Lighting Ballast Control v. Universal Lighting Technologies
On January 26, 2015, Bancroft secured a victory before the Supreme Court in Lighting Ballast Control v. Universal Lighting Technologies, 135 S. Ct. 1173 (2015), when the Court granted the petition for certiorari and vacated the judgment of the en banc Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit had ruled against Lighting Ballast after reaffirming its so-called “Cybor rule,” under which factual findings underlying patent claim construction are reviewed de novo. Reflecting its disagreement with the Cybor rule and its application to Lighting Ballast, the Supreme Court vacated the Federal Circuit’s judgment and remanded the case for further consideration in light of the Court’s decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. On remand, the Federal Circuit reversed its previous judgment and ruled in Lighting Ballast’s favor. Paul D. Clement and George W. Hicks, Jr. represented Lighting Ballast before the Supreme Court.
John Council, Big Texas Patent Case Is Back On, Texas Lawyer (Jan. 26, 2015)