Court Opinion

ID: 4515485
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2020-03-12 16:00:46.697605+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:54:07.435405
License: Public Domain

Case: 19-1639    Document: 56    Page: 1   Filed: 03/12/2020

        NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

   United States Court of Appeals
       for the Federal Circuit
                 ______________________

                SATCO PRODUCTS, INC.,
                       Appellant

                            v.

    LIGHTING SCIENCE GROUP CORPORATION,
                     Appellee
              ______________________

                       2019-1639
                 ______________________

     Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark
 Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2017-
 01639.
                  ______________________

                 Decided: March 12, 2020
                 ______________________

    ROBERT STEPHAN RIGG, Vedder Price PC, Chicago, IL,
 argued for appellant. Also represented by JOHN K. BURKE,
 SUDIP MITRA, DANIEL SHULMAN.

    KAYVAN B. NOROOZI, Noroozi PC, Los Angeles, CA, ar-
 gued for appellee.
                  ______________________

       Before DYK, CHEN, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.
Case: 19-1639    Document: 56      Page: 2   Filed: 03/12/2020

 2     SATCO PRODUCTS, INC.   v. LIGHTING SCIENCE GROUP CORP.

 PER CURIAM.
      In this case, the Board found claim 15 of U.S. Patent
 No. 8,967,844 not unpatentable in view of Tickner and Van
 De Ven based on arguments solely related to the limita-
 tions of claim 1, from which claim 15 depends. The Board’s
 decision finding claim 15 of the ‘844 patent not unpatenta-
 ble in view of Tickner and Van De Ven is supported by sub-
 stantial evidence. In an earlier, related proceeding—
 IPR2017-01280—the Board found claim 1 of the ‘844 pa-
 tent, unpatentable over Chou and Wegner. On appeal, Pe-
 titioner has failed to argue that the Board’s decision
 invalidating claim 1 in the earlier proceeding abrogated the
 basis for the Board’s decision. See MaxLinear, Inc. v. CF
 CRESPE LLC, 880 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2018). This argu-
 ment is thus waived.
                        AFFIRMED