Untitled case

Case Overview: Power2B, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

This patent infringement litigation, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas under case number 2:21-cv-00348, involves plaintiff Power2B, Inc. asserting U.S. Patent No. 10,664,070 against defendants [Samsung Electronics Co.](/litigations/by-defendant/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.), Ltd., and Samsung Group. Power2B, Inc. appears to be a patent assertion entity (PAE) or non-practicing entity (NPE), though further details on its operations are not readily available in the provided sources. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., a well-known operating company, is a global leader in electronics, including the manufacturing of mobile devices and other consumer electronics. The patent at issue, U.S. Patent No. 10,664,070, generally relates to memory devices. The specific accused products, services, or technology beyond this general description would typically be detailed in the complaint or subsequent filings, but a precise identification is not available in the current search results.

The procedural posture places this case in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue historically favored by patent plaintiffs due to its reputation for a "rocket docket" with expedited trials and plaintiff-friendly verdicts. This district has consistently attracted a significant share of all U.S. patent lawsuits, often leading to increased costs for defendants due to the accelerated litigation schedule. While the Supreme Court's TC Heartland decision in 2017 aimed to restrict patent venue to a defendant's state of incorporation or where it has a regular and established place of business, the Eastern District of Texas judges have issued opinions that interpret the "regular and established place of business" prong broadly, potentially allowing for continued filings in the district. Judge Rodney Gilstrap is a prominent judge in this district known for handling a substantial number of patent cases.

Beyond the general trends of patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas, specific notable aspects for this particular case, such as significant industry impact, unusual assertion patterns, or direct linkages to parallel IPR proceedings for the asserted patent, are not detailed in the provided search results. While one source mentions other cases filed by entities often associated with IP Edge and discusses IPRs generally, it does not provide specific IPR linkage for patent 10,664,070 in this particular lawsuit. Therefore, without further specific docket information or legal news coverage directly addressing these points for this case, its unique notability beyond the parties and venue remains undetailed.

The patent infringement litigation Power2B, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al. (Case No. 2:21-cv-00348) was filed in the Eastern District of Texas and involves U.S. Patent No. 10,664,070.

Here are the key legal developments and current posture of the case:

1. Filing & Initial Pleadings

• Complaint Filed: Power2B, Inc. filed its complaint against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Group on September 9, 2021, in the Eastern District of Texas. The complaint alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,664,070, among other patents (8816994, 7952570, 8547364, 9946369).
• Defendants' Appearance: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. appeared as defendants.
• Answer & Counterclaims: Details regarding the defendants' answer and any counterclaims are not explicitly available in the provided search results but are standard initial pleadings.

2. Pre-trial Motions of Substance

• Motion to Stay Pending PTAB: A motion to stay pending PTAB proceedings was filed. Although the provided search results mention a motion to stay pending PTAB for "2:21-cv-00348" by Samsung Electronics America, Inc., it also refers to "GenghisComm Holdings, LLC" in the response, suggesting a potential mix-up with another case in an aggregated list of motions. For Power2B v. Samsung, further specifics on the filing and outcome of a motion to stay related to IPRs on patent 10,664,070 would require direct docket access.

3. Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes

• The case reached the claim construction stage, with "Defendants' Identification of Claim Terms for Construction" filed pursuant to a Docket Control Order. A Markman hearing was undertaken by the District Court. The specific outcome of the Markman ruling is not detailed in the provided search results.

4. Discovery Milestones

• No specific strategic discovery milestones are explicitly detailed in the provided search results.

5. Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-trial Motions

• A jury trial was demanded in the initial complaint. However, no information regarding trial events, verdict, or post-trial motions (such as JMOL, new trial, or fees) is available in the provided search results, suggesting the case did not proceed to trial or these events have not yet occurred.

6. Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal

• The current posture or final disposition of the case (settlement, dismissal, judgment, or appeal) is not explicitly stated in the provided search results. The case does not appear to have reached a final judgment or appeal based on the available information.

7. Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings

• While a motion to stay pending PTAB was mentioned, the details regarding specific IPR/PGR proceedings on patent 10,664,070 and their effect on this litigation are not clearly specified in the available information. No IPR or PGR petitions specifically against U.S. Patent No. 10,664,070 by Samsung or related entities in connection with this case are detailed in the search results.

Plaintiff Power2B, Inc. in the case Power2B, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (2:21-cv-00348) is represented by a combination of local and specialized patent litigation counsel.

Here's a breakdown of the counsel of record for the plaintiff:

• J. Mark Mann

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Mann Tindel & Thompson (formerly Mann Law Group), Tyler, Texas.
  • Experience: Mr. Mann is a partner at Mann Tindel & Thompson, focusing on complex civil litigation, including patent litigation. He is Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and a Certified Civil Trial Specialist by the National Board of Trial Advocacy. He has been recognized as a Texas Monthly "Super Lawyer" every year since 2004 and is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers. His firm emphasizes results-driven intellectual property litigation for individuals and small businesses, often utilizing alternative fee arrangements.

• Adam P. Daniels

  • Role: Lead Counsel (Polsinelli PC)
  • Firm: Polsinelli PC, Los Angeles, CA (also with offices in Chicago, IL and Dallas, TX).
  • Experience: Mr. Daniels is a shareholder at Polsinelli PC and has led teams representing Power2B, Inc. in significant patent disputes, including appeals to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concerning inter partes review (IPR) proceedings against Samsung. In these proceedings, Polsinelli successfully defended Power2B's patent rights related to navigating and controlling handheld electronic devices.

• Jason A. Wietjes

  • Role: Lead Counsel (Polsinelli PC)
  • Firm: Polsinelli PC, Dallas, TX (also with offices in Los Angeles, CA and Chicago, IL).
  • Experience: Mr. Wietjes is a shareholder at Polsinelli PC and was part of the Polsinelli team that secured a Federal Circuit win for Power2B in IPR proceedings against Samsung.

• Mark T. Deming

  • Role: Lead Counsel (Polsinelli PC)
  • Firm: Polsinelli PC, Chicago, IL (also with offices in Los Angeles, CA and Dallas, TX).
  • Experience: Mr. Deming is a shareholder at Polsinelli PC and contributed to the Federal Circuit victory for Power2B against Samsung in IPR challenges.

• Andrea L. Fair

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC (as of October 1, 2024, Miller Fair Henry), Longview, Texas.
  • Experience: Ms. Fair is a trial lawyer known for her intellectual property litigation practice and has secured multi-million dollar verdicts in patent infringement cases. Ward, Smith & Hill has a national reputation in high-stakes intellectual property trials and is particularly recognized for its understanding of the Eastern District of Texas judges.

• Claire Abernathy Henry

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC (as of October 1, 2024, Miller Fair Henry), Longview, Texas.
  • Experience: Ms. Henry is a partner recognized for her work in patent litigation and handles high-stakes patent litigation matters in the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas.

• Charles Everingham IV

  • Role: Of Counsel (Local Counsel)
  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC (as of October 1, 2024, Miller Fair Henry), Longview, Texas.
  • Experience: A former magistrate judge, Mr. Everingham is recognized for his work in intellectual property and patent litigation.

It's important to note that, effective October 1, 2024, the firm Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, where Andrea Fair, Claire Abernathy Henry, and Charles Everingham IV practice, will transition to Miller Fair Henry, with Ms. Fair and Ms. Henry becoming name partners. Former U.S. District Court Judge T. John Ward, also associated with Ward, Smith & Hill as Of Counsel, is recognized for his intellectual property litigation expertise, particularly in patent and complex commercial cases. While he is highly experienced, his specific role as counsel of record for Power2B in this particular case within the available search results is not explicitly stated beyond his general affiliation with the local counsel firm.

I'll research the defendant's counsel of record using targeted web searches.

Let me dig into the docket itself and firm-specific entries.

I have some promising leads. Let me verify which attorneys are on the docket for this specific case and pin down the firms.