BOE Technology Group Co Ltd v. Samsung Display Co Ltd

This case, IPR2025-01480, involves an Inter Partes Review (IPR) filed by BOE Technology Group Co Ltd against Samsung Display Co Ltd before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. BOE Technology Group is a Chinese electronic components producer and a leading IoT innovation company, specializing in intelligent interface products and services, including being one of the world's largest manufacturers of LCD, OLEDs, and flexible displays. Samsung Display Co Ltd, headquartered in South Korea, is a global manufacturer of OLED and QD-OLED panels used in various devices like smartphones, TVs, and laptops. Both companies are major players in the display technology industry. The specific accused product, service, or technology is not explicitly detailed in the IPR filing, as IPRs focus on the patentability of claims rather than specific infringement allegations.

The patent at issue in this IPR is U.S. Patent No. 10,430,015. A one-line technical sketch of this patent (based on information for a similarly numbered but older patent, as specific details for 10,430,015 are not readily available through general search) would likely relate to display technology, given the core businesses of both parties. However, without specific details for patent 10,430,015, a precise technical sketch is not possible. (It is important to note that the search results for "patent 10430015 technical description" predominantly show information for US Patent 4,230,015 which pertains to a "tamborine." This is clearly not the patent at issue in a dispute between these display technology companies, indicating a lack of publicly available, easily accessible descriptive information for patent 10,430,015 in this context.)

The procedural posture of this case was an Inter Partes Review before the PTAB. The IPR was filed on September 15, 2025, and terminated on December 30, 2025, due to a settlement between the parties. IPRs are administrative proceedings at the USPTO designed to review the patentability of one or more claims in an issued patent based on prior art. This venue is notable because IPRs are a common and often effective way for alleged infringers to challenge the validity of patents outside of district court litigation. The settlement of this IPR suggests that the parties reached an agreement resolving their dispute regarding the patentability of the '015 patent, potentially impacting broader licensing or litigation strategies between these industry giants. The high-stakes competition in the display technology market between BOE and Samsung makes any intellectual property dispute between them noteworthy, often indicative of broader industry trends and competitive dynamics.

The provided case, IPR2025-01480, is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, not a patent infringement litigation in a district court. As such, many of the typical legal developments found in district court litigation, such as complaints, answers, counterclaims, motions to dismiss or transfer, Markman hearings, discovery milestones, trials, or post-trial motions, are not applicable.

The key legal developments for this IPR proceeding are as follows:

• Filing of Petition: On September 15, 2025, BOE Technology Group Co Ltd (Petitioner) filed a petition for Inter Partes Review against U.S. Patent No. 10,430,015, owned by Samsung Display Co Ltd (Patent Owner).
• Termination due to Settlement: The IPR proceeding was terminated on December 30, 2025, due to a settlement between the parties.
• Outcome: The IPR was settled between BOE Technology Group Co Ltd and Samsung Display Co Ltd on December 30, 2025, before the PTAB made a decision on institution.

There were no parallel PTAB IPR/PGR proceedings noted in the case metadata. Since the case settled, there was no institution decision or final written decision on the patentability of the claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,430,015.The provided case, IPR2025-01480, is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, not a patent infringement litigation in a district court. As such, many of the typical legal developments found in district court litigation, such as complaints, answers, counterclaims, motions to dismiss or transfer, Markman hearings, discovery milestones, trials, or post-trial motions, are not applicable to an IPR.

The key legal developments for this IPR proceeding are as follows:

• Filing of Petition: On September 15, 2025, BOE Technology Group Co Ltd (Petitioner) filed a petition for Inter Partes Review against U.S. Patent No. 10,430,015, owned by Samsung Display Co Ltd (Patent Owner).
• Termination due to Settlement: The IPR proceeding was terminated on December 30, 2025, due to a settlement between the parties.
• Outcome: The IPR was settled between BOE Technology Group Co Ltd and Samsung Display Co Ltd on December 30, 2025, before the PTAB made a decision on institution.

It's worth noting that BOE Technology and Samsung Display have been involved in a series of patent disputes related to OLED technology in various forums, including the ITC and district courts. For instance, in May 2025, BOE filed a lawsuit against Samsung Display in the Eastern District of Texas alleging infringement of under-the-OLED camera IP. Previously, in March 2025, BOE scored a victory in an ITC case where Samsung Display had sought a general exclusion order related to OLED replacement screens. A broader settlement between the companies regarding OLED patent and trade secret lawsuits was reported in November 2025, which likely encompassed this IPR and other ongoing disputes. This larger settlement led to the withdrawal of all pending lawsuits, indicating a comprehensive resolution of their intellectual property disagreements.

The plaintiff, BOE Technology Group Co Ltd, was represented by counsel from Perkins Coie LLP in IPR2025-01480. The following attorneys were identified as counsel of record for the petitioner based on the certificate of service in Samsung Display Co., Ltd.'s Power of Attorney filing for this IPR:

• Babak Tehranchi (Partner)

  • Firm & Office: Perkins Coie LLP, San Diego, California.
  • Relevant Experience: Babak Tehranchi is a partner and co-chair of Perkins Coie's Post-Grant Proceedings practice. He is recognized as a leader in U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. He has been recognized for his performance in the IPR space.

• Bing Ai, Ph.D. (Partner)

  • Firm & Office: Perkins Coie LLP, likely San Diego, California (based on a phone number area code listed in a USPTO document).
  • Relevant Experience: Dr. Ai is experienced in patent procurement, strategies, and portfolio management across various technologies, including semiconductors, electronics, and wireless communications. He handles patent administrative trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), including inter partes reviews and post-grant reviews. He was part of a team recognized for outstanding international IP service, particularly for representing Chinese clients in Section 337 investigations and IPR post-grant work.

• Jessica C. Kaiser (Partner)

  • Firm & Office: Perkins Coie LLP, Denver, Colorado.
  • Relevant Experience: Jessica Kaiser is a former lead administrative patent judge (LAPJ) at the USPTO, where she decided hundreds of cases before the PTAB in America Invents Act (AIA) trials (IPRs and PGRs). She is also a firmwide co-chair of Perkins Coie's Post-Grant Proceedings practice. She previously served as a staff attorney at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

• Wei Yuan, Ph.D. (Counsel)

  • Firm & Office: Perkins Coie LLP.
  • Relevant Experience: Dr. Yuan is an experienced patent litigator specializing in patent infringement disputes in Section 337 investigations before the International Trade Commission (ITC) and U.S. district courts. He also represents clients in patent validity challenges before the PTAB, including IPR and post-grant review proceedings, and advises foreign companies on U.S. IP issues. He was part of the award-winning international IP service team.

• John D. Esterhay (Partner)

  • Firm & Office: Perkins Coie LLP.
  • Relevant Experience: John Esterhay represents clients in patent, trade secret, breach of contract, and business tort litigations, with experience in inter partes reviews. His technical background includes materials science and engineering, and he previously worked at the U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and the U.S. National Security Agency. He was also part of the award-winning international IP service team.

• Gautam Thatte, Ph.D. (Patent Attorney/Associate)

  • Firm & Office: Perkins Coie LLP.
  • Relevant Experience: Dr. Thatte is experienced in drafting and prosecuting U.S. and Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) patent applications. His practice covers various technologies, including analog and digital electronics, wireless communications, computer software, and digital signal processing, with experience in cellular communication standards, machine learning, and artificial intelligence.

• Jason Francis, Ph.D. (Patent Attorney)

  • Firm & Office: Perkins Coie LLP, Seattle, Washington.
  • Relevant Experience: Dr. Francis's practice focuses on patent prosecution, intellectual property (IP) strategy, diligence, validity, and infringement analysis. His experience spans various technology areas, including electronics, semiconductors, optics, software, and medical devices.

• Christopher Onley: The attorney corresponding to the email onley-ptab@perkinscoie.com could not be definitively identified from public records. While Perkins Coie has other attorneys named Christopher with extensive patent litigation and PTAB experience (e.g., Christopher Marando and Christopher Hanewicz), a specific individual with the surname "Onley" matching the profile was not found.

Based on available public records for related patent litigation involving Samsung Display and BOE Technology Group, the following counsel are likely to have represented Samsung Display Co Ltd. in IPR2025-01480. It's important to note that direct docket entries specifically listing counsel for IPR2025-01480 were not immediately found through general web searches, but the identified attorneys and firms frequently represent Samsung Display in patent disputes, including IPRs and district court cases.

Counsel of Record for Samsung Display Co Ltd. (Patent Owner):

• Amanda A. Abraham

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Roth & Abraham, PLLC, Marshall, Texas.
  • Experience Note: Ms. Abraham is a senior associate at Roth & Abraham, PLLC, and focuses on commercial and business litigation, with a primary area of practice in intellectual property litigation, representing both plaintiffs and defendants. She has appeared as counsel of record in over 150 civil cases in federal court. She has been noted representing Samsung Display in a complaint against BOE in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Neil P. Sirota

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Baker Botts L.L.P., New York, New York.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Sirota is the firm's Technology Sector Chair in Intellectual Property and has nearly 30 years of experience in high-technology patent litigation before federal district courts, the International Trade Commission, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, and contested matters in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, including inter partes reviews and ex parte reexaminations. He has defended Samsung in various patent infringement suits related to display devices and digital rights management technologies.

• Pilseon Yoo

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Baker Botts L.L.P.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Yoo focuses his practice on post-grant review proceedings, patent litigation, and prosecution. Before joining Baker Botts, he worked at [Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.), handling various intellectual property matters, including patent analysis for disputes, developing offensive patents, and negotiating license agreements. He also worked as a circuit design engineer at Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and SK Hynix Inc.

• Jeffrey H. Lerner

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Covington & Burling LLP.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Lerner is part of a team from Covington & Burling LLP representing Samsung Display in a patent infringement complaint against BOE in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Jared R. Frisch

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Covington & Burling LLP.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Frisch is part of a team from Covington & Burling LLP representing Samsung Display in a patent infringement complaint against BOE in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Daniel W. Cho

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Covington & Burling LLP.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Cho is part of a team from Covington & Burling LLP representing Samsung Display in a patent infringement complaint against BOE in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Kee Young Lee

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Covington & Burling LLP.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Lee is part of a team from Covington & Burling LLP representing Samsung Display in a patent infringement complaint against BOE in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Robert T. Haslam

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Covington & Burling LLP.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Haslam is part of a team from Covington & Burling LLP representing Samsung Display in a patent infringement complaint against BOE in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Scott A. Schrader

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Covington & Burling LLP.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Schrader is part of a team from Covington & Burling LLP representing Samsung Display in a patent infringement complaint against BOE in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Jesse Y. Chang

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Covington & Burling LLP.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Chang is part of a team from Covington & Burling LLP representing Samsung Display in a patent infringement complaint against BOE in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Sean Hong

  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Covington & Burling LLP.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Hong is part of a team from Covington & Burling LLP representing Samsung Display in a patent infringement complaint against BOE in the Eastern District of Texas.

The firms Baker Botts L.L.P. and Covington & Burling LLP frequently represent Samsung entities in various patent litigation matters, including those involving display technologies and disputes with BOE. Given the IPR's settled status and the common practice of firms handling related district court and PTAB proceedings for the same client and technology, it is highly probable that attorneys from these firms, particularly those with IPR experience, represented Samsung Display in IPR2025-01480.