Google LLC v. Telcom Ventures LLC

Google LLC, a global technology conglomerate and subsidiary of Alphabet Inc., operates across various sectors including online advertising, search engines, cloud computing, software, and hardware, making it a prominent operating company in the tech industry. The opposing party, Telcom Ventures LLC, is identified as a private investment firm specializing in venture capital and private equity investments within the telecommunications, wireless communication, network, technology, Internet, and design/engineering sectors. With its CEO, Rajendra Singh, listed as an inventor on the asserted patents, Telcom Ventures LLC functions in this context as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) or Patent Assertion Entity (PAE), focused on licensing and enforcing its patent portfolio rather than manufacturing or selling patented products.

The patent at issue in this Inter Partes Review (IPR) is U.S. Patent No. 11,770,756, which generally pertains to enabling and disabling features of a mobile device based on physiological or environmental sensor data. While the IPR directly addresses the patent's validity, Telcom Ventures has previously asserted this patent, among others, in district court litigation against other major technology companies. For instance, Telcom Ventures accused Samsung of infringing patents, including the '756 patent, through its Samsung Pay service and associated smartphones, particularly concerning mobile payments using biometric authentication and near-field communication (NFC) or magnetic secure transmission (MST) technologies. Similarly, Apple was targeted over its Apple Pay service and iPhones for mobile payments utilizing biometric authentication and NFC. Given these assertion patterns, it is highly probable that any underlying infringement claims against Google would similarly involve Google's mobile payment systems or devices incorporating comparable functionalities.

This case is before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) as IPR2025-01409, and its status as "Not Instituted - Procedural" is particularly noteworthy. The PTAB provides an administrative forum for challenging patent validity that is often faster and more cost-effective than district court litigation. However, the procedural denial signifies that the PTAB did not reach the merits of Google's patent invalidity arguments. This outcome highlights recent shifts in PTAB practice, where the USPTO Director has exercised increased discretion, leading to a rise in procedural denials of IPR petitions, often related to stricter enforcement of rules concerning Real Parties-in-Interest, parallel litigation, or other procedural deficiencies. The assertion of mobile payment-related patents by an NPE against a tech giant like Google, coupled with the "Not Instituted - Procedural" denial in an IPR, underscores the evolving strategies in patent disputes and the heightened procedural hurdles at the PTAB.

The case in question, Google LLC v. Telcom Ventures LLC, IPR2025-01409, is an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), not a patent infringement litigation in a district court. The petition for IPR was filed by Google LLC to challenge the validity of Telcom Ventures LLC's U.S. Patent No. 11,770,756. The PTAB did not institute the IPR, citing procedural grounds.

While there is no direct patent infringement litigation identified between Google LLC and Telcom Ventures LLC concerning Patent No. 11,770,756, Telcom Ventures LLC has actively asserted this patent, along with several others, in district court litigations against other technology companies.

Here are the key legal developments in chronological order:

Parallel District Court Litigations (Asserting U.S. Patent No. 11,770,756):

• 2024-08-21: Telcom Ventures LLC filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Case No. 2:24-cv-00691). This complaint accused Samsung of infringing eight patents, including U.S. Patent No. 11,770,756, related to mobile financial transactions and device features based on sensor data.
• 2024-10-04: Telcom Ventures LLC filed a second patent infringement lawsuit, this time against Apple Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 1:24-cv-23837). This suit asserted the same eight patents, including U.S. Patent No. 11,770,756, targeting Apple Pay and iPhones.
• 2026-04-23: In the Telcom Ventures LLC v. Samsung case, the Eastern District of Texas court granted Samsung's motion for leave to amend its invalidity contentions. This motion was filed on August 29, 2025, after Samsung received documents responsive to a January 9, 2025, subpoena to Motorola Mobility LLC regarding potential mobile payment prior art. Fact discovery in this case closed on December 18, 2025.

Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings (Initiated by Google LLC against Telcom Ventures LLC Patents):

• 2025-08-08: Google LLC filed IPR2025-01401 against Telcom Ventures LLC, challenging U.S. Patent No. 12,028,793. This patent is part of the same family of patents asserted by Telcom Ventures against Samsung and Apple.
• 2025-08-14: Google LLC filed IPR2025-01421 against Telcom Ventures LLC, challenging U.S. Patent No. 10,674,432.
• IPR2025-01409 Filing Date (U.S. Patent No. 11,770,756): The specific filing date for IPR2025-01409 for U.S. Patent No. 11,770,756 is not explicitly detailed in the provided search results but would have occurred around the same period as other Google IPRs against Telcom Ventures' patents (mid-2025).

Outcome of IPR2025-01409:

• Not Instituted - Procedural: The petition for Inter Partes Review, IPR2025-01409, was not instituted by the PTAB on procedural grounds. While the exact procedural reason for this specific IPR is not explicitly detailed in the search results, Google has been actively challenging the USPTO's policy of denying IPR petitions based on a patent owner's "settled expectations," particularly for patents older than six years. Google filed a petition for certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court on May 13, 2026, challenging this policy, arguing that it creates an unauthorized age-based limit on IPRs and shields potentially invalid patents from administrative scrutiny. The Federal Circuit previously rejected similar mandamus challenges by Google to the PTO's use of "settled expectations" as a factor in denying IPR institution in January and February 2026. It is highly probable that the "procedural" denial of IPR2025-01409 relates to this "settled expectations" policy.

Google LLC is represented by attorneys from Paul Hastings LLP and in-house counsel in IPR2025-01409.

Here is the counsel of record for Google LLC:

• Naveen Modi

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Paul Hastings LLP, Washington, DC
  • Note: Naveen Modi is a highly experienced patent litigator, frequently appearing before the PTAB in inter partes review proceedings.

• Daniel Zeilberger

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel
  • Firm: Paul Hastings LLP, Washington, DC

• Quadeer Ahmed

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel
  • Firm: Paul Hastings LLP, Washington, DC

• Alexa Lowman

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel (pro hac vice to be filed)
  • Firm: Paul Hastings LLP, Washington, DC

• Maksim Mints

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel
  • Firm: Paul Hastings LLP, Washington, DC

• Emily O'Brien

  • Role: Senior Litigation Counsel (in-house)
  • Firm: Google LLC

Telcom Ventures LLC is represented by attorneys from Alston & Bird LLP in this and related Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), as well as in parallel patent infringement litigations.

Here is the counsel of record for Telcom Ventures LLC:

• Christopher T.L. Douglas

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Alston & Bird LLP, Charlotte, NC
  • Note: Mr. Douglas is identified as lead counsel for Telcom Ventures LLC in other related PTAB IPR proceedings, such as IPR2025-01232 (Apple Inc. v. Telcom Ventures LLC).

• Kirk T. Bradley

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel
  • Firm: Alston & Bird LLP, Charlotte, NC
  • Note: Mr. Bradley is listed as back-up counsel in PTAB IPR filings and has appeared for Telcom Ventures LLC in district court cases against Samsung and Apple.

• Mary I. Riolo

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel (pro hac vice to be requested)
  • Firm: Alston & Bird LLP, Charlotte, NC
  • Note: Ms. Riolo is designated as back-up counsel in PTAB filings for Telcom Ventures LLC and has represented the company in district court litigations.

• Katherine G. Rubschlager

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel (pro hac vice to be requested)
  • Firm: Alston & Bird LLP, San Francisco, CA
  • Note: Ms. Rubschlager is listed as back-up counsel in PTAB filings and has appeared for Telcom Ventures LLC in district court cases against Apple and Samsung.

• Karlee N. Wroblewski

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel
  • Firm: Alston & Bird LLP, Charlotte, NC
  • Note: Ms. Wroblewski is identified as back-up counsel in PTAB IPR proceedings and has represented Telcom Ventures LLC in district court patent infringement cases.

• Jacob W. Young

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel
  • Firm: Alston & Bird LLP, Dallas, TX
  • Note: Mr. Young is designated as back-up counsel in PTAB filings and has appeared for Telcom Ventures LLC in district court cases against Apple and Samsung.

• Emily Welch

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel (pro hac vice to be requested)
  • Firm: Alston & Bird LLP, Atlanta, GA
  • Note: Ms. Welch is identified as back-up counsel in PTAB IPR filings for Telcom Ventures LLC.

Other attorneys from Alston & Bird LLP, such as Theodore Stevenson, III and Coral Del Mar Lopez, have also appeared for Telcom Ventures LLC in the parallel district court litigations against Apple and Samsung. In some district court proceedings, Telcom Ventures LLC has also been represented by attorneys from Desmarais LLP and Lash & Goldberg. However, the PTAB filings for IPRs initiated by Google and Apple primarily identify Alston & Bird LLP as counsel for Telcom Ventures LLC.