Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

This Inter Partes Review (IPR) case was filed by Samsung Electronics against AQ Corporation challenging US patent 11728564.

A petition for inter partes review (IPR) of US Patent 9,824,035 filed by Samsung. The PTAB declined to institute the review due to procedural reasons.

Samsung filed an Inter Partes Review petition against patent 10468047. The PTAB has instituted the review, and the case is currently pending.

This Inter Partes Review (IPR) case was initiated by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. against Xifi Networks R&D Inc. before the PTAB, challenging US patent 11974143. The IPR has been instituted and is currently pending.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. filed a petition for inter partes review (IPR) against Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc., challenging US patent 11716171B2. The petition was filed on June 24, 2025, and the case is currently instituted, with a Final Written Decision due on January 12, 2027.

A declaratory judgment action for non-infringement filed by Samsung against Netlist. The case is currently active.

An Inter Partes Review filed by Samsung entities against VB Assets, LLC for US Patent 8073681 was not instituted due to procedural reasons.

Samsung petitioned for inter partes review of '055, challenging claims 1-2, 6-7, 9-10, and 12. The PTAB denied institution under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a); Samsung withdrew its request for director review/rehearing and the proceeding terminated.

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied institution of this inter partes review concerning US patent 10812646.

Samsung petitioned for inter partes review of all claims 1-19 of the '886 patent. The PTAB issued a final written decision on March 16, 2026, holding the claims unpatentable over prior art including Okashita, Burgener, and Yu. Harbor Island appealed to the Federal Circuit.

Samsung petitioned for inter partes review challenging the '609 patent. The PTAB instituted trial, held oral argument, and, according to the patent owner's parent company's SEC filings, issued final written decisions canceling claims of the '609 patent. Harbor Island's Director Review request was pending as of the filing.

Samsung petitioned for inter partes review of the '673 patent. The PTAB instituted on all three grounds and issued a Final Written Decision on February 9, 2026, finding all challenged claims unpatentable. Harbor Island appealed the decision.

Samsung petitioned for inter partes review of all claims 1-20 of the 9245826 patent. The Board issued a Final Written Decision finding all challenged claims unpatentable, and Harbor Island Dynamic filed a request for Director Review.

In this action, Samsung seeks a declaratory judgment of non-infringement of the '846 patent. A motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction was granted, but the court is allowing Samsung to conduct jurisdictional discovery.

An inter partes review (IPR) proceeding where Samsung challenges the patent's validity. The PTAB has also instituted a trial in this proceeding.

Samsung filed this IPR against Netlist's US Patent 10,268,608. The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision on October 31, 2024, finding certain claims unpatentable, which decision was affirmed by the Federal Circuit on December 11, 2025.

Qualcomm Inc. filed an inter partes review against U.S. Patent No. 10,049,080, with Samsung Electronics entities later joined. The proceedings were terminated by settlement and no final written decision issued.

Samsung and others filed inter partes review of US Patent 9,629,287. The patent file wrapper records a final written decision, but the substantive outcome is not confirmed in the narrative.

Samsung petitioned for inter partes review of the '740 patent. The PTAB issued a final written decision holding all challenged claims unpatentable as obvious, and the Federal Circuit later affirmed.

Samsung petitioned for inter partes review of all claims 1-15 of the '142 patent. The Board held all challenged claims unpatentable as obvious, and the decision was appealed (noted as 2024-2231).

Apple Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. filed an inter partes review petition against Smart Mobile Technologies LLC directed at U.S. Patent No. 8,761,739. The PTAB instituted review on December 5, 2022, issued a Final Written Decision, and an IPR certificate issued on January 5, 2024.

Samsung initiated a declaratory judgment action against Netlist, alleging non-infringement of US10217523B1 and other patents. Netlist filed counterclaims for infringement against Samsung, Google LLC, and Alphabet, Inc. The case was stayed pending resolution of a related action.

Samsung entities petitioned for inter partes review of the ’678 patent. The proceeding was joined with IPR2016-00209 and decided in the same November 30, 2016 final written decision holding claims 1–18 unpatentable.

This is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding initiated by Samsung. The PTAB has instituted a trial, having determined a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail on at least one of the challenged claims.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. filed a post-grant review petition at the PTAB challenging patent 12193790, which was procedurally denied institution.

Samsung entities filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Chien-Min Sung, challenging US Patent 8974270. Oral arguments are scheduled for June 19, 2025.

An Inter Partes Review (IPR) case filed by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. against Staton Techiya, LLC at the PTAB, which concluded with a Final Written Decision.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. filed an Inter Partes Review petition challenging US Patent 10615925, owned by LG Electronics Inc. The PTAB issued a final written decision on January 25, 2023, finding all challenged claims (1-15) unpatentable due to anticipation.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. challenged the validity of US10217523B1 in this Inter Partes Review. The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision upholding the validity of the patent, which was later affirmed on appeal.

Samsung petitioned for IPR challenging claims 1, 4, 7, and 8 of the '595 patent. The PTAB instituted review and held all challenged claims unpatentable as obvious over prior art.

Samsung petitioned for inter partes review challenging claims 1-19 of the '654 patent. The petition was dismissed prior to institution, and Google Patents labels the status as 'Settlement.'

District court action involving Samsung and Omni MedSci. No asserted patents identified; US 9,995,722 not confirmed as asserted.