Defendant

Xiaomi Inc.

1 case as defendant.

Cases
1
Active
1
0 closed
Filed
2025
Top venue
C.D. California
1 case

Company profile

Xiaomi Corporation, commonly known as Xiaomi, is a Chinese multinational technology company headquartered in Beijing, China, founded on April 6, 2010. It operates as a public company, listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange under the ticker SEHK: 1810. As of 2025/2026, Xiaomi employs approximately 56,531 people globally. The company reported a revenue of CN¥365.906 billion in 2024 and USD 37.47 billion for 2023. Its market capitalization is around HK$553.54 billion.

Xiaomi is a global leader in consumer electronics, software, and has recently ventured into electric vehicles. Its diverse product portfolio includes smartphones under brands like Mi, Redmi, and POCO; a wide range of Artificial Intelligence of Things (AIoT) devices such as smart TVs, robot vacuum cleaners, air purifiers, smartwatches, and other smart home products; as well as laptops, tablets, and headphones. The company also offers various internet services, including advertising, online gaming, fintech, and cloud storage via Xiaomi Cloud. In March 2024, Xiaomi launched its first electric vehicle, the SU7 sedan, building on a prior US$10 billion investment in the EV sector.

In terms of patent litigation, Xiaomi Inc. primarily operates as a defendant. The company has been involved in one tracked patent litigation case, appearing solely as a defendant and zero times as a plaintiff. This posture is typical of an operating company that is defending its products and services against patent infringement claims. The single tracked case, Mesa Digital LLC v. Xiaomi Inc., was filed in the California Central District Court.

The case Mesa Digital LLC v. Xiaomi Inc. involves Mesa Digital LLC, which appears to be a non-practicing entity (NPE). Mesa Digital LLC has a history of initiating patent infringement lawsuits against other technology companies, including Dell and HP, concerning patents related to wireless multimedia devices. Some of these cases were resolved through voluntary dismissals, with or without prejudice, indicating a strategy of patent assertion.