Untitled case

The patent infringement case 2:25-cv-00070, filed in the Eastern District of Texas, involves Wilus Institute of Standards & Technology Inc. ("WILUS") as the plaintiff and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. along with Samsung Electronics America, Inc. as the defendants. WILUS is identified as a Patent Assertion Entity (NPE). The defendants, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., are operating companies in the electronics industry. The litigation specifically targets the provision of Wi-Fi 6-enabled devices by Samsung.

The sole patent at issue in this case is U.S. Patent No. 11,664,926 ("the '926 patent"). This patent, filed on January 25, 2021, and issued on September 19, 2023, is a continuation of prior applications and is assigned to WILUS. A technical sketch of the '926 patent indicates it relates to methods and systems for wireless communication, specifically in the context of Wi-Fi 6 technology.

This case is currently active in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, and is assigned to Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap and Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. The Eastern District of Texas has long been considered a "rocket docket" for patent cases, known for its plaintiff-friendly procedural rules, accelerated trial schedules, and a history of a high success rate for plaintiffs. While the Supreme Court's TC Heartland decision in 2017 aimed to restrict venue options by limiting where a patent infringement lawsuit could be filed to where the defendant resides (state of incorporation) or has a regular and established place of business, the Eastern District of Texas has seen a "new litigation strategy" emerge. Plaintiffs have sometimes bypassed these restrictions by suing foreign affiliates, such as manufacturing or holding companies, thereby taking advantage of general venue rules that allow suits against foreign defendants in any district where they are subject to personal jurisdiction. This case, filed against both Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (a foreign entity) and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (a U.S. subsidiary), exemplifies how plaintiffs continue to utilize this venue. The case was filed on January 23, 2025, and on March 25, 2025, it was consolidated with another case, 2:25-cv-00069 (Wilus v. HP Inc.), into a lead case (2:25-cv-00069), both before Chief Judge Gilstrap. The consolidated litigation is set for trial on August 17, 2026, and claim construction issues are scheduled to be briefed in January 2026, with a hearing set for February 26, 2026.

The case is notable due to the plaintiff being an NPE asserting patents related to Wi-Fi 6 technology, a standard essential patent (SEP) area. Defendants have filed counterclaims addressing the obligations of WILUS and Sisvel International S.A. to license the patents-in-suit on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms, which is a common defense in SEP litigation. Furthermore, a related inter partes review (IPR) against the '926 patent, IPR2025-01165, was filed by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. on June 24, 2025, challenging all claims of the patent. This IPR linkage is significant as the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is being asked to consider discretionary denial of institution, given the impending trial date in the Eastern District of Texas.

The patent infringement litigation Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., LTD., et al, Case No. 2:25-cv-00070, is active in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case involves U.S. Patent No. 11,664,926.

Here are the key legal developments in chronological order:

• January 23, 2025: Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. filed a patent infringement complaint against Samsung Electronics Co., LTD., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division.
• March 25, 2025: The case (2:25-cv-00070) was consolidated with a related case, Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. v. HP Inc. (Case No. 2:25-cv-00069-JRG-RSP), with the HP Inc. case designated as the lead case (referred to as the "Co-Pending Litigation"). A Docket Control Order (Dkt. No. 51) was subsequently issued for the consolidated cases.
• July 9, 2025: Defendants in the consolidated case provided their P.R. 3-3 and 3-4 Invalidity Contentions and Subject Matter Eligibility Contentions.
• October 23, 2025: Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. submitted their P.R. 4-1 Exchange of Proposed Terms and Claim Elements for Construction, initiating the claim construction process pursuant to the Court's Patent Rule 4-1 and the Docket Control Order.
• Undated (prior to March 2025 filing): Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) petition, IPR2025-01165, challenging the patentability of U.S. Patent No. 11,664,926 at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
• Undated (prior to September 2025): The patent owner, Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc., filed a request for discretionary denial of Samsung's IPR petition.

Current Status and Outcome:

The case is currently active and "Open". A trial date for the consolidated litigation is set for August 17, 2026.

In the parallel IPR proceeding (IPR2025-01165), the anticipated date for the Final Written Decision is January 12, 2027. This means the District Court trial is scheduled to occur approximately five months before the PTAB's decision, making a stay of the district court litigation pending the IPR outcome unlikely.

The plaintiff, WILUS Institute of Standards & Technology Inc., is represented by attorneys from Russ August & Kabat and Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC.

Here is a breakdown of the identified counsel for the plaintiff:

From Russ August & Kabat:

• Marc A. Fenster (Lead Counsel)
  • Firm: Russ August & Kabat, Los Angeles, CA.
  • Note: Known for extensive experience in patent litigation, particularly representing patent holders in high-stakes cases. He has been involved in numerous patent infringement lawsuits across various technology sectors.
• Adam A. Suhl (Counsel)
  • Firm: Russ August & Kabat, Los Angeles, CA.
  • Note: Frequently appears in patent litigation alongside Marc Fenster, focusing on complex technology disputes.
• Paul A. Kroeger (Counsel)
  • Firm: Russ August & Kabat, Los Angeles, CA.
  • Note: Has a strong background in intellectual property litigation, including patent infringement cases.

From Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC:

• Johnny Ward (Local Counsel)
  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, Longview, TX.
  • Note: A prominent local counsel in the Eastern District of Texas, frequently representing plaintiffs in patent cases in this venue.
• Claire Abernathy Henry (Local Counsel)
  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, Longview, TX.
  • Note: Also a well-known local counsel in the Eastern District of Texas, involved in numerous patent disputes.

These attorneys are listed as counsel of record for WILUS in related filings and docket entries, including a document from October 23, 2025, in case 2:25-cv-00070.

Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. in case 2:25-cv-00070 are represented by attorneys from Baker Botts L.L.P. and Fish & Richardson P.C..

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

Baker Botts L.L.P.

• Ralph A. Phillips (Lead Counsel)
  • Firm Office: Dallas, Texas
  • Note: Ralph A. Phillips is listed as counsel of record for the defendants in a filing from October 23, 2025, concerning claim construction terms. Baker Botts has a robust and active patent litigation practice, particularly in defensive patent cases and before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The firm is recognized for representing leading technology companies like Samsung.

Fish & Richardson P.C.

While specific individual attorneys from Fish & Richardson P.C. are not named in the provided October 23, 2025 filing as explicitly as Ralph A. Phillips, Fish & Richardson is a prominent intellectual property law firm with a significant presence in patent litigation. It is common for multiple firms to represent large corporate defendants in complex patent cases. Fish & Richardson handles more patent cases in District Courts, the Federal Circuit, the ITC, and the PTAB than any other national firm. They have a deep bench of attorneys with technical degrees and experience across various technology areas.