Litigation

Untitled case

filed

5:25-cv-00052

Patents at issue (1)

Summary

A US patent infringement case, 5:25-cv-00052, was filed in the Texas Eastern District Court concerning US patent 12160681.

Case overview & background

Plain-language overview of the case: parties, accused product, patents at issue, and why the suit matters.

The patent infringement case 5:25-cv-00052 was filed in the Eastern District of Texas, Texarkana Division, before District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III. The plaintiff, Maxell, Ltd., a Japanese operating company known for electronics and energy solutions, has accused Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., multinational South Korean electronics giants, of infringing its patent. The litigation targets a wide array of Samsung's products, including smartphones and smart home hubs, alleging infringement across features such as various camera modes, photo grouping, media streaming applications (e.g., Netflix and Samsung TV), the SmartThings Network system, and visual display signal processing.

The sole patent at issue in this case is U.S. Patent No. 12,160,681. While specific details of its technical scope were not immediately available in a one-line summary, the context of the accused products suggests it likely relates to digital media processing, display technologies, or network integration within consumer electronics. The case is currently stayed as of April 2, 2026, pending further order of the Court. This stay may be related to an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding, IPR2025-01312, initiated by Samsung against Maxell concerning this patent, for which institution was granted on February 9, 2026.

This case is notable given Maxell's history of asserting patents against Samsung; for instance, a previous Maxell case against Samsung (5:23-cv-00092-RWS) resulted in a $112 million verdict for Maxell that was subsequently overturned by Judge Schroeder in November 2025. The Eastern District of Texas remains a prominent venue for patent litigation, having recently re-emerged as a top district for patent filings due to its plaintiff-friendly reputation, experienced judges, and commitment to expeditious trials, despite a dip in filings post- TC Heartland. The ongoing IPR proceeding and the broad scope of accused products add layers of complexity and potential industry impact to this particular dispute.

Key legal developments & outcome

Major rulings, motions, claim construction, settlements, and the present posture or final disposition.

Maxell, Ltd. initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, "Samsung") in the Texas Eastern District Court, concerning US patent 12160681 and other patents. The case, 5:25-cv-00052, is currently stayed pending inter partes review (IPR) proceedings.

Here are the key legal developments in chronological order:

  • 2025-04-21: Complaint Filed
    Maxell, Ltd. filed a complaint against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. This was a broader lawsuit asserting ten patents, including US patent 12160681, across a wide array of products such as smartphones, smart home hubs, and various features like camera modes, photo grouping, media streaming apps, the SmartThings Network system, and visual display signal processing.

  • 2025-08-18: Initial Docket Control Order and Discovery Orders Issued
    District Judge Robert W. Schroeder III issued a Docket Control Order, a Protective Order, a Discovery Order, an E-Discovery Order, and an Order Focusing Patent Claims and Prior Art. The Docket Control Order set several key deadlines, including amended pleadings due by 2026-02-18, a Markman Hearing for 2026-05-06, a Dispositive Motion Hearing for 2027-05-11, and a Pretrial Conference for 2027-08-10.

  • 2025-08-28 & 2025-10-12: Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings Initiated
    Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. filed IPR2025-01312 against Maxell, Ltd. challenging US patent 12160681. Separately, Samsung also filed IPR2025-01310 against Maxell, Ltd., also challenging US patent 12160681. These were part of a larger set of IPR petitions, IPR2025-01307 through -01316, filed by Samsung in response to Maxell's district court lawsuit, challenging all ten asserted patents.

  • 2025-10-24: Samsung Files Unopposed Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending IPR
    Samsung filed an Unopposed Motion to Stay Proceedings Pending Inter Partes Review, arguing that the outcome of the PTAB proceedings was likely to assist the court.

  • 2026-04-02: Motion to Stay Granted
    The Court granted Samsung's unopposed motion to stay proceedings pending inter partes review. This decision effectively paused the district court litigation while the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) evaluates the validity of the asserted patents. The scheduled Markman hearing on 2026-05-06 and other subsequent deadlines are affected by this stay.

The case remains stayed as of the current date, 2026-05-29, awaiting the outcomes of the various IPR proceedings at the PTAB. There have been no trial events, verdicts, post-trial motions, or a final judgment in the district court given the current stay.

Plaintiff representatives

Counsel of record for the plaintiff(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).

Here is the counsel of record representing the plaintiff, Maxell, Ltd., in the patent infringement case 5:25-cv-00052:

Lead Counsel (for Maxell, Ltd. in related PTAB proceedings, likely lead counsel in District Court):

  • Name: Scott M. Kelly

    • Role: Founding Partner, Head of Practice, Lead Counsel.
    • Firm: KellDann Law PLLC, McLean, VA.
    • Note: Focuses on patents, trademarks, and copyrights, with a strong emphasis on IP litigation and licensing. He previously served as an examiner at the USPTO.
  • Name: Kirk A. Sigmon

    • Role: Founding Partner, Chief Innovation Attorney, Back-Up Counsel.
    • Firm: KellDann Law PLLC, McLean, VA.
    • Note: Experienced in U.S., Japanese, Korean, Chinese, and European IP matters, including patent prosecution and enforcement in technologies like AI, communications systems, and video gaming. He has successfully represented both plaintiffs and defendants in multimillion-dollar patent infringement trials.
  • Name: Ross A. Dannenberg

    • Role: Founding Partner, Managing Partner, Back-Up Counsel.
    • Firm: KellDann Law PLLC, McLean, VA.
    • Note: Specializes in intellectual property relating to computer software, with extensive experience in patent, copyright, and trademark disputes, particularly in the video game industry.

Local Counsel (for Maxell, Ltd. in Eastern District of Texas):

  • Name: Melissa Richards Smith
    • Role: Partner, likely Local Counsel.
    • Firm: Gillam & Smith, LLP, Marshall, TX.
    • Note: Highly experienced trial lawyer in the Eastern District of Texas, handling patent cases for both plaintiffs and defendants, and frequently serves as local counsel. She has been recognized as a "go-to" lawyer by numerous Fortune 500 companies in intellectual property.

Unconfirmed Counsel:

Jesse Hindman of Edleson & Hindman is listed on PacerMonitor for case 5:25-cv-00052. However, his firm is based in San Diego, CA. While his firm's practice areas include intellectual property and they occasionally handle out-of-state cases with local counsel, specific documentation confirming his role as plaintiff's counsel for Maxell, Ltd. in this particular Eastern District of Texas case was not explicitly found. His typical role as local counsel is primarily in San Diego and Southern California. Therefore, his exact role for the plaintiff in this specific case remains unconfirmed.

Defendant representatives

Counsel of record for the defendant(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).

Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. are represented by a team of in-house counsel and outside counsel from DLA Piper and O'Melveny & Myers LLP.

The counsel of record for the defendants include:

In-house Counsel (Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.):

  • Matthew Bathon - Principal Legal Counsel, Samsung Electronics. Matthew Bathon coordinates Samsung's ITC and district court dockets and has extensive experience litigating Section 337 investigations before the International Trade Commission (ITC) and IP disputes in district courts. He previously worked as a partner at Steptoe LLP and as a senior investigative attorney in the ITC's Office of Unfair Import Investigations.
  • Tim Jezek - Principal Legal Counsel, Samsung Electronics America. Tim Jezek focuses on IP litigation and related policy issues, bringing over two decades of experience in both in-house and law firm settings.
  • Phillip Lee - Principal Legal Counsel, Samsung Electronics US IP Center. Phillip Lee is a veteran litigator with substantial experience in patent litigation, prosecution, and licensing across various technologies. He has appeared before federal district courts, the Patent Trial Appeal Board (PTAB), the ITC, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
  • Jae-Il Park - Legal Counsel, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Jae-Il Park is listed as Legal Counsel for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. in filings related to the IPR proceedings.

Outside Counsel:

  • DLA Piper LLP (US)

    • Sean C. Cunningham - Partner, Washington, D.C. Sean Cunningham was part of the DLA Piper team that secured a victory for Samsung in a previous case against Maxell, where a $112 million jury verdict was overturned.
    • Erin P. Gibson - Partner, Washington, D.C. Erin Gibson was also a member of the DLA Piper team involved in the successful overturning of the Maxell v. Samsung verdict.
    • Erik R. Fuehrer - Partner, Palo Alto, CA. Erik Fuehrer contributed to DLA Piper's defense of Samsung in the prior Maxell litigation.
    • Mark D. Fowler - Partner, Palo Alto, CA. Mark Fowler was part of the DLA Piper team that overturned the Maxell jury verdict.
    • Michael D. Jay - Partner, Los Angeles, CA. Michael Jay was involved in the DLA Piper team that secured a victory for Samsung against Maxell.
    • James M. Heintz - Partner, Reston, VA. James Heintz was also part of the DLA Piper team that successfully defended Samsung in the previous Maxell case.
    • Sangwon Sung - Associate, San Francisco, CA. Sangwon Sung provided support as an associate in the DLA Piper team during the prior Maxell v. Samsung litigation.
    • Paulina Starostka - Associate, Chicago, IL. Paulina Starostka was part of the DLA Piper team providing support in the previous Maxell case.
    • Alan A. Limbach - Palo Alto, CA. Alan Limbach is also listed as counsel for petitioners Samsung in related IPR proceedings.
    • Robert Buergi - DLA Piper LLP (US).
    • Angela Whitesell - DLA Piper (US).
    • Salvatore P. Tamburo - DLA Piper LLP (US).
  • O'Melveny & Myers LLP (specifically for related IPR proceedings, IPR2025-01312, IPR2025-01310, and IPR2025-01309)

    • William M. Fink - Lead Counsel, Washington, DC.
    • Brian Cook - Back-Up Counsel, Los Angeles, CA.
    • Nicholas Whilt - Back-Up Counsel, Los Angeles, CA.
    • Benjamin Haber - Back-Up Counsel, Los Angeles, CA.
    • Caitlin Hogan - Back-Up Counsel, New York, NY.
    • Raj Paul - Back-Up Counsel, Washington, DC.
  • Gillam & Smith, LLP (Local Counsel)

    • Melissa Richards Smith - Gillam & Smith, LLP.

It is important to note that the counsel information from search results may sometimes refer to related cases or IPR proceedings (e.g., IPR2025-01312, IPR2025-01310, IPR2025-01309, 5:23-cv-00092-RWS), but these firms and attorneys have a history of representing Samsung in patent litigation, particularly against Maxell in the Eastern District of Texas.