Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
Yechezkal Evan Spero v. Mercedes-Benz | Patent Lawsuit 25-1307

Yechezkal Evan Spero v. Mercedes-Benz

25-1307 Fed. Cir. Closed US9955551B2
Get a prior-art report

Patentability filed 20 Dec 2024 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and closed 14 May 2026, with US9955551B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: unpatentable.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patent involved
US9955551B2
Application no.
US13/357549
Case no.
25-1307
Verdict cause
Patentability
Court
Fed. Cir.
Court level
Court of Appeals
Case region
District of Columbia
Chief judge
None recorded
Trial level
Appeal
Filed – Closed
20 Dec 2024 – 14 May 2026
Duration
510 days
Basis of termination
Unpatentable
Products & marks
Detector controlled illuminating system
Validity challenges
10 on record
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 25-1307, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Open this record in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

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
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
US9955551B2 Inactive App. US13/357549

Detector controlled illuminating system

An illuminating device coupled with sensors or an image acquisition device and a logical controller allows illumination intensity and spectrum to be varied according to changing user needs. The system provides illumination to areas according to the principles of correct lighting practice for the optimal performance of visual tasks in the most efficient, cost effective manner. Aspects of the invention include: lighting fixtures which adapt to ambient lighting, movement, visual tasks being performed, and environmental and personal conditions affecting illumination requirements at any given instant. Lighting fixtures having spatial distribution of spectrum and intensity, providing both “background” room lighting, and “task” lighting.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Inactive
Granted
24 Apr 2018
Earliest priority
17 Sep 2011
Est. expiry
10 Jan 2026
Validity challenges
10 on recordIPR2023-01040 · Patentability · filed by Mercedes-BenzIPR2023-00315 · Patentability · filed by Porsche Cars North America, Inc.orporatedIPR2023-00315 · Patentability · filed by VolkswagenIPR2023-01225 · Patentability · filed by Porsche Cars North America, Inc.orporatedIPR2023-00318 · Patentability · filed by VolkswagenIPR2023-01225 · Patentability · filed by YECHEZKAL EVAN SPEROIPR2023-01039 · Patentability · filed by Mercedes-Benz90014815 · EPRIPR2023-00336 · Patentability · filed by VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INCIPR2023-01296 · Patentability · filed by PORSCHE CARS NORTH AMERICA, INC
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
H05B37/02F21V23/04F21V19/02B60Q1/14H05B33/08B60Q1/04F21K9/232F21K9/23B60Q1/08H05B3/00F21S4/28F21V21/02F21V21/30F21V29/74F21W111/023F21W111/027F21W111/08F21W131/103F21W131/40F21Y113/00F21Y115/10H05B44/00
Prosecution counsel
Brooks Kushman P.C.
Examiner
LE, TUNG X
US9955551B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US9955551B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Counsel of record

Source: case record + Patsnap company data. Attorney names appear as recorded in the docket. Compare both portfolios
Outcome

Basis of termination

From the record · verbatim

“THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED : AFFIRMED.”

Case 25-1307 · Fed. Cir. · closed 14 May 2026
Source: case record, verbatim. The quoted paragraph is the basis-of-termination text as filed.

Related cases

Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 25-1307?

25-1307 is a patent patentability brought by Yechezkal Evan Spero against Mercedes-Benz, filed on 20 Dec 2024 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case closed on 14 May 2026.

Which patent was asserted in 25-1307?

US9955551B2 (“Detector controlled illuminating system”), assigned to YECHEZKAL EVAN SPERO, currently inactive. The record also lists Detector controlled illuminating system.

How was case 25-1307 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is unpatentable. The termination text reads: “THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED : AFFIRMED.”

How long did case 25-1307 take?

510 calendar days, from filing on 20 Dec 2024 to closure on 14 May 2026.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 25-1307?

Andrew B. Turner, John M. Halan, Sangeeta G. Shah and Thomas A. Lewry are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Yechezkal Evan Spero. Celine Jimenez Crowson, Joseph James Raffetto and Nicholas Rotz appear for defendant Mercedes-Benz.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 25-1307 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 25-1307 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.

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.