Brightex Bio-Photonics, LLC v. L'Oreal USA, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaMay 7, 20253:24-cv-07919California5,022 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRIGHTEX BIO-PHOTONICS, LLC,

Case No. 24-cv-07919-JCS Plaintiff, 8 v. ORDER GRANTING RULE 54(b) MOTION L'OREAL USA, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 39 Defendant.

12 I. INTRODUCTION In this action, Plaintiff Brightex Bio-Photonics, LLC (“Brightex”) accuses Defendant L’Oreal USA, Inc. (“L’Oreal USA”) of infringing two of its patents: U.S. Patent No. 9,842,358 (“the `358 Patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 9,542,595 (“the `595 Patent”). On March 6, 2025, the Court granted L’Oreal’s motion to dismiss under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014) as to the ’358 Patent and dismissed Brightex’s claim of infringement of that patent with prejudice. Dkt. no. 32 (“March 6 Order”). Brightex now brings a Rule 54(b) Motion (“Motion”), asking the Court to enter final judgment on its claim of infringement of the ’358 Patent so that it can pursue an immediate…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.