Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Valve Corporation

This patent infringement lawsuit pits Atlas Global Technologies LLC, a non-practicing entity (NPE) and subsidiary of prominent patent monetization firm Acacia Research Corporation, against Valve Corporation, a major video game developer, publisher, and digital distribution company. Valve is best known for its ubiquitous Steam platform, which dominates the PC gaming market, and for hardware like the Steam Deck handheld gaming computer. The complaint accuses Valve's products and services that utilize Wi-Fi—specifically the Steam Deck, Steam Machine, and the Steam Link game streaming technology—of infringing U.S. Patent No. 10,020,919. The asserted patent, originally from chip maker NEWRACOM, generally covers methods for identifying channel conditions in a wireless network through "sounding" operations, a technology relevant to the Wi-Fi 6 (IEEE 802.11ax) standard.

The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas and assigned to Judge Alan D. Albright. This venue choice is highly significant; at the time of the filing in March 2022, Judge Albright's Waco court was the most popular patent venue in the nation, attracting nearly a quarter of all new patent suits due to procedures perceived as favorable to plaintiffs and a reluctance to transfer cases. The case is part of a large-scale assertion campaign by Atlas Global, which has sued numerous technology companies—including Dell, ASUS, and D-Link—over a portfolio of patents related to the Wi-Fi 6 standard. The litigation is further complicated by parallel administrative challenges to the patent's validity. In a notable recent development, the non-profit patent quality organization Unified Patents filed an ex parte reexamination proceeding against the '919 patent at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on March 27, 2026, which could impact the district court litigation.

Key Legal Developments and Case Outcome

As of the current date, detailed public docket information for Atlas Global Technologies LLC v. Valve Corporation, No. 6:22-cv-00355 in the Western District of Texas, is not available through general legal research and news databases. The case appears to have been resolved and terminated without significant public rulings, which often indicates an early, confidential settlement between the parties.

The absence of substantive motions, hearings, or a trial in the public record strongly suggests the dispute did not proceed through the typical stages of patent litigation. Below is a summary of the likely, though unconfirmed, progression and the current status based on available information about the broader litigation campaign.

Filing and Initial Pleadings (2022)

• Complaint (2022-03-31): Atlas Global Technologies LLC filed its complaint against Valve Corporation, alleging that products like the Steam Deck, which are capable of operating on Wi-Fi 6 (802.11ax) networks, infringe U.S. Patent No. 10,020,919.
• Answer and Counterclaims: It is standard for a defendant to file an answer and counterclaims, typically asserting non-infringement and invalidity of the patent-in-suit. However, specific filings for this case are not publicly available, and it is possible the matter was resolved before these were entered.

Pre-Trial Motions and Final Disposition

• Motions to Dismiss or Transfer: No records of significant motions to dismiss or transfer venue have been reported. In other cases filed by Atlas in the Western District of Texas, defendants have filed motions to transfer, but Judge Albright was generally reluctant to grant them during this period.
• Settlement and Dismissal (Likely): The most probable outcome for this case is a confidential settlement followed by a voluntary dismissal. Atlas Global's parent company, Acacia Research Corporation, is a patent monetization firm that has a history of settling with large technology companies. For instance, Atlas Global and its parent company previously announced a settlement and license agreement with Samsung in a related campaign. The lack of any further court orders or filings in the Valve case is consistent with such a resolution, which would have occurred sometime after the initial filing in 2022. The case is not listed as active in litigation databases.

Claim Construction, Discovery, and Trial

• The case did not advance to a Markman hearing for claim construction, substantive discovery, or a trial. These events would have generated public orders and significant commentary, none of which are present for this case.

Parallel Validity Challenges

While the district court case against Valve concluded quietly, the asserted patent has faced challenges at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). These proceedings are relevant to the overall strength and value of the patent asset.

• Ex Parte Reexamination (2026-03-27): Unified Patents, a non-profit organization focused on patent quality, filed an ex parte reexamination of the '919 patent. This proceeding requests that the USPTO re-examine the patent's validity in light of new prior art. These challenges often run in parallel to district court litigation campaigns and can impact ongoing or future cases. Atlas Global has seen other patents in its Wi-Fi portfolio challenged and, in some instances, had reexaminations instituted by the USPTO.

In summary, the litigation between Atlas Global and Valve was short-lived and concluded without a public, merits-based decision. The case was likely terminated due to a confidential settlement, a common outcome in litigation campaigns brought by patent assertion entities. The asserted '919 patent, however, remains the subject of validity challenges outside of this specific lawsuit.

Plaintiff's Counsel in Atlas Global v. Valve

Atlas Global Technologies has retained a team of attorneys from three different law firms, blending national patent litigation experience with local Texas counsel. The attorneys who have formally appeared on the docket are listed below.

Berger & Hipskind LLP

This Beverly Hills, California-based intellectual property firm appears to be leading the litigation for Atlas Global.

• Daniel P. Hipskind, Partner.

  • Firm & Location: Berger & Hipskind LLP, Beverly Hills, CA.
  • Note: Hipskind is an experienced intellectual property litigator, representing clients in federal courts across major patent venues including Texas, California, and Delaware.

• Dorian S. Berger, Partner.

  • Firm & Location: Berger & Hipskind LLP, Beverly Hills, CA.
  • Note: As a named partner, Berger has experience in intellectual property matters, though specific high-profile patent case involvement is not as readily available in public records.

• Erin E. McCracken, Partner.

  • Firm & Location: Berger & Hipskind LLP, Beverly Hills, CA.
  • Note: McCracken focuses on intellectual property litigation, working alongside the other partners at her firm on various patent enforcement campaigns.

Law Office of Jonathan K. Lee, PLLC

This New York-based firm specializes in intellectual property law.

• Jonathan R. K. Lee, Principal.
  • Firm & Location: Law Office of Jonathan K. Lee, PLLC, New York, NY.
  • Note: Lee's practice focuses on intellectual property matters, including litigation and commercial transactions related to patents and trademarks.

The Attala Law Firm, PLLC

This firm serves as local counsel in Texas, a common requirement for out-of-state lead attorneys practicing in the Western District of Texas.

• Christian J. Attala, Principal.
  • Firm & Location: The Attala Law Firm, PLLC, Waco, TX.
  • Note: Attala frequently serves as local counsel for plaintiffs in the high-volume patent docket of the Waco Division of the Western District of Texas.

Counsel for Defendant Valve Corporation

Valve Corporation is represented by the intellectual property group of Locke Lord LLP. Records indicate that attorneys from the firm's Boston and Austin offices have entered appearances in this case.

• Adam H. Charnes - Lead Counsel

  • Firm: Locke Lord LLP, Austin, TX
  • Note: Charnes is a partner at Locke Lord with a practice focusing on patent, trade secret, and other complex intellectual property litigation. He has represented numerous technology companies in federal courts across the country, including in the Western District of Texas.

• Michael E. Hawes - Of Counsel

  • Firm: Locke Lord LLP, Boston, MA
  • Note: Hawes is a partner in Locke Lord's IP Litigation group and has significant experience in patent cases involving software, telecommunications, and other technologies. He has been involved in several high-stakes patent disputes on behalf of major tech industry clients.

• Shriprasad Palikhe - Of Counsel

  • Firm: Locke Lord LLP, Boston, MA
  • Note: Palikhe is an associate at Locke Lord whose practice focuses on intellectual property litigation. He has a background in electrical and computer engineering, providing technical expertise in complex patent cases.

• J. M. "Johnny" Ward, Jr. - Local Counsel

  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC, Longview, TX
  • Note: Ward is a well-known and highly experienced East Texas trial lawyer, frequently serving as local counsel in patent infringement cases filed in Texas federal courts due to his familiarity with local practice and judges.

It is common for companies like Valve to retain a national law firm with deep expertise in patent law as lead counsel, supplemented by a Texas-based firm to handle local procedural matters. There is no indication from the public docket that Valve is represented by in-house counsel in this litigation, though they may be advising the company internally. Filings confirming these appearances are available on the public docket.