⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Federal Circuit hears DS Advanced Enterprises versus Lowe's Home Centers, a dispute over recessed LED ceiling lights. DS Advanced sued Lowe's, claiming that recessed lights sold by the retailer infringed its lighting patent. The patent concerns mounting an LED light either directly in a ceiling or inside an existing recessed-light housing. The patent requires a metal housing. The district court ruled for Lowe's without a trial, finding that the accused lights had plastic housings and did not meet that requirement. It later refused to reconsider that judgment. DS Advanced contends that an internal metal disc, with a rim around its edge, can satisfy the metal-housing requirement. Lowe's will contend that the disc is an internal component, not the housing the patent claims. Claim construction means determining what the patent's claims mean before applying them to the accused product. Intrinsic evidence comes from the patent record, including its claims and description of the invention; an outside dictionary is extrinsic evidence. Summary judgment requires that there be no genuine dispute over a material fact requiring a trial. The argument also addresses attorney's fees under Section two eighty-five. That provision allows reasonable attorney's fees for the prevailing party in exceptional patent cases. Octane Fitness requires courts to consider all the circumstances when deciding whether a case is exceptional.

DS Advanced Enterprises, Ltd. v. Lowe's Home Centers, LLC (No. 25-1072) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, argued October 7, 2026.