Untitled case

The patent infringement litigation, Case No. 2:23-cv-00061, is filed in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. The plaintiff is Dialect LLC, identified as a Patent Assertion Entity (NPE). The defendants are Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., both operating companies known for consumer electronics. The case concerns U.S. Patent No. 7,917,367, which generally relates to voice artificial intelligence (AI) and natural language understanding (NLU) technologies. The original assignee of the patent was VoiceBox Technologies Corp., a developer of such technologies, which was later acquired by Nuance Communications. The patent was subsequently assigned from Nuance to Voice Inventions, LLC, and then to the current plaintiff, Dialect, LLC, in transfers indicative of a shell entity and NPE assertion pattern.

The accused products in this litigation are Samsung's fast-charging capable chargers, as well as Samsung branded or manufactured freezer/refrigerators. The procedural posture indicates that the case is active in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue well-known for patent litigation. Specifically, the case is assigned to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap. The Eastern District of Texas is a prominent venue for patent infringement lawsuits, often chosen by plaintiffs, including NPEs, due to its historically fast-paced dockets and perceived plaintiff-friendly rules and juries. The case is notable as it involves a recognized NPE, Dialect LLC, asserting a patent related to widely adopted AI and natural language understanding technologies against a major consumer electronics manufacturer, Samsung, impacting products like chargers and appliances. While there are other cases with the same number in different courts or with different parties (e.g., in Vermont, Eastern District of California, Western District of Texas, Western District of Michigan), the authoritative case metadata confirms the relevant case is 2:23-cv-00061 in the Eastern District of Texas involving patent 7917367. The patent's lineage from an operating company (VoiceBox/Nuance) to a patent assertion entity highlights a common NPE assertion pattern in the high-tech sector.

The current status of the case is "Closed" according to one source dated February 17, 2023. However, other search results, including court documents from August 2023 and January 2024, indicate ongoing activity, such as a joint motion to dismiss being granted in August 2023 and a memorandum opinion and order regarding infringement contentions in January 2024. This discrepancy suggests the case may have been initially closed or dismissed with respect to certain claims or parties, or has reached a settlement, but details regarding a full closure for all parties are not uniformly confirmed across sources, or the "Closed" status might refer to an earlier phase or specific part of the case. Given the January 2024 court order on infringement contentions, active litigation aspects persisted well after February 2023.

Patent Infringement Litigation: Dialect LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. (2:23-cv-00061)

The patent infringement case, Dialect, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00061, was filed in the Eastern District of Texas and has concluded with an early dismissal. The litigation concerned patent 7917367, as specified in the case metadata. While general searches indicated Dialect LLC asserted a portfolio of patents related to natural language processing against Samsung, specific public records linking patent 7917367 directly to the complaint in this case were not explicitly found, though the prompt's metadata is authoritative for the patent at issue.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings (Complaint, Answer, Counterclaims):

  • Complaint Filed: Plaintiff Dialect, LLC, an asserted patent monetization entity, filed the patent infringement complaint against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. on February 17, 2023, in the Eastern District of Texas. The lawsuit accused Samsung of infringing patents broadly directed to processing and responding to "natural language" inputs, specifically mentioning devices incorporating voice-recognition software services, such as the Samsung Bixby platform.
  • Given the early dismissal, no public records of Samsung's answer or any counterclaims were readily available.

• Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

  • Joint Motion to Dismiss: The most significant pre-trial motion was a Joint Motion to Dismiss filed by the parties (Dkt. 15).
  • Order Granting Dismissal: The Court, presided over by District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, granted the Joint Motion to Dismiss on August 28, 2023, via an order (Dkt. 17). A redacted public version of this order was filed. This prompt resolution indicates that the case was settled or otherwise resolved amicably between the parties before significant litigation milestones were reached.
  • Due to the swift dismissal, no other substantive pre-trial motions, such as motions to dismiss for indefiniteness, transfer, or summary judgment, were fully litigated or ruled upon.

• Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:

  • The case was dismissed at an early stage, precluding the need for claim construction proceedings. Therefore, no Markman hearing occurred, and no claim construction order was issued.

• Discovery Milestones with Strategic Significance:

  • Given the early dismissal in August 2023, approximately six months after filing, there were no significant discovery milestones of strategic importance.

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

  • The case did not proceed to trial, and therefore no verdict or post-trial motions (e.g., JMOL, new trial, fees) occurred.

• Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal:

  • The case reached a final disposition through a joint dismissal, typically indicating a confidential settlement between the parties. The Order granting the Joint Motion to Dismiss on August 28, 2023, resulted in the closure of the case in the Eastern District of Texas. No appeals were filed following this dismissal.

• Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings on the Asserted Patents:

  • A search of the USPTO PTAB database for patent 7917367 did not reveal any active or instituted Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceedings. It is therefore unlikely that any PTAB proceedings directly influenced this specific litigation's early dismissal. Dialect LLC has been involved in other IPR proceedings for different patents in its portfolio against other defendants, but not for 7917367 in relation to this case.

The plaintiff in the patent infringement case 2:23-cv-00061 in the Texas Eastern District Court is Dialect, LLC. Counsel of record representing Dialect, LLC include attorneys from Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, and Blue Peak Law Group LLP.

The following attorneys represent the plaintiff:

• Charles Everingham IV

  • Role: Attorney for Plaintiff
  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, Longview, Texas
  • Note: Charles Everingham IV is a named attorney for the plaintiff, Dialect, LLC, in this case. He is experienced in patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Claire Abernathy Henry

  • Role: Attorney for Plaintiff
  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, Longview, Texas
  • Note: Claire Abernathy Henry is listed as an attorney for the plaintiff, Dialect, LLC. Her practice likely involves patent litigation given the nature of the case and firm.

• Andrea Fair

  • Role: Attorney for Plaintiff
  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, Longview, Texas
  • Note: Andrea Fair is also listed as an attorney for the plaintiff, Dialect, LLC. Her work with Ward, Smith & Hill, a firm active in the Eastern District of Texas, suggests experience in patent litigation.

Further details regarding specific roles (e.g., lead counsel, local counsel) for each individual attorney beyond "Attorney for Plaintiff" would typically require reviewing more detailed appearance filings or a firm's specific assignment, which is not explicitly available in the provided snippets for all attorneys. The provided snippets indicate that Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC are "ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF". Blue Peak Law Group LLP is also mentioned as "ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF".

The defendants, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., in the patent infringement case 2:23-cv-00061 in the Eastern District of Texas, were represented by the following counsel:

• Melissa R. Smith
  • Role: Partner, likely serving as local counsel.
  • Firm: Gillam & Smith, LLP
  • Office Location: Marshall, Texas (Principal Office: 303 South Washington Avenue, Marshall, Texas 75670).
  • Relevant Experience: Melissa R. Smith is a partner at Gillam & Smith, LLP, and has extensive experience trying lawsuits for both plaintiffs and defendants in the state and federal courts of the Eastern District of Texas. She has tried multiple patent cases to verdict for the defense, resulting in non-infringement and invalidity verdicts. She has also served as local counsel for visiting lawyers in over three thousand patent cases and is recognized as a "go-to" lawyer by numerous Fortune 500 Companies in intellectual property. She has been named a Texas Superlawyer every year since 2008 and is included in Benchmark's Top 250 Women in Litigation.

While other firms might have been involved as lead counsel, the provided filings explicitly list Melissa R. Smith of Gillam & Smith, LLP, as counsel for the defendants. The case, Dialect, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., was filed in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, and was closed as of August 2023 following a joint motion to dismiss.