Untitled case

This patent infringement litigation, Case No. 2:24-cv-01073, is currently active in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, before Judge Rodney Gilstrap. The plaintiff is Radian Memory Systems LLC, a non-practicing entity (NPE) or patent assertion entity (PAE) with ties to Fortress Investment Group LLC, established in Texas in April 2024 to manage patents originally developed by Radian Memory Systems Inc.. The defendants are Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., a South Korean multinational semiconductor company, and its American subsidiary, Samsung Electronics America, Inc. Samsung is a major player in the computer memory and storage industry, manufacturing products such as solid-state drives (SSDs).

Radian Memory Systems LLC alleges that Samsung is infringing U.S. Patent No. 11,709,772, along with other patents covering its "Cooperative Flash Management" (CFM) technology. Patent 11,709,772, titled "Storage system with multiplane segments and cooperative flash management," generally describes improvements in managing multi-drive, multi-die, or multi-plane NAND flash memory to enhance SSD performance and efficiency in enterprise and data center environments. The accused products are Samsung's solid-state drives and related products that incorporate "Zoned Namespaces (ZNS) technology". Radian claims that Samsung adopted its patented technology through the NVM Express (NVMe) consortium's Zoned Namespace Command Specification (ZNS) standard, despite Radian's refusal to join NVMe and grant royalty-free licenses to its members.

This case is particularly notable due to the unusual intervention by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), which filed a Statement of Interest on June 24, 2025. This statement argued that non-practicing entities, like Radian, can suffer irreparable harm from ongoing infringement and may be entitled to injunctive relief, potentially signaling a shift in federal patent policy regarding injunctions for NPEs post-eBay v. MercExchange. Radian had initially filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in April 2025, seeking to halt Samsung's alleged infringement. However, Radian later withdrew this request after Samsung provided new evidence that reportedly undercut the immediate risk required for such an order. The Eastern District of Texas, presided over by Judge Rodney Gilstrap, remains a frequently chosen venue for patent litigation, especially those involving standard-essential patents (SEPs), further highlighting the significance of this case within the broader patent landscape.

This patent infringement litigation, Radian Memory Systems LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-01073, has seen several significant legal developments since its filing.

Filing & Initial Pleadings

Radian Memory Systems LLC filed its complaint against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. on December 23, 2024, in the Eastern District of Texas. The complaint alleged infringement of seven patents related to Radian's "Cooperative Flash Management" (CFM) technology, including U.S. Patent No. 11,709,772, 11,544,183, and 11,347,656. Radian claimed that Samsung infringed these patents through its Zoned Namespaces (ZNS) technology, adopted via the NVMe consortium, after Radian declined to join NVMe and offer royalty-free licenses.

Pre-trial Motions of Substance

• Motion for Preliminary Injunction (April 2025): Radian filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in April 2025, seeking to stop Samsung's alleged infringement during the litigation. Radian argued that it faced irreparable harm from lost licensing opportunities, diminished reputation, and erosion of its pioneer status. Samsung opposed this motion, arguing that Radian lacked standing, failed to demonstrate irreparable harm, and could be adequately compensated by monetary damages.
• DOJ/USPTO Statement of Interest (June 24, 2025): The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) filed a joint Statement of Interest in the case. They argued that patent owners, including non-practicing entities like Radian, can suffer irreparable harm from ongoing infringement and may be entitled to injunctive relief, potentially signaling a shift in federal patent policy.
• Withdrawal of Preliminary Injunction Motion (after June 24, 2025): Radian later withdrew its motion for a preliminary injunction. This withdrawal occurred after Samsung provided new evidence that reportedly undercut the immediate risk necessary for such an order.
• Motion to Dismiss (prior to January 19, 2026): Radian Memory Systems LLC moved to dismiss its own lawsuit in the district court. However, Radian explicitly "telegraphed it may file future lawsuits asserting the same Asserted Patents," as noted in an IPR decision.

Claim Construction (Markman)

A Markman/Claim Construction Hearing was set for February 26, 2026, before Judge Rodney Gilstrap.

Discovery Milestones

A deposition of Mark Jones, likely an expert witness on infringement, occurred on May 13, 2025.

Trial Events

Jury selection was set for August 31, 2026, with a Pretrial Conference scheduled for July 27, 2026. However, based on the median time-to-trial for the Eastern District of Texas (25.1 months), the projected start of trial was estimated to be February 2, 2027.

Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal

• Settlement and Dismissal (December 30-31, 2025): The case was settled between Radian and Samsung, with a joint motion to terminate IPRs filed on December 31, 2025. Docket entries indicate the case was "closed" on December 22, 2025. This settlement occurred approximately six months after the DOJ-USPTO Statement of Interest.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings

Several Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings were initiated by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. against Radian Memory Systems LLC concerning the asserted patents, including IPR2025-01266, which challenged U.S. Patent No. 11,544,183. Another related case is IPR2025-01376. These IPRs were terminated on account of the settlement reached between Radian and Samsung in December 2025.

Radian Memory Systems LLC is represented by a team of attorneys from two law firms: Caldwell Cassady & Curry P.C. and Miller Fair Henry PLLC.

Here are the details of the counsel of record for Radian Memory Systems LLC:

Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry P.C.

• Bradley W. Caldwell

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm Office Location: Dallas, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Caldwell Cassady & Curry is a prominent intellectual property litigation firm, frequently appearing in patent infringement cases, particularly in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Jason D. Cassady

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm Office Location: Dallas, Texas.

• John A. Curry

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm Office Location: Dallas, Texas.

• Hamad M. Hamad

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm Office Location: Dallas, Texas.

• Andrew T. Langford

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm Office Location: Dallas, Texas.

• Adrienne R. Dellinger

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm Office Location: Dallas, Texas.

• Alexander J. Gras

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm Office Location: Dallas, Texas.

Firm: Miller Fair Henry PLLC

• Andrea L. Fair
  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm Office Location: Tyler, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Miller Fair Henry PLLC is a Texas-based firm often serving as local counsel in Eastern District of Texas patent cases.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. are represented by a formidable team of attorneys from several prominent law firms, alongside their in-house legal counsel.

Here are the details of the counsel of record for the defendants:

Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP

• Sean S. Pak

  • Role: Lead Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: Likely Silicon Valley or Washington D.C., given the firm's major patent litigation hubs.
  • Experience Note: Quinn Emanuel is highly recognized for its expertise in complex and high-profile patent infringement disputes, particularly in the hi-tech space, and has a strong track record, including achieving complete defense verdicts for clients like Samsung.

• Victoria Maroulis

  • Role: Lead Counsel (Co-chairs the firm's patent litigation practice).
  • Firm Office Location: Silicon Valley, CA.
  • Experience Note: Specializes in patents related to telecommunications, software, semiconductors, and medical devices.

Firm: Kirkland & Ellis LLP

• Gregory Arovas

  • Role: Lead Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: New York, NY.
  • Experience Note: Represents plaintiffs and defendants in high-profile patent cases. Kirkland & Ellis is a global firm with a strong IP litigation practice known for its trial readiness and success in high-stakes patent litigation, including achieving significant defense-side wins for Samsung.

• Gregg LoCascio

  • Role: Lead Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: Washington D.C.
  • Experience Note: Regularly acts as lead counsel on high-stakes IP disputes.

• Michael De Vries

  • Role: Lead Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: Los Angeles, CA.
  • Experience Note: Consistently achieves victories in both plaintiff and defense-side patent litigation.

• James Hurst

  • Role: Lead Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: Chicago, IL.
  • Experience Note: A seasoned trial lawyer.

• Robert Appleby

  • Role: Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: New York, NY.
  • Experience Note: Focuses on patents and trade secret cases in state and federal courts.

• Brandon Brown

  • Role: Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: Bay Area, CA.
  • Experience Note: Specializes in high-tech patents.

• Sharre Lotfollahi

  • Role: Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: Los Angeles, CA.
  • Experience Note: Concentrates on patents related to semiconductors, microprocessors, and medical devices.

Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C.

• Fish & Richardson is a prominent IP law firm with extensive experience in patent litigation across various venues, including district courts, the Federal Circuit, the ITC, and the PTAB. They are recognized for handling a high volume of patent cases and specializing in patent appeals. While specific attorneys from Fish & Richardson for this case were not explicitly listed in the search results, the firm is often associated with Samsung's patent defense strategies.

Firm: Gillam & Smith LLP

• Melissa R. Smith
  • Role: Local Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: Tyler, TX.
  • Experience Note: Likely serves as local counsel in Eastern District of Texas patent cases, a common practice in the venue.

In-house Counsel (Samsung Electronics)

• Matthew Bathon

  • Role: Principal Legal Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: Samsung Electronics.
  • Experience Note: Coordinates Samsung's ITC and district court dockets and has prior experience litigating Section 337 investigations at the ITC and IP disputes in district courts.

• Phillip Lee

  • Role: Principal Legal Counsel.
  • Firm Office Location: Samsung Electronics US IP Center.
  • Experience Note: A veteran litigator with substantive experience in patent litigation, patent prosecution, and licensing, managing a docket of patent cases with outside counsel.

Other appearances:

• Arian Joseph Koochesfahani also filed a Notice of Attorney Appearance - Pro Hac Vice on behalf of all defendants, indicating his involvement, though his primary firm was not specified in the snippet.