Samsung Semiconductor, Inc.

Omni MedSci asserts eight patents, including US 12,588,820, against Samsung. The '820 is asserted at least in claims 9 and 10 against Samsung's Galaxy XR headset based on direct time-of-flight sensing. Relief sought includes declaratory judgment of infringement, damages, permanent injunction, and attorney's fees.

Netlist, Inc. filed an ITC complaint alleging infringement of its patent(s), including US10217523B1, by Samsung entities, Google LLC, and Super Micro Computer, Inc. The investigation was instituted and is pending before an Administrative Law Judge.

Patent infringement case filed by Netlist against Samsung entities. On March 6, 2026, the court ordered a stay in the case.

Chien-Min Sung sued Samsung entities for infringing US Patent 8974270, among others, by using third-party pad conditioners in their CMP processes. The case is currently stayed.

Netlist asserted the '912 patent with U.S. 11,093,417 and 10,268,608 against Samsung. On Nov. 22, 2024, the jury found infringement of at least one claim of each patent, willful, and awarded a $118,000,000 lump-sum royalty; judgment was entered Dec. 2, 2024.

Netlist sued Samsung for infringement of the '918 patent and other patents. A jury found willful infringement and no invalidity, awarding a composite $303,150,000, with $147,225,000 allocated jointly to the '918 and '054 patents. Final judgment entered August 11, 2023; Samsung's appeal is pending.

Netlist sued Samsung entities for patent infringement in the Eastern District of Texas. The '339 patent was one of five patents tried, with asserted claims 1, 8, and 9. A jury found willful infringement of all five patents and awarded $303.15 million; final judgment was entered Aug. 11, 2023. Samsung appealed, and the parties later settled all pending litigation in 2026.

Patent infringement suit by Acorn Semi against Samsung entities. The patents actually asserted were U.S. Patent Nos. 7,084,423; 8,766,336; 9,209,261; 9,461,167; 9,905,691; and 10,090,395; the '542 patent was not asserted. A May 19, 2021 jury verdict found infringement and awarded $25 million; Samsung appealed (Appeal No. 22-1499), and the parties settled in January 2023 while the appeal was pending.

Raytheon appealed from the PTAB IPR final decisions concerning the ’678 patent. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s obviousness holdings in a nonprecedential decision issued April 2, 2018.

Raytheon asserted the ’678 patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(g) against Samsung entities over back-illuminated CMOS image sensors. The case was stayed pending co-pending IPRs, and after the patent claims were cancelled the parties’ joint motion to dismiss was granted on June 8, 2018.

W&Wsens Devices Inc. sued Samsung for patent infringement, asserting patent 11621360 and other related patents. The court denied Samsung's motions to stay pending PTAB review and to transfer the case to the Northern District of California. Samsung was granted leave to amend its invalidity contentions.

Appeal from PTAB IPR2024-00534 concerning U.S. 9,138,862. The record indicates the appeal was resolved by dismissal pursuant to settlement, but the narrative did not independently verify the 26-1528 order.