Defendant

MediaTek Inc.

8 cases as defendant.

Cases
8
Active
2
6 closed
Filed
2012–2024
Top venue
E D Tex
2 cases

Company profile

MediaTek Inc. is a major fabless semiconductor company from Taiwan that designs and markets a wide range of semiconductor products. Founded on May 28, 1997, as a spin-off from United Microelectronics Corporation (UMC), MediaTek is headquartered in Hsinchu, Taiwan. The company is publicly traded on the Taiwan Stock Exchange (TWSE: 2454). As a leading global entity in its sector, MediaTek powers over two billion devices annually. For its fiscal year ending in December 2025, the company reported revenues of approximately $19.1 billion, and it employs over 17,000 people.

MediaTek is a leading developer of innovative systems-on-chip (SoC) for a variety of devices, including mobile phones, home entertainment systems, and Internet of Things (IoT) products. The company’s product lines include the "Dimensity" family of 5G smartphone chips, "Helio" processors for 4G smartphones, "Kompanio" chips for Chromebooks, and "Pentonic" SoCs for smart TVs. MediaTek also develops chipsets for Wi-Fi connectivity ("Filogic"), IoT devices ("Genio"), and provides custom ASIC design services. The company has a significant market share, having become the largest smartphone chipset vendor by volume in 2020.

As an operating company, MediaTek is typically a defendant in patent litigation. The provided case data shows MediaTek as a defendant in one U.S. patent suit and as a plaintiff in none. This defensive posture is common for large technology manufacturers that are frequently targeted by patent assertion entities. The single tracked case, Redstone Logics LLC v. MediaTek, Inc. et al., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, a popular venue for patent litigation. This case reflects MediaTek's position as a target for patent assertions related to its high-volume product lines.

Filing activity

2012: 1 case'12'14'16'18'202022: 1 case'222024: 2 cases2'24
Cases filed per year naming MediaTek Inc. as defendant.

Daedalus Prime LLC v. MediaTek Inc.

terminated
Docket:
2:24-cv-00235-JRG
Filed:
2024-04-08
Patents:8984228

Daedalus Prime LLC sued MediaTek Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, alleging infringement of eight U.S. patents, including US 8,984,228. The court partially granted MediaTek's motion to dismiss, dismissing the § 271(f) and pre-suit willfulness allegations, and the case is listed as terminated.

Daedalus Prime LLC v. Mazda Motor Corp. et al.

closed
Docket:
1:22-cv-01108
Filed:
2022-08-23

Daedalus Prime LLC asserted six Daedalus Prime patents, including the '080 patent, against Mazda, MediaTek, Mercedes-Benz, and Visteon entities in the District of Delaware. The docket is marked closed.

LSI Corporation et al. v. Funai Electric Co., Ltd. et al.

terminated
Docket:
337-TA-837
Filed:
2012-03-12
Terminated:
2014-03-26

ITC Section 337 investigation brought by LSI and Agere against Funai, MediaTek, Ralink, and Realtek. The Commission found no violation as to any asserted claim of the '958 patent and terminated the investigation in March 2014.

CommWorks Solutions, LLC v. MediaTek Inc.

unknown
Docket:
2:24-cv-00701
Court:
E.D. Tex.
Patents:7463596

CommWorks Solutions, LLC sued MediaTek Inc. in E.D. Tex. in 2024; the '596 patent was asserted. Accused WMM/WPS chips include MT7688, MT7628, MT7921, MT7922. Outcome not confirmed.

Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd. v. MediaTek Inc.

settled; dismissed with prejudice
Docket:
2:06-cv-01225
Terminated:
2007-06-01

Sanyo asserted patent claims against MediaTek, and MediaTek brought counterclaims in the same California proceedings. The broader Sanyo-MediaTek dispute, including the uncertain '356 patent association, was settled and dismissed with prejudice on June 1, 2007, with cross-licenses exchanged.

Sanyo Electric Co., Ltd. v. MediaTek Inc. et al.

settled; dismissed with prejudice
Docket:
2:06-cv-01225
Patents:5867819

California action brought by Sanyo against MediaTek and ASUS entities in the Sanyo/MediaTek dispute involving the '819 patent. It was settled and dismissed with prejudice as part of the same global settlement resolving the Texas action, with cross-licenses exchanged.