Plaintiff
11 cases as plaintiff.
LG Electronics Inc. is a major South Korean multinational electronics company headquartered in Seoul. Founded in 1958 as GoldStar, it is a public company and a key part of the LG Corporation conglomerate. The company is publicly traded on the Korea Exchange (KRX: 066570) and the London Stock Exchange (LSE: LGLD). LG Electronics employs over 74,000 people globally and reported worldwide revenues of over KRW 88 trillion in 2024.
As a global operating company, LG Electronics manufactures and sells a wide variety of consumer and commercial products. Its main business units are Home Appliance & Air Solution, Home Entertainment, Vehicle Component Solutions, and Business Solutions. Major product lines include televisions, home theater systems, refrigerators, washing machines, computer monitors, and automotive components. The company also provides commercial products such as digital signage, and HVAC systems.
The provided case data shows LG Electronics as a defendant in one tracked patent case, with no instances of it acting as a plaintiff. This posture is typical of a large operating company that is a target for patent litigation. The single tracked case, Multimedia Technologies Pte Ltd v. LG Electronics Inc, was an appeal at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. This appears to stem from a patent infringement lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, a common venue for patent assertion.
The litigation with Multimedia Technologies Pte Ltd concerned patents related to smart TV technology used in products incorporating LG's webOS operating system. In May 2025, a jury found that LG did not infringe the asserted patents and also ruled that the patent claims were invalid, resulting in a victory for LG Electronics in the district court. The subsequent appeal at the Federal Circuit, listed in the authoritative case data, was later dismissed by agreement of both parties.
Watchlist
Email-only, free, anonymous. We'll notify you when LG Electronics, Inc. files another patent-infringement lawsuit. One-click unsubscribe from any alert.
LG Electronics petitioned for inter partes review of all claims 1–9 of U.S. Patent 7,421,188, asserting obviousness over Yoshida/Terashita, Dow, and Dow/Murakami. The parties settled and filed a joint motion to terminate; the proceeding was closed July 9, 2025 without institution or final written decision.
LG Electronics filed an inter partes review challenging U.S. Patent No. 10,244,284. The parties filed a joint motion to terminate on July 1, 2025, and the proceeding was terminated as settled on July 9, 2025.
LG Electronics petitioned for inter partes review of U.S. 8,339,493. The proceeding was terminated as settled on July 14, 2025.
Google LLC (with Samsung and LG) petitioned for inter partes review of the '084 patent. The PTAB held claims 1, 2, 4–7, 10, and 14 unpatentable as obvious.
LG Electronics filed an IPR against U.S. 7,999,514 owned by Fundamental Innovation Systems International LLC. The proceeding was terminated/settled on October 16, 2018.
LG Electronics petitioned for IPR of the '655 patent. The proceeding was terminated by settlement.
LG filed an IPR petition identical in substance to Facebook's '1427/'1428 petitions and moved to join both Facebook IPRs. Google Patents lists the case as terminating in a Final Written Decision, and the Federal Circuit confirmed the consolidated Facebook/LG IPR found all challenged claims unpatentable.
Instituted 2016-02-05; joined IPR2015-00487; final decision 2016-07-15 held no claims unpatentable.
Inter partes review of US 7537370 filed 2014-12-29 by LG Electronics, Inc. against Innovative Display Technologies LLC; instituted 2015-07-15 and joined with IPR2014-01096. Docket activity through 2017-05-23.
Inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 7,434,973, challenging the same claims 1-5. Filed Aug. 4-5, 2015; institution and motion for joinder granted Feb. 5, 2016, joining it with IPR2015-00506. Final Written Decision June 22-23, 2016, resolved together with IPR2015-00506.
LG Electronics, Inc. et al. petitioned for inter partes review of the '586 patent. The Board denied institution on 2018-08-30.