Light Guide Innovations LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al.

The case Light Guide Innovations LLC v. [Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%20Ltd.) et al. (2:25-cv-01093) is an active patent infringement lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiff, Light Guide Innovations LLC, is identified as a Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) and an entity of Anjay Venture Partners LLC. The defendant, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and its American subsidiary, Samsung Electronics America Inc., are global electronics manufacturers. Light Guide Innovations LLC alleges that Samsung's televisions and displays, including its LED, Crystal UHD, QLED, and Neo QLED product lines, infringe on a portfolio of patents related to LED backlight assemblies, lenses, and display components. While the initial prompt mentions the '415 patent, court documents indicate a larger portfolio of patents is at issue, with some reports stating 16 patents from a former Suzhou Lekin Semiconductor Co. Ltd. (LEKIN) portfolio, and one report stating 19 patents. These patents originated from LG Innotek and were acquired by LEKIN, which subsequently assigned some to Light Guide Innovations LLC. For example, U.S. Patent No. 8,616,729 describes a lens with a convex top surface having a recessed center and a flat circumference, while U.S. Patent No. 8,562,200 details a lighting module with a "guide protrusion" on a substrate.

The case was filed on October 31, 2025, in the Eastern District of Texas, and is assigned to District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III and Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. The Eastern District of Texas is a significant venue for patent litigation, having reclaimed its position as one of the busiest patent forums in the country due to its established patent local rules, experienced judges, and a reputation for moving cases quickly to trial.

This case is notable as it represents a pattern of assertion by Light Guide Innovations LLC, which has initiated similar lawsuits against other major electronics manufacturers like TCL, Hisense, and Walmart over patents acquired from the LG Innotek/LEKIN portfolio. The plaintiff's status as an NPE (or patent assertion entity, PAE) indicates a business model focused on licensing and enforcing patent rights rather than manufacturing. The repeated assertions against multiple large companies in the display market highlight a broader strategy to monetize this patent portfolio. The allegations of willful infringement, based on Samsung's alleged knowledge of the patents due to their public dissemination after the LG Innotek sale, are also a common tactic employed by NPEs to seek enhanced damages. While no specific IPRs are listed for the '415 patent in this case, Unified Patents has filed an ex parte reexamination against another patent owned and asserted by Light Guide Innovations, U.S. Patent 9,638,378, indicating potential for validity challenges at the PTAB across the asserted portfolio.

Light Guide Innovations LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al.: Key Legal Developments

Case Number: 2:25-cv-01093
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Filed: 2025-10-31
Status: Active

This patent infringement litigation, filed in the Eastern District of Texas, involves Light Guide Innovations LLC accusing Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America Inc. of infringing U.S. Patent No. 7,936,415, among other patents, through their televisions and displays.

Here's a chronological summary of the key legal developments to date:

• 2025-10-31: Complaint Filed. Light Guide Innovations LLC initiated the lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America Inc., alleging infringement of a portfolio of nineteen U.S. patents related to LED backlight assemblies, lenses, and display components. The '415 patent is specifically identified in the complaint. Plaintiff's counsel is Fabricant LLP. The case has been assigned to District Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III and Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne.

• 2025-11-10: Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Defendants Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America Inc. filed an unopposed motion seeking an extension of time to file their answer, move, or otherwise respond to the plaintiff's complaint and for a waiver of foreign service requirements.

Given the recent filing date of October 31, 2025, the case is in its early stages. As of May 16, 2026, there are no public records indicating the filing of Samsung's answer or counterclaims, any substantive pre-trial motions (such as motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay), claim construction (Markman) hearings or outcomes, discovery milestones, trial events, verdict, post-trial motions, settlement, dismissal, or appeal.

Parallel PTAB Proceedings

A search for parallel PTAB IPR/PGR proceedings specifically concerning U.S. Patent No. 7,936,415 did not yield any active or terminated proceedings. Therefore, there is no information available regarding the effect of any such proceedings on this litigation.

Light Guide Innovations LLC is represented by attorneys from Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP. While the specific docket entries detailing roles (e.g., lead counsel vs. local counsel) are not publicly available in the provided snippets, Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP is identified as Plaintiff's Counsel in general for this case and a related matter. Given the Eastern District of Texas venue, it is common for out-of-state firms to engage local counsel. However, the provided information does not explicitly name distinct local counsel for this specific case (2:25-cv-01093). Fabricant Rubino Lambrianakos LLP has also been identified as "Local" counsel in a related case for Light Guide Innovations LLC, suggesting their active participation in the district.

The counsel of record identified for Light Guide Innovations LLC includes:

• Alfred R. Fabricant

  • Role: Counsel (likely lead or primary counsel)
  • Firm: Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP
  • Office Location: Rye, New York (based on general firm information, not explicitly stated in snippets for this case).
  • Experience: Mr. Fabricant is a named partner in a firm specializing in patent litigation.

• Peter Lambrianakos

  • Role: Counsel (likely lead or primary counsel)
  • Firm: Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP
  • Office Location: Rye, New York (based on general firm information, not explicitly stated in snippets for this case).
  • Experience: Mr. Lambrianakos is a named partner in a firm focused on patent litigation.

• Vincent J. Rubino, III

  • Role: Counsel (likely lead or primary counsel)
  • Firm: Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP
  • Office Location: Rye, New York (based on general firm information, not explicitly stated in snippets for this case).
  • Experience: Mr. Rubino is a named partner in a firm focused on patent litigation.

• Jacob D. Ostling

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Fabricant, Rubino & Lambrianakos LLP
  • Office Location: Rye, New York (based on general firm information, not explicitly stated in snippets for this case).
  • Experience: Mr. Ostling is an attorney at a firm specializing in patent litigation.

Counsel of Record for Defendant(s) Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. in Light Guide Innovations LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. (2:25-cv-01093 ETX)

As of 2026-05-16, a definitive list of counsel of record for Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America Inc. in case 2:25-cv-01093 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas could not be identified through public web searches. Direct access to the court's electronic filing system (PACER) would be required to review specific appearance filings for this case. Therefore, the information below is based on Samsung's typical representation in recent patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas and includes attorneys who have represented Samsung in similar matters in the same court.

Samsung frequently engages prominent national and local counsel for patent infringement cases in the Eastern District of Texas. Based on recent patent litigation involving Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas, such as Maxell, Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. (Case # 5:23-cv-00092) and Collision Communications Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (Case # 2:23-cv-00587), the following firms and attorneys are known to represent Samsung in this venue:

Potentially Involved Lead Counsel Firms & Attorneys (Based on other ETX Samsung cases):

• DLA Piper LLP (US)

  • Erik R. Fuehrer (Partner) - Palo Alto, CA. Erik Fuehrer has been part of DLA Piper teams representing Samsung in patent infringement cases in the Eastern District of Texas, including securing a victory for Samsung in Maxell Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co. where a jury verdict was overturned.
  • Mark D. Fowler (Partner) - Palo Alto, CA. Mark Fowler has also been involved in DLA Piper's representation of Samsung in Eastern District of Texas patent litigation, as evidenced in the Maxell case.
  • Sean C. Cunningham (Partner) - Washington, DC. Sean Cunningham was a partner on the DLA Piper trial team that secured a victory for Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Erin P. Gibson (Partner) - Washington, DC. Erin Gibson was also part of the DLA Piper trial team for Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Michael D. Jay (Partner) - Los Angeles, CA. Michael Jay contributed to DLA Piper's representation of Samsung in Eastern District of Texas patent cases.
  • James M. Heintz (Partner) - Reston, VA. James Heintz was a partner on the DLA Piper team representing Samsung in EDTX patent litigation.
  • Helena D. Kiepura (Partner) - Washington, DC. Helena Kiepura was part of the DLA Piper trial team for Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Brian K. Erickson (Partner) - Austin, TX. Brian Erickson was part of the DLA Piper team representing Samsung in EDTX patent cases.
  • Martin Ellison (Associate) - Los Angeles, CA. Martin Ellison provided support as an associate on the DLA Piper trial team for Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Paulina Starostka (Associate) - Chicago, IL. Paulina Starostka provided support as an associate on the DLA Piper trial team for Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Sangwon Sung (Associate) - San Francisco, CA. Sangwon Sung provided support as an associate on the DLA Piper trial team for Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP

  • Victoria F. Maroulis - (Likely Lead Counsel, based on past representation) - Redwood Shores, CA. Victoria Maroulis was identified as an attorney representing Samsung in the Collision Communications patent infringement case in the Eastern District of Texas.
  • Sean Pak - (Likely Lead Counsel, based on past representation) - San Francisco, CA. Sean Pak also represented Samsung in the Collision Communications patent infringement case in the Eastern District of Texas.

Potentially Involved Local Counsel (Based on other ETX Samsung cases):

• Melissa Richards Smith (Partner) - Gillam & Smith, LLP, Tyler, TX. Melissa Richards Smith has served as local counsel for Samsung in patent cases in the Eastern District of Texas, such as the Maxell case. Gillam & Smith is a Texas-based law firm with experience in complex civil litigation, including intellectual property.

In-House Counsel:

• Matthew Bathon (Principal Legal Counsel) - Samsung Electronics. Matthew Bathon coordinates Samsung's ITC and district court dockets and focuses on litigating Section 337 investigations before the ITC and IP disputes in district courts.
• Phillip Lee (Principal Legal Counsel) - Samsung Electronics US IP Center. Phillip Lee is a veteran litigator with experience in patent litigation, prosecution, and licensing, managing a docket of patent cases with outside counsel.

Given the case was filed in October 2025, counsel would have appeared by now. However, without direct docket access, this list represents the most likely firms and individuals based on Samsung's active and extensive patent litigation history in the Eastern District of Texas.