Litigation

Maxell, Ltd. v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd. et al.

5:18-cv-00033

Auto-generating section 1 of 5: Case overview & background…

Each section takes ~30-60s with web-search grounding. Keep this tab open — sections will fill in below as they complete.

Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

Patents at issue (1)

Plaintiffs (1)

π Maxell, Ltd.

Defendants (5)

Summary

Earlier E.D. Tex. action listed in the patent family/litigation record. Per RPX, six patents including U.S. Patent No. 6,928,306 were previously asserted in this District against the Huawei/ZTE/ASUS group; the exact defendant mapping between -00033 and -00034 was not confirmed. A 2018 opinion, Maxell Ltd. v. Huawei Device U.S. Inc., 297 F. Supp. 3d 668, reflects claim-construction activity.

Case overview & background

Plain-language overview of the case: parties, accused product, patents at issue, and why the suit matters.

Not yet generated. Click Generate to run the LLM with web-search grounding (~30-60s).

Key legal developments & outcome

Major rulings, motions, claim construction, settlements, and the present posture or final disposition.

Not yet generated. Click Generate to run the LLM with web-search grounding (~30-60s).

In the news

What the press has reported about this case, summarized with links to the source articles.

Not yet generated. Click Generate to run the LLM with web-search grounding (~30-60s).

Plaintiff representatives

Counsel of record for the plaintiff(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).

Not yet generated. Click Generate to run the LLM with web-search grounding (~30-60s).

Defendant representatives

Counsel of record for the defendant(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).

Not yet generated. Click Generate to run the LLM with web-search grounding (~30-60s).

Record id: 6928306-5-18-cv-00033 · edit in Admin

Further reading

Joint defense groups: economics, formation, and the privilege framework
An NPE sues twenty defendants on one patent. Solo, each faces $3-5M in defense costs. Pooled into a joint defense group, the per-defendant number drops to $200-500K. The economics only work if the privilege framework is set up correctly.
Patent law glossary
Sixty-plus patent-law terms, defined in one or two sentences each, with a link to the deeper article. The universal landing pad when an article uses a term you don't know.
Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories (2012)
The two-step framework defendants now recite from memory comes from Mayo, not Alice. Mayo is the often-overlooked but doctrinally essential ancestor of every modern § 101 motion.
Lumen View v. FindTheBest (2013-2016): when a defendant fought back, the troll paid
Same patent. Same plaintiff playbook. Different outcome — because the defendant had the resources and the will to fight. Most don't. That's the asymmetry this site is built to fix.
Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) lawsuit defense: a defendant's playbook
Defending an NPE suit is different from defending a competitor's suit. The asymmetries cut both ways — and the right plays exploit the ones that favor the defendant.

All resources →