Key Takeaways: Nextpower’s mix of apparatus and system claims illustrates how claim strategy can expand enforcement flexibility. Additionally, carefully drafting patent claims can expand the scope of protection of the claim and increase direct infringement exposure for competitor products.
On June 1, 2026, Nextpower Inc. and Nextpower LLC (collectively, “Nextpower”) sued GameChange Solar Corp. (“GameChange”), alleging that GameChange’s Genius Tracker products infringe several of Nextpower’s U.S. patents. Most of the patent claims Nextpower asserts against GameChange are apparatus claims directed to a single “tracker” or a “solar power plant” with one tracker. One of the asserted claims, however, is a system claim directed to a “solar power plant system” that includes multiple solar trackers and a main controller connected to each of the solar trackers and configured to adjust the angles of each of the solar trackers based on received local weather information and shading information. Having claims directed to both an individual solar tracker and a “solar power plant,” as well as to an entire “solar power plant system,” provides Nextpower with significant flexibility in terms of the types of entities that may infringe their patents, which infringement theories to assert, and the type of damages that can be recovered.
Infringement Theory
Nextpower’s complaint alleges that GameChange’s Genius Tracker products directly infringe, among other claims, Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,411,529 (the “’529 Patent”), Claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,967,921 (the “’921 Patent”), and Claim 18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,158,289 (the “’289 Patent”), each of which recites that the patented invention includes a plurality of solar modules. GameChange’s Genius Tracker products, however, appear designed to be used with third-party solar panels and solar modules, and GameChange does not appear to make, sell, or offer to sell solar panels/modules themselves, so it is unclear how GameChange’s Genius Tracker meets the “plurality of solar modules” limitation in these claims.
Nextpower’s complaint does not allege that any other entity directly infringes these claims, but does allege that GameChange is also liable for induced and/or contributory infringement of these same claims. So even if Nextpower is unable to demonstrate that GameChange’s making, selling, or offering for sale of the Genius Tracker products directly infringes some of the asserted claims, Nextpower may nevertheless be able to recover from GameChange under an alternative infringement theory.
Patent Prosecution Lessons
This case underscores the importance of carefully drafting patent claims to capture how competitors actually commercialize their products and to facilitate infringement evaluations. For example, asserted Claim 18 of the ’289 Patent recites, among other features, “a plurality of solar trackers, each of the solar trackers including a plurality of solar modules.” However, if this claim had been drafted to instead recite “a plurality of solar trackers, each of the solar trackers configured to support a plurality of solar modules,” the claim would have an expanded scope of protection and increase direct infringement exposure for competitor products. Having claims directed to subsystems and overall systems, in addition to having claims directed to an apparatus, can increase the scope of protection for the patented technology and can expand the types of entities that may directly infringe a patent, the infringement theories that can be asserted against each entity, and the types of damages that can be recovered.
Just as importantly, this case also serves as a reminder of the importance of maintaining continuation applications to preserve a patent owner’s ability to adapt claim scope as market realities and enforcement needs evolve. Nextpower has a pending application that claims priority to the ’289 Patent that could be amended (or a new continuation application could be filed) to include claims of different scope. Such claims could use “configured to” language to refer to, rather than affirmatively claim, the “plurality of solar modules,” thus providing Nextpower with additional patent assets to assert against competitors who do not themselves make or sell solar modules. Maintaining continuation applications to keep patent families alive also allows patent owners to continue to pursue claims (including broader claims) even when the 2-year broadening reissue deadline has passed, as is the case here for the ’529 Patent and the ’921 Patent.
Subscribe for News and Updates
