In a previous post, I discussed a patent infringementÃÂ action in the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) between Philips Lumileds Lighting Co. (Philips) and TaiwaneseÃÂ LED maker Epistar Corp. (Epistar) involving U.S. Patent No. 5,008,718 (‘718 Patent).ÃÂ
In that case, Philips alleged that Epistar and United Epitaxy Company (UEC) infringed the ‘718 Patent by selling certain AlGaInP LEDs.ÃÂ The ‘718 Patent is directed to an LED with a transparent window layer on top of the active semiconductor layers.
That post reported onÃÂ a Federal Circuit decision reversingÃÂ both an ITC limited exclusion order excluding Epistar’s LEDs from entry into the U.S. and an ITCÃÂ ruling that Epistar couldn’t challenge the validity of the ‘718 Patent.ÃÂ ÃÂ
Philips recentlyÃÂ to withdraw its complaint and terminate the investigation becauseÃÂ the ‘718 patent would expire on December 18, 2009,ÃÂ before the ITC could conduct further proceedings in the case.
An ITC administrative law judge (ALJ) ,ÃÂ and earlier this month the ITC issued aÃÂ of its determination not to review the ALJ’s decision to terminate the investigation.
Though the ITC case is over, a lawsuit between Philips and Epistar in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California remains pending, and Philips noted in its motion that it is not waiving any of its rights in that suit.ÃÂ