments focus on maintaining the intensity of a single light source as its battery drains ('661 Patent, col. 1:22-35, col. 2:33-41). This context may support a narrower construction limited to maintaining a stable color, not dynamically selecting a new one.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement. Inducement is based on Defendant's advertising, user manuals, and technical support, which allegedly instruct customers on how to use the infringing camera and flash features (Compl. ¶53, 67, 81). Contributory infringement is based on allegations that the camera and flash systems are not staple articles of commerce and were especially adapted for use in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶55, 69, 83).
- Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on Defendant’s purported knowledge of the patents-in-suit since at least August 2, 2016, and its continued infringement thereafter (Compl. ¶56, 70, 84). The complaint also asserts this is an exceptional case warranting an award of attorneys' fees (Compl. ¶90).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue will be one of technical mechanism: For the '390 patent, does evidence show the accused LG smartphones control flash color by "adjust[ing] a height of the pulses" as literally claimed, or by a different, non-infringing method such as blending light from two LEDs using pulse-width modulation?
- A key dispute will likely concern claim scope: Can the relatively general claim language in the early '661 patent, which speaks of "control[ling] a light output color spectrum," be interpreted to cover the sophisticated, sensor-driven, dual-LED color-balancing systems in the accused devices, or is such functionality only addressed by the narrower claims of the later patents in the family?
- A significant procedural question will be the impact of post-filing events: Given that asserted claim 19 of the '390 patent was disclaimed by the Plaintiff after the suit was filed, a critical legal question will be what, if any, damages can be recovered for its alleged infringement prior to the disclaimer.