Last week, a jury was convened for a special trial to determine reasonable damages in the matter of GeigTech East Bay LLC v. Lutron Electronics Co., Inc. GeigTech, the plaintiff in this case is the manufacturer of motorized shade products marketed under the J Geiger brand, an independent company owned by Savant (and which is not a party to this litigation). Lutron has already been found to have infringed on certain patents held by Geigtech and the original jury’s large damages award was set aside by the judge who found it to be excessive. This new trial was held to determine a more reasonable damages amount.
See the painful result for Geigtech in this new trial
This battle between GeigTech and Lutron has been raging since 2018 when GeigTech filed a lawsuit against the larger company alleging patent infringement, unjust enrichment, and trade dress violations. As is common in cases like this, Lutron filed a countersuit against Geigtech. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York before the Honorable Judge Colleen McMahon.
I picked up my coverage of this story in April of this year when a trial on remaining issues concluded with a jury finding that Lutron failed to prove any of its counterclaims, while GeigTech prevailed on almost all of its claims in the trial. The jury in this David vs. Goliath battle between GeigTech and Lutron went on to set the award to Geigtech for damages at a pretty massive $34.6 million, to be paid by Lutron.
Original Award was Big News
Truthfully, this was a pretty surprising award amount and big news around the industry. When GeigTech initiated its litigation against Lutron, it asserted damages of about $3.8 million. But now the jury had awarded them almost ten times that amount.
A furious Lutron immediately filed a motion asking the judge to throw out the jury findings and set a new trial. The judge did not throw out the jury’s finding that Lutron was responsible for infringement. However, the judge did agree with Lutron that the damages award was excessive and reduced it to the $3.8 million that GeigTech had originally sought.
Judge Gives Geigtech Just Two Option
Now GeigTech was furious and both parties began a new round of discussions on a reasonable award. Finally, the judge cut off the discussions and told GeigTech they had two options: 1) Accept $3.8 million as the final award amount and be done with the matter, or 2) Set a new trial to be convened solely for the purpose of determining a reasonable amount of damages.
GeigTech chose option #2, to have a new trial. It is that trial that concluded last week. The three-day trial in which certain key facts were left to be determined by the judge, went on to seat a jury that was asked to weigh all the facts and set a fair amount of damages to be paid by Lutron for its infringement.
New Jury Reduces Award by $1.2 Million
GeigTech may have gotten a little greedy and is probably now questioning its decision to go forward. Why? Because the new jury set the fair damages rate at $2,672,000 – about $1.2 million less than offered to them by the judge months ago. Keep in mind that not only is this new award substantially less than the $3.8 million they had already been offered, but these months of additional wrangling ran up their lawyer’s tab as well.
In my last report on the idea of GeigTech potentially choosing to have another trial, I noted that going to trial is always risky…juries are completely unpredictable…
I’m not sure having a new trial on the damages would be such a good idea. Any time you go to a trial, the outcome is completely unpredictable – it could be better…but it also could definitely be worse.
From: Lutron Loses Appeal in J Geiger Lawsuit But Gets Penalty Reduction
A Prescient Comment
My comment turned out to be prescient, and the company is now left with a lower award.
In any event, this should bring the matter to a close such that all parties can put this six-year ordeal behind them. GeigTech got a payout…smaller perhaps, but a payout nonetheless…and a permanent injunction against Lutron ever infringing on these patents in the future. Lutron lost its appeal, but it did win a significant reduction in the damages it must pay to GeigTech.
Close to a Win/Win; More Information
In the world of litigation, this is about as close to a win/win as these things can typically produce.
Learn more about Geigtech by visiting geigtech.com (redirects to J Geiger website).
See Lutron’s extensive line of products at lutron.com.
Leave a Reply