Litigation

Untitled case

litigation

4:25-cv-00886

Patents at issue (1)

9350649PTAB: discretionary denial

Summary

This is a critical litigation case involving US Patent 9350649 filed in the Texas Eastern District Court.

Case overview & background

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

Competitive Access Systems, Inc. (CAS) has initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Research America in the Eastern District of Texas. Filed on August 15, 2025, in the Sherman Division under Judge Sean D. Jordan, the case centers on allegations that Samsung's modern cellular products infringe on CAS's patents. Competitive Access Systems, Inc. is identified as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE), and a technology design and development company founded by Eric Delangis, whose background includes designing communications systems. The defendants, collectively referred to as "Samsung," are major operating companies in the high-tech and consumer electronics industry, manufacturing and selling a wide range of devices.

The core of the dispute involves Samsung's products, particularly its Galaxy Smartphones, which are accused of infringing by implementing 3GPP standards for simultaneous use of 4G LTE and 5G connections. Specific technologies implicated include E-UTRAN New Radio-Dual Connectivity (EN-DC), Carrier Aggregation (CA), and Multipath TCP (MPTCP). Samsung's Galaxy S10 (its first 5G smartphone), S20 5G, Note20 5G, S21 5G series, A54 5G, Note4, S5, S6, and S8 models are listed among the allegedly infringing products, along with associated base stations and their components. The litigation asserts six U.S. Patents: 8,861,349; 9,350,649; 11,418,641; 11,582,343; 8,228,801, and 10,868,908, with US Patent 9,350,649 being central to this case. U.S. Patent 9,350,649 generally relates to systems and methods for multipath communications, enabling improved data transfer over multiple network connections simultaneously.

This case is notable due to its "NPE (Individual)" plaintiff, Competitive Access Systems, Inc., asserting patents against a global technology leader like Samsung, reflecting common patterns in patent litigation where non-practicing entities seek to enforce intellectual property rights against large manufacturers. The Eastern District of Texas is a frequently chosen venue for patent infringement cases, known for its specialized patent docket and reputation for being favorable to patentees, providing a strategic advantage for plaintiffs. The case's focus on essential 4G and 5G telecommunication technologies, such as EN-DC and CA, underscores its potential impact on the broader wireless and smartphone industry. No specific parallel PTAB IPRs directly linked to US Patent 9,350,649 within this litigation context have been identified in the immediate search results.

Key legal developments & outcome

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

Competitive Access Systems, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al. (4:25-cv-00886) is an active patent infringement litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas concerning U.S. Patent No. 9,350,649, among others. The case was filed on August 15, 2025.

Here's a chronological summary of the key legal developments and current posture:

Filing & Initial Pleadings:

  • Complaint Filed (2025-08-15): Plaintiff Competitive Access Systems, Inc. (CAS) initiated the lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Research America (collectively, "Samsung"). The complaint alleges infringement of six U.S. Patents: 8,861,349; 9,350,649; 11,418,641; 11,582,343; 8,228,801; and 10,868,908. The patent central to this case, U.S. Patent No. 9,350,649, titled "Multipath Communication Devices and Methods," was issued on May 24, 2016. The complaint seeks past money damages for Samsung's alleged acts of making, using, selling, offering for sale, and/or importing infringing products, specifically mentioning Samsung's Galaxy Smartphones that implement 3GPP standards in conjunction with simultaneous 4G LTE and 5G connections.

Pre-Trial Motions of Substance:

  • As of May 24, 2026, specific substantive pre-trial motions and their outcomes within this particular case (4:25-cv-00886) are not publicly detailed in the provided search results. However, related litigation involving Competitive Access Systems, Inc. against Apple Inc. saw Apple move to dismiss CAS's complaint on Section 101 unpatentability grounds, indicating that similar motions could be anticipated in the Samsung case.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:
Several Inter Partes Review (IPR) petitions have been filed by Red Hat, Inc. against patents owned by Competitive Access Systems, Inc., including those asserted in the district court litigation:

  • IPR2025-01371 (Filed 2025-08-01): Red Hat, Inc. filed an IPR against Competitive Access Systems, Inc. related to U.S. Patent No. 10,868,908 (one of the patents asserted in the Samsung litigation), which was discretionarily denied on November 20, 2025. This IPR proceeding also lists 4:25-cv-00886 as a related case and explicitly mentions US 9,350,649 B2 as a related patent.
  • IPR2025-01372 (Filed 2025-08-03): Red Hat, Inc. filed another IPR against Competitive Access Systems, Inc., which references the district court case 4:25-cv-00886.
  • IPR2025-01380 (Filed 2025-08-06): Red Hat, Inc. filed an IPR against Competitive Access Systems, Inc., also mentioning the district court case 4:25-cv-00886.

The USPTO has implemented recent policy changes affecting IPRs, particularly regarding discretionary denials and the requirements for petitioners in parallel proceedings. These changes emphasize strict enforcement of identifying claim elements in prior art and grant the Director more authority over institution decisions, which could influence any future IPRs or motions to stay litigation pending IPR outcomes.

Current Posture:
The case was filed in August 2025, making it a relatively new litigation. Given the filing date and the most recent docket activity noted in some sources (August 15, 2025, or January 23, 2026), the case is likely in its early to mid-stages, potentially involving initial discovery, responsive pleadings, and preliminary motions. No information is available regarding claim construction (Markman) outcomes, specific discovery milestones beyond the initial phase, trial events, verdict, post-trial motions, settlement, or final judgment as of the current date.

Plaintiff representatives

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

The plaintiff, Competitive Access Systems, Inc. (CAS), is represented by attorneys from Stinson LLP and The Simon Law Firm PC, along with local counsel from Gillam & Smith, LLP.

Here is a breakdown of the identified counsel:

Stinson LLP

  • Kevin Robinowitz (Counsel) - Stinson LLP.
  • Benjamin Levin (Counsel) - Stinson LLP.
  • Judith Samilda Araujo (Counsel) - Stinson LLP.
  • Julie Scheipeter (Counsel) - Stinson LLP.
  • Christopher Reed Clayton (Counsel) - Stinson LLP.
  • Austin Diehl (Counsel) - Stinson LLP.
  • B Scott Eidson (Counsel) - Stinson LLP.

The Simon Law Firm PC

  • Timothy D Krieger (Counsel) - The Simon Law Firm PC.

Gillam & Smith, LLP

  • Melissa Richards Smith (Local Counsel) - Gillam & Smith, LLP.
    • Ms. Smith is a recognized patent litigator in the Eastern District of Texas, a popular venue for patent cases.

Defendant representatives

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

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Research America are represented by attorneys from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, and local counsel from Gillam & Smith, LLP.

The following attorneys have made appearances on behalf of Samsung:

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP (Lead Counsel)

  • Luke Hampton MacDonald (Attorney) - Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
  • Gerald F. Ivey (Attorney) - Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner LLP (Washington D.C. office).
  • Alex Park (Attorney) - Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
  • Benjamin R. Schlesinger (Attorney) - Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP (Atlanta office).
  • Charles H. Suh (Attorney) - Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunn LLP (Reston office).
  • Shawn S. Chang (Attorney) - Finnegan.
  • Yi Yu (Attorney) - Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
  • Joseph M. Myles (Attorney) - Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garrett & Dunner LLP (Washington D.C. office).
  • Parmanand K. Sharma (Attorney) - Finnegan Henderson Farabow Garret Dunner, LLP.
  • Victor Palace (Attorney) - Finnegan.

Gillam & Smith, LLP (Local Counsel)

  • Melissa Richards Smith (Attorney) - Gillam & Smith, LLP.