Untitled case

This patent infringement litigation, XiFi Networks R&D, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-01057, is currently active in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. The plaintiff, XiFi Networks R&D, Inc. (a Delaware corporation), has sued Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Republic of Korea) and its U.S. subsidiary, Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (New York), alleging infringement of eleven patents. While not explicitly stated in the provided search results, the plaintiff's name and the nature of the asserted patents against a major technology manufacturer like Samsung strongly suggest that XiFi Networks R&D, Inc. operates as a non-practicing entity (NPE) or patent assertion entity (PAE). Samsung Electronics is a global operating company renowned for its consumer electronics, including smartphones, tablets, and computers.

The core of the dispute centers on Samsung devices incorporating "multi-link Wi-Fi operations functionality," specifically features like "band allocation decision functionality," "preamble puncturing functionality," "transmit/receive functionality," and "link aggregation functionality". These functionalities are described as relating to the foundational architecture for Multi-Link Operations (MLO), a key feature of the Wi-Fi 7 standard. The patent specifically at issue, U.S. Patent No. 12,003,976, titled "Method and Apparatus for Processing Bandwidth Intensive Data Streams Using Virtual Media Access Control and Physical Layers," claims a device with a resource monitoring interface that evaluates data transfer characteristics of different bandwidth portions.

The case was filed on December 17, 2024, with an amended complaint following on March 11, 2025. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap and Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne are presiding over the case, with a Markman hearing held on May 1, 2026. The Eastern District of Texas is a historically plaintiff-friendly venue for patent litigation, often chosen for its expedited trial schedules and perceived sympathetic jury pool. Following the TC Heartland Supreme Court decision which limited venue for domestic corporations, the EDTX has seen a resurgence in patent filings, partly due to plaintiffs targeting foreign affiliates to circumvent stricter venue requirements. The case is notable for its focus on Wi-Fi 7 foundational technology and the procedural posture involving parallel challenges at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Samsung has filed multiple Inter Partes Review (IPR) and Post-Grant Review (PGR) petitions against the asserted patents; however, Judge Gilstrap denied Samsung's motion to stay the district court proceedings pending the outcome of these PTAB reviews on March 12, 2026, consistent with the EDTX's general practice of not granting such stays. A trial in this case is currently set for October 19, 2026.

This is an active patent infringement litigation case, XiFi Networks R&D, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, under case number 2:24-cv-01057. The case involves U.S. Patent 12,003,976, among several other asserted patents.

Here are the key legal developments in chronological order:

• Complaint Filing (2024-12-17): Plaintiff XiFi Networks R&D, Inc. filed its initial complaint against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.
• First Amended Complaint (2025-03-11): An amended complaint was filed by XiFi.
• First Amended Docket Control Order (2025-04-14): The district court issued an amended docket control order, setting key deadlines for the case, including a trial date of October 19, 2026.
• Defendants' Answer and Affirmative Defenses (2025-06-09): Samsung filed its answer and affirmative defenses to XiFi's first amended complaint.
• Defendants' P.R. 3.3 and 3.4 Invalidity Contentions (2025-06-18): Samsung submitted its invalidity contentions.
• Joint Claim Construction Statement (2026-02-27): The parties submitted a joint claim construction statement to the court.
• Amended Joint Claim Construction Statement (2026-03-12): An amended joint claim construction statement was filed, reflecting an agreement between the parties regarding the construction of one term.
• Claim Construction (Markman) Hearing (2026-05-01): A Markman hearing was held by the court to construe the disputed claim terms of the asserted patents. Attorney appearances for both plaintiff and defense were noted. As of the current date, the Markman order with the court's final claim constructions has not yet been publicly issued in the search results.
• Discovery: The parties are actively engaged in discovery, including the exchange of infringement contentions (filed pursuant to court orders dated February 24, 2025, and March 12, 2025) and invalidity contentions.
• Trial Date: The case is scheduled for trial on October 19, 2026.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

While specific IPR/PGR proceedings for U.S. Patent 12,003,976 were not directly found in the search results, it is known that Samsung has initiated Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings against at least one other patent asserted in this district court case. For instance, Patent Owner XiFi Networks R&D, Inc. responded to Samsung's petition for IPR of U.S. Patent No. 11,818,591 (IPR2025-01204), where the district court case 2:24-cv-01057 was referenced. In that IPR filing, XiFi requested the Director to exercise discretion and deny institution, arguing against the overlap with the district court proceedings and mentioning that the district court had set a trial date for October 19, 2026, which would decide validity before the PTAB's final written decision deadline. There is no indication from the provided search results that the district court case 2:24-cv-01057 has been stayed pending the outcome of any IPRs, or that a motion to stay specifically for this case has been granted.

Outcome/Present Posture:

The case is currently active and in the pre-trial phase, having completed the Markman hearing. A trial is scheduled for October 19, 2026.

Here is the counsel of record representing the plaintiff(s) in case 2:24-cv-01057, XiFi Networks R&D, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al:

• Aaron R. Fahrenkrog

  • Role: Partner, Trial Lawyer
  • Firm: Robins Kaplan LLP, Minneapolis, MN
  • Relevant experience: Mr. Fahrenkrog has a background in chemical engineering and is a trial lawyer with extensive patent litigation experience, having participated in preparing damage models exceeding a billion dollars and recovering hundreds of millions for clients. He has notably represented Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) in patent litigation against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. involving semiconductor and computing technologies and also has experience with Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings.

• Matthew L. Woods

  • Role: Partner
  • Firm: Robins Kaplan LLP, Minneapolis, MN
  • Relevant experience: Mr. Woods focuses his practice on intellectual property and antitrust law, with a strong background in patent litigation. He has represented Honeywell in patent litigation against the LCD consumer electronics industry and Intergraph Corp. in patent litigation involving microprocessor system design in East Texas, where he helped recover $500 million in settlements.

• Rebecca Bact

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Robins Kaplan LLP, Boston, MA
  • Relevant experience: Ms. Bact specializes in business litigation, including intellectual property and appellate matters. She has experience in trade secret and patent disputes across various technologies, handling all stages of litigation, including matters before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and the International Trade Commission (ITC).

• Garrett Parish

  • Role: Partner
  • Firm: Miller Fair Henry PLLC, Longview, TX
  • Relevant experience: Mr. Parish is adept in patent and complex commercial litigation, with significant experience in trials, particularly in the Eastern District of Texas. He co-secured an $11.5 million verdict for a client in a patent infringement case.

This is an active patent infringement case, 2:24-cv-01057, in the Texas Eastern District Court, where XiFi Networks R&D, Inc. is the plaintiff and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. are the defendants.

The counsel of record representing the defendants, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., include attorneys from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP and Gillam & Smith, LLP.

Here is a breakdown of the identified defense counsel:

• Patrick Thomas Schmidt
  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP – Los Angeles office
  • Note: Quinn Emanuel is a prominent law firm frequently involved in high-stakes intellectual property litigation.
• Jason Clarence Williams
  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP
  • Note: Quinn Emanuel is well-known for its extensive experience in patent litigation.
• Melissa Richards Smith
  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Gillam & Smith, LLP
  • Note: Gillam & Smith, LLP is a Texas-based firm often serving as local counsel in Eastern District of Texas patent cases.
• Sean S. Pak
  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP – San Francisco office
  • Note: Sean Pak is identified as counsel for the defendants.
• Kevin Hardy
  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP – Washington D.C. office
  • Note: Kevin Hardy is listed as counsel for the defendants.

While other firms like Robins Kaplan LLP and Miller Fair Henry PLLC were listed in initial search results related to the case, the provided snippets explicitly link Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP and Gillam & Smith, LLP to the representation of the Samsung defendants.The defendants in XiFi Networks R&D, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al, case number 2:24-cv-01057 in the Eastern District of Texas, are represented by counsel from Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP and Gillam & Smith, LLP.

Here is the breakdown of the identified defense counsel:

• Patrick Thomas Schmidt

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Los Angeles, CA
  • Note: Mr. Schmidt is a seasoned trial attorney with extensive experience in high-stakes commercial and intellectual property disputes, including patent infringement and trade secret matters, and has represented clients in cases involving satellite communications and other aerospace technologies.

• Jason Clarence Williams

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York, NY
  • Note: Mr. Williams' practice focuses on intellectual property litigation, including patent-based Section 337 investigations before the U.S. International Trade Commission and numerous patent infringement actions in U.S. district courts, covering diverse technologies such as LTE telecommunications and microprocessors.

• Melissa Richards Smith

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Gillam & Smith, LLP, Marshall, TX
  • Note: Ms. Smith is a partner with significant experience trying patent lawsuits in the Eastern District of Texas, having served as local counsel in over three thousand patent cases and achieving both non-infringement and invalidity verdicts.

• Sean S. Pak

  • Role: Co-Chair of National Intellectual Property Litigation Practice
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, San Francisco, CA
  • Note: Mr. Pak is a trial lawyer with extensive experience in litigating patents, trade secrets, and copyrights, and he served as lead counsel for Samsung Electronics in a trial in Marshall, Texas, where his team obtained a complete defense verdict.

• Kevin Hardy

  • Role: Partner, Intellectual Property Practice
  • Firm: Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Washington, D.C., DC
  • Note: Mr. Hardy is a trial lawyer with extensive experience in intellectual property disputes, including patent cases and standard essential patent licensing, and was trial counsel for Samsung Electronics in a 2023 jury trial in Marshall, Texas, obtaining a complete defense verdict.