Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. v. W&Wsens Devices Inc.

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. has filed a post-grant review (PGR) petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) challenging US patent 12243948, owned by W&Wsens Devices Inc. Samsung, a South Korean multinational conglomerate, operates extensively in consumer electronics, IT, mobile communication, and device solutions, including the manufacturing of semiconductors and image sensors. W&Wsens Devices Inc. is described as an "inventor-controlled plaintiff" and a developer of photodetector technology, which in the context of this litigation, functions as a patent assertion entity (PAE). The PGR targets patent 12243948, which generally relates to "semiconductor photodetectors" and specifically to "microstructure enhanced absorption photosensitive devices" that utilize lightwave trapping with microholes to achieve high speed and sensitivity in thin silicon photosensor arrays.

This PTAB proceeding (PGR2025-00082), filed on August 28, 2025, and instituted for trial on February 10, 2026, is a direct defensive action against an ongoing patent infringement lawsuit filed by W&Wsens Devices Inc. against Samsung in the Eastern District of Texas (Case No. 2:24-cv-00854). In that district court case, W&Wsens accused Samsung's CMOS image sensors and products incorporating them, such as digital cameras, smartphones (including the Samsung Galaxy S23 FE and S24 Ultra), and tablets, of infringing a portfolio of five patents, including the '948 patent. The PTAB venue is critical as it offers a specialized and often faster forum for challenging patent validity, with PGRs allowing a broader range of invalidity arguments compared to other PTAB trial types.

The case is notable due to the interplay between the district court litigation and the PTAB challenge. Samsung, as a major operating company, is employing a common strategy of using PTAB proceedings to invalidate patents asserted against its core products, such as advanced CMOS and Time-of-Flight (ToF) image sensors, which are crucial components in modern consumer electronics. W&Wsens's role as an "inventor-controlled plaintiff" asserting a patent portfolio against a large manufacturer like Samsung also highlights a prevalent pattern of patent assertion by non-practicing entities in high-tech sectors. This specific PGR, along with at least one other IPR (IPR2025-00993) filed by Samsung against W&Wsens, underscores the multi-front legal battle over valuable semiconductor technology.

PGR2025-00082, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. v. W&Wsens Devices Inc., is a Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), not a district court patent infringement litigation. As such, the procedural milestones typically associated with district court litigation (e.g., complaints, answers, Markman hearings, discovery, jury trials, JMOL motions) do not apply directly to this PTAB proceeding. However, PGRs are often initiated in response to or in anticipation of district court patent infringement litigation.

Here are the key developments for the PGR proceeding and any related district court litigation found:

PTAB Post-Grant Review (PGR2025-00082)

• PGR Petition Filed (2025-08-28): Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. filed a petition for Post-Grant Review against U.S. Patent No. 12,243,948, owned by W&Wsens Devices Inc. The petition challenged the patentability of certain claims of the '948 patent.
• Trial Instituted (Date not specified, but confirmed in prompt): The PTAB instituted trial on the PGR petition. This means the Board found that Samsung demonstrated a reasonable likelihood that at least one challenged claim of the '948 patent is unpatentable.
• Current Status: The case is currently in the trial phase. As of May 25, 2026, a final written decision has not yet been issued, as the institution occurred after the petition filing on August 28, 2025.

Parallel District Court Litigation

A search for district court patent infringement litigation involving U.S. Patent No. 12,243,948 and parties Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and W&Wsens Devices Inc. does not yield any readily identifiable active or recently concluded cases. It is possible that the PGR was filed preemptively, or that any related litigation is under a different case name or has not yet become publicly visible through standard search channels.

Without an active district court case, there are no specific developments regarding complaints, answers, motions to dismiss, Markman orders, discovery, trial, or judgments to report in the context of patent infringement litigation. Should a district court case be filed, the outcome of PGR2025-00082 would likely have a significant impact, potentially leading to a stay of the litigation or influencing claim validity arguments.

Here is the counsel of record representing the plaintiff(s), Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., in PGR2025-00082:

Firm: Baker Botts L.L.P.

• Theodore W. Chandler

  • Role: Lead Counsel (in related PGR2025-00071 for Samsung)
  • Office Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Experience Note: Has 20 years of experience in IP litigation, including patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret litigation, handling cases involving electronics, software, and medical devices. He is registered to practice before the Patent Office and handles challenges to patent validity in reexaminations and Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings.

• Ferenc Pazmandi

  • Role: Back-up Counsel (in a related IPR Power of Attorney for Samsung and for PGR2025-00071)
  • Office Location: San Francisco, CA (based on typical firm structure, though not explicitly stated for this particular counsel role)
  • Experience Note: Holds a Ph.D. in Physics and is a patent agent. He has appeared in over fifteen contested matters before the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board and provides technical analysis for intellectual property litigation, licensing, and patent opinions across various technologies, including wireless communication, computer software/hardware, and semiconductor devices.

• Michael E. Knierim

  • Role: Back-up Counsel (in a related IPR Power of Attorney for Samsung)
  • Office Location: New York, NY
  • Experience Note: A seasoned patent litigator with a physics background, he has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in patent disputes before district courts, the International Trade Commission, and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. He has experience arguing before the PTAB in multiple inter partes reviews and counsels on patent portfolio development, validity, and infringement across diverse technological fields including media, telecommunications, optics, electronics, and software.

• Mark A. Speegle

  • Role: Back-up Counsel (in a related IPR Power of Attorney for Samsung and for PGR2025-00071)
  • Office Location: Austin, TX
  • Experience Note: An IP litigator who represents both startup and Fortune 500 companies in patent and trade secret litigation. He is adept at handling all aspects of district court litigation, including the damages portion of intellectual property cases, and has experience with technologies such as semiconductor devices, unmanned aircraft, and robotics.

In-House Counsel for Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.:

While not formally listed as counsel of record in PTAB filings, the following individuals serve in in-house legal roles at Samsung and are involved in managing intellectual property and litigation:

• Matthew Bathon

  • Role: Principal Legal Counsel
  • Firm: Samsung Electronics
  • Experience Note: Coordinates Samsung's ITC and district court dockets and focuses on litigating Section 337 investigations before the International Trade Commission and IP disputes in district courts.

• Phillip Lee

  • Role: Principal Legal Counsel
  • Firm: Samsung Electronics US IP Center
  • Experience Note: A veteran litigator with experience in patent litigation, patent prosecution, and licensing, he manages a docket of patent cases with outside counsel, negotiates settlements, and advises on IP issues.

It is noted that a "Petitioner's Power of Attorney" document, dated August 29, 2025 (the day after PGR2025-00082 was filed), for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. in an inter partes review identified Theodore W. Chandler, Ferenc Pazmandi, Michael E. Knierim, and Mark A. Speegle from Baker Botts L.L.P.. While this document explicitly states "inter partes review," these attorneys were also named as counsel for Samsung in a related Post-Grant Review, PGR2025-00071, indicating their role in Samsung's PTAB proceedings.

Counsel of record representing W&Wsens Devices Inc. in PGR2025-00082 are inferred from their representation in a related district court case, W&Wsens Devices Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al (2:24-cv-00854, E.D. Tex.), where the parties and patents in dispute are closely aligned. The firms representing W&Wsens Devices Inc. are Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer (US) LLP and Capshaw DeRieux LLP.

The following attorneys are identified:

• Paul J. Andre

  • Role: Lead Counsel (inferred from related district court case)
  • Firm: Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer (US) LLP (Redwood Shores, CA office). The firm was formerly Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, which merged with Herbert Smith Freehills in 2025.
  • Experience Note: Mr. Andre is a highly experienced patent litigator, recognized for successfully trying complex patent disputes. He has a background in molecular biology and has handled over 100 patent trials and litigations, including securing significant plaintiff-side patent litigation wins against major technology companies. [cite: 2 from prior step, 9]

• Lisa Kobialka

  • Role: Lead Counsel (inferred from related district court case)
  • Firm: Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer (US) LLP (Redwood Shores, CA office).
  • Experience Note: Ms. Kobialka is part of a successful patent trial team known for plaintiff-side patent litigation wins in complex technology cases. [cite: 2 from prior step, 9]

• James Hannah

  • Role: Lead Counsel (inferred from related district court case)
  • Firm: Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer (US) LLP (Redwood Shores, CA office).
  • Experience Note: Mr. Hannah is also a member of the patent trial team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer (US) LLP, which has achieved significant verdicts in patent litigation. [cite: 2 from prior step, 9]

• Aaron M. Frankel

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer (US) LLP (New York, NY office).
  • Experience Note: Mr. Frankel is involved in intellectual property matters with the firm. [cite: 13 from prior step, 9]

• Elizabeth L. DeRieux

  • Role: Local Counsel (inferred from related district court case)
  • Firm: Capshaw DeRieux LLP (Gladewater, TX office).
  • Experience Note: Ms. DeRieux has a broad federal practice including commercial litigation and intellectual property, with a focus on appellate law in both federal and state courts. Her firm, Capshaw DeRieux, L.L.P., lists PTAB as one of its practice areas and has extensive experience in intellectual property litigation. [cite: 2 from prior step, 5, 8]

While the specific document "POWER OF ATTORNEY AND DESIGNATION OF LEAD AND BACKUP COUNSEL" for PGR2025-00082 was identified [cite: 2 from prior step], its full content, including named attorneys, was not directly accessible through web search snippets. Therefore, the above information on individual counsel is based on their representation of W&Wsens Devices Inc. in a closely related patent infringement case in the Eastern District of Texas, and the firms' general experience in PTAB proceedings.