Lighting control Company Lutron who was accused of patent infringement and sued by US Company GeigTech has been hit with a A$53 penalty by a US federal Court, after knocking back an earlier settlement offer of A$5.8M offer to settle, both Crestron and Hunter Douglas are currently using designs that are similar to the Palladiom and GeigTech designs, Crestron is now facing additional claims that could increase the award.
The big hit on the lighting Company whose products are distributed in Australia by Queensland based Avation, followed a two week trial in a U.S. District Court for in New York.
GeigTech is a company that is part of J. Geiger Shading, which was recently acquired by Savant which is also distributed by Avation.
The Company originally filed its first claim against Lutron, in 2018, at the time they asked for a $3.8 million judgment, according to a GeigTech attorney, this was rejected.
The battle which has been ongoing for six years involved multiple patents, resulted in several claims being made for patent infringement, unjust enrichment, and trade dress infringement – which covers misappropriation of the look and feel of a product.
At one stage Lutron attempted to get the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to invalidate GeigTech’s patents, this failed with several other Companies now facing similar action by GeigTech, they include, several Companies whose products are sold in Australia.
In the end the case came down six claims in one patent called, the ‘717 Patent that was for a ‘shade bracket with concealed wiring’.
This technology was developed and patented by integrator James Geiger in 2011.
His stylish design was based on the mechanism, mechanical brackets, wiring, and shades being hidden behind a soffit, valance, or other fascia.
Geiger, sought to create a more fashionable minimalist design, that implemented a elegant brackets with hidden wiring, that did not have to be hidden behind a soffit [see the image at the top of this post].
It was often referred to as delivering a new standards in the aesthetics and functionality of modern window blinds.
According to GeigTech, Lutron’s Palladiom Shading System unlawfully incorporated jamb, centre, and end brackets that copy the GeigTech products.
They claim that Lutron stole their design and used it without permission, licensing agreement, or royalty payments.
After a trial that lasted approximately two weeks, the jury found all six of the GeigTech claims to be valid.
The jury then determined that damages should be set at US$34.6 million.
At one stage the jury was asked “Has GeigTech shown by a preponderance of evidence that any portion of the accused statement is true?”
They replied “Yes.”
In an unusual move the jury foreperson added in handwritten text that Lutron opted to poach [GeigTech’s] patented designs and intellectual property to try and remain competitive in a segment of the market that [GeigTech] cornered.
The result endorses claims that Lutron’s infringement was “wilful” and intentional with several other businesses now facing a redesign of their products.
With the jury’s determination that the infringement was wilful, GeigTech can now petition the court to triple the damage award.
