Federal Circuit Vacates, Reverses Patent Infringement Judgment in School Bus Sign Dispute

Smartrend Manufacturing Group (SMG), Inc. sued Opti-Luxx Inc. for infringing two patents related to illuminated school bus signs: U.S. Design Patent No. D932,930 (the D930 patent) and U.S. Patent No. 11,348,491 (the ’491 patent). The jury found Opti-Luxx infringed both patents.

Regarding the D930 patent, the Federal Circuit determined that the district court erred in its interpretation of the term “transparency,” which was construed to mean both “transparent” and “translucent.” The Court reasoned that because the D930 patent was claimed “as shown and described,” its scope of protection is limited by its drawings and accompanying descriptions. Since the D930 patent’s specification states any shading denotes transparency, the Court concluded the claims cover only surfaces that are transparent—not translucent. Accordingly, the Court vacated and remanded for a new trial as to infringement of the D930 patent.

Regarding the ’491 patent, the Court found that it describes functions that cannot be performed by a sign with an integrated frame. Yet, Opti-Luxx’s product uses an integrated frame. Since SMG’s expert conceded that the accused product could not perform these functions, the Court held that no reasonable jury could have found infringement, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Accordingly, the Federal Circuit reversed the judgment of infringement for the’491 patent.