Untitled case

This active patent infringement litigation, Signal, LLP v. NXP USA, Inc., case number 7:26-cv-00095, was filed on March 16, 2026, in the Pecos Division of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The plaintiff, Signal, LLP, is a Nevada-based entity that appears to be a Patent Assertion Entity (PAE) or Non-Practicing Entity (NPE), given its past involvement in patent licensing and assertions through a related entity, Signal IP, Inc., a subsidiary of Marathon Patent Group, a company focused on patent acquisition and monetization. The defendant, NXP USA, Inc., is a semiconductor operating company headquartered in Austin, Texas, known for providing semiconductor, system solutions, and software for embedded applications across various markets, including automotive, identification, wireless infrastructure, and mobile devices.

The sole patent asserted in this case is US Patent 10,056,902. A one-line technical sketch of this patent, titled "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR SECURE DATA COMMUNICATION," describes a system and method designed to facilitate secure communication of data. The specific product, service, or technology offered by NXP USA, Inc. that is allegedly infringing this patent has not been explicitly detailed in the public docket information reviewed, though NXP's broad range of secure connectivity solutions for embedded applications suggests a potential focus in this area.

The case is currently in its early stages, with U.S. Magistrate Judge Derek T. Gilliland overseeing motions. Judge Gilliland, a former patent litigator, serves in the Western District of Texas and handles a significant number of patent cases, often referred by District Judge Alan Albright, who is known for making the Western District of Texas a prominent venue for patent litigation due to its efficient dockets and patent-experienced judiciary. The choice of the Western District of Texas, including its Pecos Division, is often strategic for plaintiffs due to its reputation for a fast track to trial and favorable rulings for patent holders. The case is notable as another example of a PAE asserting intellectual property against an operating company in the high-tech semiconductor industry within a commonly favored plaintiff's venue. As of the current date, no parallel inter partes review (IPR) proceedings concerning patent 10,056,902 have been identified.

Patent Infringement Litigation: Signal, LLP v. NXP USA, Inc.

This document summarizes the key legal developments in the patent infringement case Signal, LLP v. NXP USA, Inc., Case Number 7:26-cv-00095, filed in the Texas Western District Court, concerning US Patent 10056902. The litigation is currently active.

Key Legal Developments:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings:
  • Complaint Filed (2026-03-16): Signal, LLP initiated the patent infringement lawsuit against NXP USA, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. The complaint was filed on March 16, 2026.
  • Details regarding the specific allegations within the complaint, NXP USA, Inc.'s answer, and any potential counterclaims are not yet publicly available in the provided search results.

Further developments such as pre-trial motions, claim construction, discovery milestones, trial events, verdict, post-trial motions, settlement, dismissal, judgment, appeal, or parallel PTAB IPR/PGR proceedings are not yet available in the public records at this early stage of litigation. The case was filed recently, in March 2026.

The plaintiff in Signal, LLP v. NXP USA, Inc. (7:26-cv-00095) is represented by attorneys from The Law Offices of David A. Gerasimow, P.C. and Nelson Bumgardner Conroy P.C..

Here's a breakdown of the counsel of record for Signal, LLP:

The Law Offices of David A. Gerasimow, P.C.

• David A. Gerasimow (Role not specified, likely lead counsel)
  • Firm: The Law Offices of David A. Gerasimow, P.C.
  • Office Location: Not specified in available search results.
  • Relevant Experience: The firm is listed as representing Signal, LLP, indicating experience in patent litigation.

Nelson Bumgardner Conroy P.C.

• Attorney Name(s) & Role(s): Specific attorneys from this firm representing Signal, LLP are not explicitly named in the immediate search results. They are likely acting as local counsel or co-counsel.
  • Firm: Nelson Bumgardner Conroy P.C.
  • Office Location: Not specified in available search results.
  • Relevant Experience: While specific attorney experience isn't detailed here, the firm's appearance in this Western District of Texas case suggests local counsel capabilities in patent litigation.

The defendant, NXP USA, Inc., is represented by Bradley Dalton Coburn.

Here's a breakdown of the identified counsel:

• Bradley Dalton Coburn
  • Role: Attorney of record for NXP USA, Inc.
  • Firm: Not explicitly stated in the provided search results for this case. However, in other cases involving Signal, LLP and in the Western District of Texas, firms like Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC and The Law Offices Of David A. Gerasimow, P.C. have appeared for defendants.
  • Relevant experience: While specific experience for Bradley Dalton Coburn isn't detailed, NXP Semiconductors N.V. (the parent company of NXP USA, Inc.) has been extensively involved in patent litigation, often represented by firms like Jones Day in high-stakes, multi-patent disputes concerning RFID and semiconductor technologies. NXP has secured favorable outcomes in such cases, including directed verdicts and settlements.

It's important to note that NXP USA, Inc. has in-house legal counsel, with Jennifer Wuamett serving as Executive Vice President, General Counsel, Corporate Secretary, and Chief Sustainability Officer of NXP Semiconductors, responsible for worldwide legal and intellectual property matters. While she oversees these matters, external counsel typically handles the day-to-day litigation.