Untitled case

This patent infringement litigation, MEMS Innovations, LLC v. TDK Corporation et al, Case No. 2:22-cv-00434, was filed on November 8, 2022, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiff, MEMS Innovations, LLC, is identified as a patent monetization entity (PAE) and an exclusive licensee of the asserted patents, which are owned by the Korean Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI). The defendants are TDK Corporation, TDK Corporation of America, and InvenSense Inc. TDK Corporation is a global electronics company specializing in electronic components and sensors, while InvenSense Inc., a TDK Group Company, focuses on MEMS inertial sensors for various applications.

The lawsuit alleges infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,812,505, titled "Piezoelectric microspeaker". The accused products are the defendants' "ultrasonic 'Chirp Sensors'," specifically targeting their incorporation of piezoelectric microspeakers utilizing microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) with certain designs. The case falls under the purview of District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, a judge well-known for presiding over a significant number of patent cases, and was referred to Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. The Eastern District of Texas, particularly the Marshall Division where Judge Gilstrap sits, has historically been a highly attractive venue for patent plaintiffs, including NPEs, due to its expedited litigation timelines, plaintiff-friendly local rules, and judges with extensive experience in patent law, though the impact of the TC Heartland decision in 2017 has led to evolving strategies for establishing venue.

This case is notable for involving a PAE asserting patents against a prominent electronics manufacturer in a forum known for its plaintiff-favorable environment. The rapid progression of the case, which was filed in November 2022 and closed by May 1, 2023, suggests a relatively swift resolution, likely through settlement or dismissal, although the specific outcome details are not publicly specified beyond its closure. The litigation highlights the ongoing trend of patent monetization entities targeting technology companies in strategic venues for the assertion of intellectual property related to widely adopted electronic components like MEMS sensors.

Here's a summary of the key legal developments and outcome for the patent infringement litigation MEMS Innovations, LLC v. TDK Corporation et al. (E.D. Tex. Case No. 2:22-cv-00434) concerning US Patent 7,812,505.

Case Overview:

• Plaintiff: MEMS Innovations, LLC
• Defendant: TDK Corporation et al.
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
• Case Number: 2:22-cv-00434
• Patent at Issue: US Patent 7,812,505
• Status: Closed (as of May 1, 2023)

Key Legal Developments and Outcome:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings:

  • Complaint Filed: On November 8, 2022, MEMS Innovations, LLC filed a patent infringement lawsuit against TDK Corporation et al. in the Eastern District of Texas, asserting US Patent 7,812,505.

• Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

  • No specific details about substantive pre-trial motions (like motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay pending IPR) are readily available in the public summaries, but the relatively short duration of the case suggests such motions might have played a role or the case was resolved early.

• Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:

  • There is no indication that the case proceeded to a Markman hearing or claim construction order. Given the rapid closure of the case, it is highly unlikely to have reached this stage.

• Discovery Milestones:

  • Publicly available summaries do not detail specific discovery milestones for this case.

• Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-Trial Motions:

  • The case did not proceed to trial.

• Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal — Final Disposition:

  • The case was closed on May 1, 2023. The rapid closure suggests an early settlement or dismissal, although the exact terms of the disposition are not publicly detailed in the search results.

• Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

  • A search for Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceedings related to US Patent 7,812,505 through the USPTO PTAB database (P-TACTS) did not immediately yield a direct match for this specific patent in the provided search results. Without a direct hit, it cannot be confirmed if any PTAB proceedings were initiated or if they had an effect on this particular litigation.

Summary:
The litigation, MEMS Innovations, LLC v. TDK Corporation et al., was filed on November 8, 2022, in the Eastern District of Texas, asserting infringement of US Patent 7,812,505. The case had a relatively short lifespan, being closed on May 1, 2023, indicating a swift resolution, likely through settlement or an unopposed dismissal before significant pre-trial proceedings or claim construction. No parallel PTAB proceedings for the asserted patent were identified from the search results.

It appears there might be a discrepancy in the plaintiff's name as provided in the initial case summary versus the legal developments section. The initial case summary identifies the plaintiff as "Uniloc 2017 LLC" in a case against "[[Samsung Electronics Co.](/litigations/by-defendant/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.), Ltd.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.)" However, the subsequent "Key legal developments & outcome" section and initial search results consistently refer to the plaintiff as "MEMS Innovations, LLC" and the defendant as "TDK Corporation et al." in case 2:22-cv-00434. For the purpose of identifying counsel, I will proceed with the information from the "Key legal developments & outcome" section and search results, which name MEMS Innovations, LLC as the plaintiff in case 2:22-cv-00434.

Here is the identified counsel of record for MEMS Innovations, LLC in 2:22-cv-00434:

Counsel for MEMS Innovations, LLC

• Jonathan Stroud
  • Role: General Counsel for MEMS Innovations LLC (likely in-house counsel).
  • Firm: MEMS Innovations LLC
  • Note: Jonathan Stroud is noted as General Counsel at MEMS Innovations LLC. His role suggests he is involved in the overall legal strategy and management of litigation for the company.

The previously generated sections indicate the defendant is "TDK Corporation et al." However, the initial case overview identified "Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd." as the defendant, and the "Key legal developments & outcome" section referred to "MEMS Innovations, LLC v. TDK Corporation et al." It's important to clarify which defendant is being discussed for case 2:22-cv-00434. Given the conflicting information, and the case number in the prompt directly matching the one for MEMS Innovations, LLC v. TDK Corporation et al., the defendant for this specific case will be treated as TDK Corporation and "et al." meaning there may be other defendants.

Based on available information for case 2:22-cv-00434 in the Eastern District of Texas, the following firms frequently represent defendants in patent litigation and are often found in significant cases in the Eastern District of Texas, though specific attorney appearances for TDK Corporation or other defendants in this particular case were not explicitly detailed in the search results.

However, drawing on the typical landscape of patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas and the prominent firms known for defending against patent assertion entities (PAEs) like MEMS Innovations, the following firms and their typical roles can be inferred for defendant representation, if not directly confirmed for this specific case through docket entries in the provided snippets:

• Alston & Bird LLP: This firm has a substantial patent litigation practice and is recognized as a market leader for patent litigation, particularly for representing defendants. They are noted for being among the top firms for most active and best-performing in defending patent cases. They have a deep bench of IP litigators with technical degrees and experience in various forums including federal courts, the PTAB, and the ITC.

• Haynes and Boone, LLP: Haynes Boone has a Chambers-ranked intellectual property practice group with highly regarded national patent litigation teams. They are active in major patent litigation venues, including the Eastern District of Texas, and have extensive experience in PTAB proceedings.

• Winston & Strawn LLP: Winston & Strawn's Patent Litigation Practice is one of the most active and highly regarded in the country for patent defense. They have a strong presence in high-tech cases and boast a team of trial lawyers with significant technical abilities.

• Ropes & Gray LLP: This firm advises major tech and commercial enterprises in a wide range of high-stakes patent litigation cases at both the trial and appeal stages, with experience in all major patent litigation forums. Their intellectual property group is a global team with offices in key cities, including Silicon Valley and Seoul, which could be relevant given the international nature of TDK Corporation. They have experience with complex infringement cases and matters relating to patent assertion entities.

Without direct docket information explicitly naming the attorneys for TDK Corporation et al. in case 2:22-cv-00434, specific names, roles (lead counsel, local counsel), and office locations for individual attorneys cannot be definitively provided from the search results. However, the listed firms frequently engage experienced patent litigators who serve as lead counsel, often collaborating with local counsel in the Eastern District of Texas. These firms have extensive experience in patent litigation, including defending major technology companies and addressing challenges from patent assertion entities.