Untitled case

The patent infringement lawsuit 2:26-cv-00041, filed in the Eastern District of Texas, involves plaintiff Instacom LLC, identified as an NPE (Non-Practicing Entity) or individual, and defendant [[Samsung Electronics Co.](/litigations/by-defendant/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.), Ltd.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.). Instacom asserted two patents, US10298644B2 and US9204095B2, both related to smart home video communication technology. The accused products in this action included Samsung Galaxy smartphones, Samsung SmartTVs pre-installed with the SmartThings application, and Ring Doorbell Pro devices, indicating that Instacom's claims were mapped across both mobile and smart home hub device categories. Patent US10298644B2 is entitled "Instant Communications System Having Established Communication Channels Between Communication Devices".

The case was filed on January 21, 2026, and was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice by Instacom LLC on June 1, 2026, after 131 days. This means Instacom is permanently barred from re-filing the same claims against Samsung on these patents. The court accepted and acknowledged the notice of dismissal, and no merits ruling on validity or infringement was issued. The Eastern District of Texas is known as a popular venue for patent plaintiffs due to perceived marginal advantages that can make defending patent suits predictably expensive for accused infringers. The district has seen a resurgence in patent filings, with judges experienced in patent cases and a commitment to bringing them to trial quickly.

This case is notable as it involves a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) asserting smart home video communication patents against a major technology company like Samsung, covering a broad range of its popular products. While the case was dismissed with prejudice before any merits ruling, the patents asserted by Instacom, US10298644B2 and US9204095B2, remain enforceable assets, and other companies in the smart home video communication space are advised to consider them as live risks. The lack of a merits ruling means the legal strength of the patents remains unresolved through this proceeding.

This patent infringement litigation, Instacom LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America Inc., Case No. 2:26-cv-00041, was filed in the Eastern District of Texas and has concluded with a voluntary dismissal.

Here are the key legal developments in chronological order:

• 2026-01-21: Complaint Filed
  Instacom LLC initiated the lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Instacom asserted infringement of two patents: U.S. Patent No. 10,298,644 ("Instant Communications System Having Established Communication Channels Between Communication Devices") and U.S. Patent No. 9,204,095. The complaint accused a range of Samsung products, including Galaxy smartphones, SmartTVs with the SmartThings application, and Ring Doorbell Pro devices. Instacom LLC was represented by Fabricant LLP and Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP, while Samsung was represented by Gillam & Smith LLP.

• ~2026-06-01: Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice
  Approximately 131 days after the complaint was filed, Instacom LLC filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (Docket No. 14) with prejudice. The court accepted and acknowledged this notice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), dismissing all pending claims and causes of action with prejudice. This means Instacom is permanently barred from refiling the same patent claims against Samsung in future litigation. The specific terms of the dismissal, if any, were not disclosed in the public record. The case resolved notably quickly for a multi-patent infringement action in the Eastern District of Texas, and no merits ruling on validity, infringement, or claim construction was issued.

• Parallel PTAB Proceedings:
  No parallel proceedings, such as Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs) or Post-Grant Reviews (PGRs), were identified for U.S. Patent No. 10,298,644 or U.S. Patent No. 9,204,095 on the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) database. Therefore, the litigation did not experience any stays or impacts from PTAB decisions.

The plaintiff, Instacom LLC, in the patent infringement case 2:26-cv-00041 in the Eastern District of Texas, was represented by attorneys from two firms: Fabricant LLP and Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP.

As the case was voluntarily dismissed on June 1, 2026, after being filed on January 21, 2026, the roles of "lead counsel" or "of counsel" might not have been formally delineated through extensive litigation. However, based on the firms representing the plaintiff in a patent assertion case, the attorneys involved would typically specialize in patent litigation.

Counsel for Plaintiff Instacom LLC:

• Firm: Fabricant LLP

  • Office Location: Specific office location for this case is not explicitly provided in the search results but Fabricant LLP is known for representing plaintiffs in Eastern District of Texas patent assertion cases.
  • Relevant Experience: Fabricant LLP is noted as a repeat plaintiff's counsel in Eastern District of Texas patent assertion cases, suggesting involvement in a structured enforcement program for patent portfolios.

• Firm: Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP

  • Office Location: Specific office location for this case is not explicitly provided in the search results, but this firm is also noted for its involvement in Eastern District of Texas patent assertion cases.
  • Relevant Experience: Like Fabricant LLP, Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP is identified as repeat plaintiff's counsel in patent assertion cases in the Eastern District of Texas.

Specific individual attorneys were not named in the provided search results for this particular case. However, given the nature of the firms, the attorneys involved would typically be experienced in patent litigation and often serve as lead counsel in such matters.

Marshall, TX – In the patent infringement case of Instacom LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (2:26-cv-00041) in the Eastern District of Texas, Samsung was represented by attorneys from the Texas-based firm Gillam & Smith LLP. The case, which involved US patent 10298644 among others, was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice by Instacom LLC after 131 days, without a merits ruling.

The counsel of record identified for the defendant(s) Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. includes:

• Melissa R. Smith
  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Gillam & Smith LLP, with offices in Marshall, Texas, and Tyler, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Melissa Smith is a partner at Gillam & Smith LLP with 24 years of experience, practicing in intellectual property litigation, including patent cases across various technologies such as chemical biotech, biotech, chemical, computer architecture, and software. She is actively involved in the Eastern District of Texas legal community, serving in appointed positions on the Eastern District Local Rules Advisory Committee and the Eastern District of Texas Bar Board of Directors.

While specific roles like "lead counsel" or "local counsel" for other individual attorneys at Gillam & Smith LLP are not explicitly detailed in the public records for this quickly dismissed case, the firm is known for its extensive patent litigation practice in the Eastern District of Texas, frequently acting as both local and trial counsel for defendants. The firm was noted as one of the top three busiest law firms in the country for patent litigation defendants between 2021-2025. Other prominent attorneys at the firm involved in intellectual property litigation, who likely would have been part of the defense team, include:

• Harry L. "Gil" Gillam, Jr.

  • Role: Partner (likely involved in a supervisory or strategic capacity)
  • Firm: Gillam & Smith LLP, Marshall and Tyler, Texas.
  • Experience Note: A founding partner of the firm, Gil Gillam is recognized for his broad experience in intellectual property and business litigation, and is selected to the Super Lawyers list.

• J. Travis Underwood

  • Role: Partner (likely involved in a litigation capacity)
  • Firm: Gillam & Smith LLP, Marshall and Tyler, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Travis Underwood is an experienced trial lawyer with over a hundred appearances as counsel of record in cases in the Eastern District of Texas. He litigates various complex disputes, including patent and trade secret cases. He also clerked for Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas and serves as the Chairman of the Eastern District of Texas Local Rules Advisory Committee.