Greenthread, LLC v. Texas Instruments Incorporated

In a legal dispute with significant implications for the semiconductor industry, Greenthread, LLC, a patent assertion entity (PAE), has sued Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI), a major American semiconductor design and manufacturing company. Filed on April 6, 2023, the lawsuit alleges that a wide range of TI's semiconductor products, including amplifiers and digital signal processors, infringe on U.S. Patent No. 11,316,014. This patent, one of several in Greenthread's portfolio originating from inventor G.R. Mohan Rao, generally relates to semiconductor components with graded dopant regions designed for improved performance. Greenthread has asserted this patent family against numerous other major technology companies, establishing a clear pattern of a broad litigation campaign.

The case is proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, a venue historically favored by patent plaintiffs for its fast trial schedules and specialized local patent rules. The case has been assigned to Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap, one of the most experienced patent judges in the United States, who handles a substantial portion of the nation's patent docket. The choice of this court is strategic, as its procedures and judicial expertise are well-known quantities in high-stakes patent litigation. The case is currently pending and its docket has been consolidated with related actions Greenthread has filed against other defendants in the district.

This lawsuit is notable primarily as a component of Greenthread's widespread assertion campaign and its critical linkage to parallel challenges at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Numerous defendants targeted by Greenthread, including Cirrus Logic and others, have filed petitions for inter partes review (IPR) challenging the validity of the asserted patents. In a significant development for the entire campaign, the PTAB issued rulings in late 2025 invalidating claims from six Greenthread patents in response to a challenge by Cirrus Logic. The outcome of these and other PTAB proceedings will likely have a dispositive impact on Greenthread's case against Texas Instruments and its other ongoing infringement suits.

Key Legal Developments and Case Outcome

Following its filing, the lawsuit between Greenthread and Texas Instruments was quickly shaped by the plaintiff's broader litigation campaign and the parallel challenges to its patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The district court case progressed through initial stages before being halted to await the outcome of these dispositive validity challenges.

Chronological Developments:

• 2023-04-06: Complaint Filed
  Greenthread, LLC filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Texas Instruments Incorporated (TI) in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, asserting U.S. Patent No. 11,316,014.

• 2023-05-10: Case Consolidated
  The case was consolidated for pretrial purposes into a lead case, Greenthread, LLC v. OmniVision Technologies, Inc., 2:23-cv-00212, also pending before Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap. This consolidation included other lawsuits Greenthread had filed against defendants like OSRAM GmbH.

• 2023-06-20: Answer and Counterclaim
  Texas Instruments filed its Answer to the complaint, denying infringement and asserting counterclaims against Greenthread, likely seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of the asserted patent.

• 2024-03-12: Texas Instruments Joins Parallel PTAB Challenge
  Texas Instruments filed a motion to join inter partes review (IPR) proceedings that had been previously initiated by another Greenthread defendant, Semiconductor Components Industries (onsemi), challenging related Greenthread patents. Specifically, TI moved to join IPR2023-01244, which targeted U.S. Patent No. 11,121,222, a family member to the patent asserted against TI. In its motion, TI agreed to act as an "understudy," taking a passive role unless the lead petitioner, onsemi, settled or dropped out.

• 2024-04-22: Discovery Disputes Resolved
  The court was actively managing the case through the spring of 2024. In an order issued in the lead case, Judge Gilstrap addressed discovery disputes specific to the TI member case. The court granted Greenthread's motion to amend its infringement contentions and denied TI's corresponding motion to strike those contentions. This indicates that the parties were engaged in the standard pre-trial processes of exchanging infringement and invalidity theories.

• 2024-08-30: District Court Case Stayed
  The parties filed a joint motion to stay all proceedings in the district court pending the final outcome of the IPRs that the various defendants, including TI, had filed against the Greenthread patents. Judge Gilstrap granted the motion, effectively pausing the infringement litigation until the PTAB could rule on the validity of the patent claims at issue. This is a common procedure intended to conserve court and party resources, as a PTAB finding of invalidity can render the district court case moot.

• 2025-04-24: USPTO Director Vacates Adverse PTAB Decision
  In a dramatic turn for the entire litigation campaign, the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office vacated the PTAB's Final Written Decisions in the IPRs filed by onsemi and joined by TI. The PTAB had initially found the challenged patent claims unpatentable. However, the Director's review sided with Greenthread on a procedural issue, finding that the PTAB had abused its discretion by denying Greenthread's request for discovery into whether the IPR petitions were time-barred. Greenthread had argued that onsemi was in privity with Intel, which had been sued more than a year before the IPRs were filed, potentially barring the review under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). The Director remanded the proceedings to the PTAB with instructions to permit discovery on the privity issue.

• 2026-04-10: PTAB Remand Appealed to the Federal Circuit
  Following the Director's decision to vacate and remand, an appeal was docketed at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Greenthread LLC v. Semiconductor Components Industries LLC, No. 26-1646). This appeal will review the Director's decision, adding another layer of uncertainty and delay to the resolution of the patent's validity.

Outcome and Present Posture:

As of May 10, 2026, the district court case of Greenthread v. Texas Instruments remains stayed and is administratively closed. The ultimate fate of the litigation is directly dependent on the outcome of the parallel PTAB proceedings and the subsequent appeal at the Federal Circuit.

The case has not advanced to claim construction (Markman hearing), summary judgment, or trial. The current posture is one of "wait and see." If the PTAB's decision is ultimately affirmed and claims of the Greenthread patents are invalidated, the district court case against TI will likely be dismissed. Conversely, if Greenthread prevails in the PTAB proceedings and the patent claims are confirmed as valid, the stay in the Eastern District of Texas would be lifted, and the infringement litigation would resume.

Plaintiff's Counsel of Record: Greenthread, LLC

Greenthread, LLC has retained a team of experienced patent litigators from several well-known firms to represent it in its case against Texas Instruments and across its broader litigation campaign. The counsel listed below have appeared on the docket for Greenthread in the consolidated proceedings in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Name: Stamatios "Tom" M. Stamoulis

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Stamoulis & Associates LLC (Wilmington, DE)
  • Note: Stamoulis is a veteran patent litigator who frequently represents patent licensing entities in major venues like the Eastern District of Texas and Delaware.

• Name: Richard C. "Rich" Weinblatt

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Stamoulis & Associates LLC (Wilmington, DE)
  • Note: Weinblatt has extensive experience in patent litigation and has represented clients in numerous cases alongside Tom Stamoulis.

• Name: Brian E. Farnan

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Farnan LLP (Wilmington, DE)
  • Note: Farnan is a prominent Delaware litigator, often involved in significant intellectual property and corporate disputes.

• Name: Michael J. Farnan

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Farnan LLP (Wilmington, DE)
  • Note: Michael Farnan, like his partner Brian Farnan, has a strong background in federal court litigation, including complex patent cases.

• Name: S. Calvin Capshaw

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Capshaw DeRieux LLP (Gladewater, TX)
  • Note: Capshaw is a highly experienced and well-known local counsel in the Eastern District of Texas, having represented numerous plaintiffs in patent cases.

• Name: Elizabeth L. DeRieux

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Capshaw DeRieux LLP (Gladewater, TX)
  • Note: DeRieux frequently serves as local counsel alongside Calvin Capshaw, providing essential expertise in the local practices and procedures of the Eastern District of Texas.

Defendant's Counsel of Record: Texas Instruments Incorporated

Texas Instruments (TI) has retained a team of nationally recognized patent litigators from Fenwick & West LLP, alongside local counsel from the Dallas-based firm Caldwell Cassady & Curry PC, to defend it against Greenthread's infringement claims. Attorneys from these firms have appeared on the docket and are also representing TI in the parallel inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the PTAB.

• Name: J. David Hadden

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Fenwick & West LLP (Mountain View, CA)
  • Note: Hadden is a top-ranked U.S. patent litigator known for representing major technology companies like Amazon and Zillow in high-stakes disputes.

• Name: Sanjeet K. "Sanj" Dutta

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Goodwin Procter LLP (formerly with Steptoe & Johnson LLP) (Redwood City, CA)
  • Note: Dutta specializes in patent litigation involving complex semiconductor technologies and has extensive experience before federal courts, the ITC, and the PTAB.

• Name: Darryl J. Adams

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Slayden Grubert Beard PLLC (Austin, TX)
  • Note: With a background in electrical engineering, Adams has over two decades of experience in electronics and computer patent litigation, including as a former clerk for the Federal Circuit.

• Name: Bradley Wayne Caldwell

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry PC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Caldwell is a prominent Texas trial lawyer who frequently represents clients in the Eastern District of Texas on patent and complex commercial litigation matters.

• Name: Adrienne Roberts Dellinger

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry PC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Dellinger's practice focuses on patent infringement and other intellectual property litigation, and she has represented clients in numerous matters in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Name: Robert Seth Reich, Jr.

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry PC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Reich is a seasoned litigator with experience representing both plaintiffs and defendants in patent cases within the Eastern District of Texas.

• Name: Jack Wesley Hill

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC (Longview, TX)
  • Note: Hill is a well-established East Texas trial lawyer who often serves as local counsel in patent cases due to his deep familiarity with the court's local rules and procedures.

• Name: Andrea Leigh Fair

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Ward, Smith & Hill, PLLC (Longview, TX)
  • Note: Fair frequently partners with Jack Wesley Hill as local counsel in the Eastern District of Texas, providing expertise in local court practices for clients in patent disputes.