BridgeComm LLC v. Govee Moments Trading Limited
Infringement action filed 21 Nov 2024 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 15 Jun 2026, with 2 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US8203275B2US8390206B2
- Case no.
- 2:24-cv-00962
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- E.D. Tex.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Texas
- Chief judge
- None recorded
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 21 Nov 2024 – 15 Jun 2026
- Duration
- 571 days
- Basis of termination
- Voluntary dismissal
- Products & marks
- Variable-effect lighting system
Check this patent against your own product
Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.
Get an FTO claim chart- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Variable-effect lighting system
A variable-effect lighting system includes a lamp assembly and a lamp controller coupled to the lamp assembly. The lamp assembly comprises a number of multi-coloured lamps in series with an AC voltage source and in series with each other. Each multi-coloured lamp comprises a first illuminating element for producing a first colour of light, and a second illuminating element for producing a second colour of light. The lamp controller is configured to vary the colour produced by the lamps by varying the conduction interval of each illuminating element according to a predetermined pattern. The controller is also configured to terminate the variation upon activation of a user-operable input to the controller.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 19 Jun 2012
- Earliest priority
- 16 Aug 2005
- Est. expiry
- 3 Apr 2027
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- RUXTON, JAMES
- Classification
- H05B37/00H05B44/00
- Prosecution counsel
- Graham Patent Law
- Examiner
- VU, DAVID HUNG
Variable-effect lighting system
A variable-effect lighting system includes a lamp assembly and a lamp controller coupled to the lamp assembly. The lamp assembly comprises a number of multi-colored lamps in series with an AC voltage source and in series with each other. Each multi-colored lamp comprises a first illuminating element for producing a first color of light, and a second illuminating element for producing a second color of light. The lamp controller is configured to control the current draw of each said illuminating element, and to adjust the current draw in accordance with the frequency of the voltage source.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 5 Mar 2013
- Earliest priority
- 16 Aug 2005
- Est. expiry
- 16 Aug 2026
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- RUXTON, JAMES
- Classification
- H05B37/00H05B44/00
- Prosecution counsel
- Graham Patent Law
- Examiner
- VU, DAVID H
Parties of record
BridgeComm LLC
- Core tech
- H05B37/00H05B44/00
- Counsel
- Isaac Phillip Rabicoff
- Firm
- Rabicoff Law LLC
Govee Moments Trading Limited
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Not recorded
- Firm
- Not recorded
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Isaac Phillip Rabicoff | BridgeComm LLC | Plaintiff |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Before the Court is the Notice of Dismissal (“Notice”) filed by BridgeComm LLC (“Plaintiff”). (Dkt. No. 7.) In the Notice, Plaintiff represents that the above-captioned case is voluntarily dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (Id. at 1.) . In light of the Notice, which the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES, and pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), all pending claims and causes of action in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. All pending requests for relief in the above captioned case not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT. Each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.”
Case 2:24-cv-00962 · E.D. Tex. · closed 15 June 2026
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 2:24-cv-00962?
2:24-cv-00962 is a patent infringement action brought by BridgeComm LLC against Govee Moments Trading Limited, filed on 21 Nov 2024 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 15 June 2026.
Which patents were asserted in 2:24-cv-00962?
US8203275B2 (“Variable-effect lighting system”), assigned to BRIDGECOMM LLC, currently active; US8390206B2 (“Variable-effect lighting system”), assigned to BRIDGECOMM LLC, currently inactive. The record also lists Variable-effect lighting system.
How was case 2:24-cv-00962 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: “Before the Court is the Notice of Dismissal (“Notice”) filed by BridgeComm LLC (“Plaintiff”). (Dkt. No. 7.) In the Notice, Plaintiff represents that the above-captioned case is voluntarily dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (Id. at 1.) . In light of the Notice, which the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES, and pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), all pending claims and causes of action in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. All pending requests for relief in the above captioned case not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT. Each party is to bear its own costs, expenses,
What does dismissal without prejudice mean?
A dismissal without prejudice ends this action but leaves the claims alive — the plaintiff may file them again later, subject to the limitation period.
How long did case 2:24-cv-00962 take?
571 calendar days, from filing on 21 Nov 2024 to closure on 15 June 2026.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 2:24-cv-00962?
Isaac Phillip Rabicoff is recorded as counsel for plaintiff BridgeComm.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 2:24-cv-00962 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.
Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.
No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.
No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.