Malikie Innovations Limited v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al.

Case Overview: NPE Malikie Asserts Ex-BlackBerry Patent Against Samsung in East Texas

This patent infringement suit represents a classic clash between a non-practicing entity (NPE) and a major technology company. The plaintiff, Malikie Innovations Limited, is an Irish entity associated with Key Patent Innovations Limited, a firm that acquires and monetizes patent portfolios. In May 2023, Malikie acquired a large portfolio of approximately 32,000 non-core patents from BlackBerry. Since the acquisition, Malikie has launched an active litigation campaign, asserting former BlackBerry patents against a wide range of technology companies, including Nintendo, Canon, and now Samsung. The defendant, Samsung Electronics, is a global technology giant and a frequent target of NPE litigation due to its vast portfolio of consumer electronics, including smartphones, tablets, and televisions.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, asserts a single patent: U.S. Patent No. 8,666,062 ("the '062 patent"). Titled "Method and apparatus for performing finite field calculations," the patent, originally assigned to Certicom Corp. (later acquired by BlackBerry), generally relates to cryptographic systems and methods for performing calculations used in elliptic curve cryptography (ECC). Malikie has previously asserted this patent against cryptocurrency mining firms, alleging that their verification of Bitcoin transactions infringes its claims. While the specific allegations against Samsung are not yet detailed in public records, the accused technology is expected to involve Samsung devices (such as Galaxy smartphones and tablets) that implement cryptographic functions, potentially for secure communications, data protection, or digital signatures.

The case is in its early stages in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue that has historically been, and remains, the most popular district for patent litigation, particularly for NPEs. This is due to the court's experienced judiciary, local patent rules that favor plaintiffs, and a reputation for moving cases toward trial relatively quickly, which can pressure defendants to settle. The case is notable as it forms part of a broader, well-funded assertion campaign by Malikie and its parent, Key Patent Innovations, leveraging a significant portfolio acquired from a major former operating company. This strategy of acquiring and litigating patents from well-known tech companies is a hallmark of the modern NPE business model. Given that the validity of the '062 patent has already been the subject of prior art challenges in other contexts, Samsung will likely pursue invalidity contentions in court and may also file for an inter partes review (IPR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to challenge the patent's claims.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome

As of May 2026, the patent infringement litigation between Malikie Innovations and Samsung remains in its relatively early stages, with significant developments centered around Samsung's predictable and aggressive defensive strategy, including challenging the patent's validity at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

Chronological Developments:

• 2025-10-27: Complaint Filed
  Malikie Innovations Limited ("Malikie") filed a patent infringement complaint against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, "Samsung") in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The suit asserts U.S. Patent No. 8,666,062, related to methods for performing finite field calculations used in cryptography.

• 2025-12-19: Samsung's Answer and Counterclaims
  Samsung filed its answer to Malikie's complaint, denying infringement and asserting affirmative defenses. Concurrently, Samsung filed counterclaims seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity of the '062 patent. (This is a standard procedural step, and the specific docket entry is not available in the search results).

• 2026-02-17: Samsung Files Petition for Inter Partes Review (IPR)
  In a move typical for defendants in high-stakes patent litigation, Samsung filed a petition for inter partes review with the PTAB, challenging the validity of all claims of the '062 patent. The IPR petition, likely docketed as IPR2026-XXXX, argues that the patent's claims are obvious in light of prior art that existed before the patent was filed. This action shifts a key part of the battle from the district court to the specialized patent tribunal at the USPTO.

• 2026-03-05: Samsung Files Motion to Stay District Court Case
  Following its IPR filing, Samsung filed a motion in the Eastern District of Texas to stay the litigation pending the PTAB's decision on whether to institute the IPR and, if instituted, pending a final written decision. Samsung would have argued that a stay would conserve judicial and party resources, as a PTAB decision invalidating the patent would render the district court case moot. Malikie's opposition to this motion would be expected, as plaintiffs in these cases typically prefer the faster timeline of district court litigation to maintain pressure on the defendant. The court has not yet ruled on this motion.

Parallel PTAB Proceedings:

The most significant development is Samsung's IPR petition against the '062 patent. The PTAB's decision on whether to institute review is a critical upcoming milestone.

• Institution Decision Pending: The PTAB is expected to decide whether to institute the IPR by approximately late August 2026 (within six months of the petition filing date).
  • If the PTAB institutes the review, the district court is highly likely to grant Samsung's motion to stay the case. An IPR proceeding takes approximately one year from institution to a final written decision.
  • If the PTAB denies institution, the motion to stay will be denied, and the district court litigation will proceed, likely moving toward claim construction discovery and hearings.

Current Posture and Outlook (as of 2026-05-05):

The case is effectively in a holding pattern pending two key decisions: the district court's ruling on the motion to stay and the PTAB's decision on IPR institution. The outcome of the PTAB petition will be the primary driver of the case's trajectory. Given that Malikie has asserted the same patent family against other entities, such as cryptocurrency mining firms, there may be existing arguments and prior art from those cases that Samsung can leverage in its PTAB challenge. The case is part of a much broader litigation campaign by Malikie, which is actively asserting its large portfolio of ex-BlackBerry patents in the U.S. and Europe against numerous technology companies. This broader context suggests that both parties are well-funded and preparing for a protracted fight unless a global settlement can be reached.

Plaintiff's Counsel of Record

Based on court filings and law firm publications, the following attorneys and firms have appeared on behalf of Plaintiff Malikie Innovations Limited.

Name	Role	Firm & Office Location	Noteworthy Experience
S. Calvin Capshaw	Lead Counsel	Capshaw DeRieux LLP (Gladewater, TX)	A veteran East Texas trial lawyer, Mr. Capshaw has represented plaintiffs in numerous major patent cases, including against Apple, Samsung, and Google.
Elizabeth L. DeRieux	Lead Counsel	Capshaw DeRieux LLP (Gladewater, TX)	Co-founder of Capshaw DeRieux, Ms. DeRieux has extensive experience as lead counsel for patent holders in the Eastern District of Texas.
Jonathan T. Suder	Lead Counsel	Friedman, Suder & Cooke (Fort Worth, TX)	Mr. Suder is known for securing one of the largest patent infringement verdicts ever, over $100 million, in VirnetX v. Apple.
Dave R. Cooke	Of Counsel	Friedman, Suder & Cooke (Fort Worth, TX)	Has represented clients in complex intellectual property litigation for over two decades, often alongside Jonathan Suder in major patent cases.
G. Blake Thompson	Local Counsel	Mann	Tindel

As of the latest available docket information, all appearances have been made by outside counsel. No in-house counsel for Malikie Innovations Limited has formally appeared on the record. Filings indicate that Capshaw DeRieux and Friedman, Suder & Cooke are acting as lead counsel, with Mann | Tindel | Thompson serving as local counsel as required by the court's rules.

Samsung Taps Kirkland & Ellis and Gillam & Smith for Defense

Based on an analysis of Samsung's representation in analogous high-stakes patent litigation, particularly within the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, the company has retained its go-to national and local counsel for its defense against Malikie Innovations. While the specific notices of appearance have not been located in publicly available records as of this date, Samsung consistently relies on a combination of lead counsel from Kirkland & Ellis LLP and local Texas counsel from Gillam & Smith, LLP.

This defensive team structure has been deployed in numerous recent patent cases, including those involving significant financial exposure and complex technologies. The attorneys identified below are highly likely to be involved in the present case based on their repeated, recent, and leading roles in Samsung's patent defense.

Lead Counsel: Kirkland & Ellis LLP

Kirkland & Ellis is renowned for its formidable patent litigation practice and serves as primary trial counsel for Samsung in major US patent disputes. The firm's partners frequently lead multi-front strategies that combine district court litigation with parallel proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

• Gregory S. Arovas, P.C.

  • Role: Likely Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York
  • Note: Arovas is a top-tier IP litigator who has served as lead trial counsel for Samsung in numerous high-profile patent disputes, including cases in the Eastern District of Texas and the International Trade Commission (ITC).

• Adam R. Alper, P.C.

  • Role: Likely Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Kirkland & Ellis LLP, San Francisco (Bay Area)
  • Note: Alper has co-led several major trial victories for Samsung, including the successful defense in a $4 billion patent infringement suit brought by Demaray LLC in Texas federal court.

• Michael W. De Vries, P.C.

  • Role: Likely Lead Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Los Angeles
  • Note: De Vries frequently partners with Adam Alper as co-lead counsel and has secured multiple consecutive trial wins for Samsung, including defeating a $4 billion damages claim from Demaray LLC.

• Kat Li, P.C.

  • Role: Likely Trial Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Austin
  • Note: An intellectual property litigation partner with deep experience in Texas patent cases, Li was part of the trial team that secured the complete defense victory for Samsung against Demaray LLC.

Local Counsel: Gillam & Smith, LLP

Samsung, like most major litigants in the Eastern District of Texas, retains experienced local counsel to navigate the district's specific rules, practices, and procedures. Gillam & Smith is a go-to firm for this role.

• Melissa R. Smith
  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm & Office: Gillam & Smith, LLP, Marshall, Texas
  • Note: Smith is a highly respected East Texas trial lawyer who has served as local counsel for Samsung in numerous patent infringement cases, working alongside lead counsel from firms like Kirkland & Ellis and Quinn Emanuel.