Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics

Secure Communication Technologies, LLC, a non-practicing entity (NPE) formed in January 2024, initiated patent infringement litigation against Samsung Electronics in the Eastern District of Texas (Case number: 2:24-cv-00484). Secure Communication Technologies acquired its patent portfolio, which includes the asserted patents, in April 2024 from Proxicom Wireless, LLC, an entity previously described as a "small father and son operation" that had litigated a related portfolio against retailers like Macy's and Target. Samsung Electronics, a global manufacturer of consumer electronics, was accused of infringing through the provision of its laptops, smartphones, and tablets that support features such as Fast Pair, Find My Mobile, Nearby Share, Quick Share, and/or SmartThings Find.

The lawsuit, filed on July 3, 2024, initially asserted three patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 11,334,918, 11,443,344, and 11,687,971. These patents generally relate to wireless communication systems and methods utilizing wireless service identifiers (WSIDs) to facilitate discovery and connection to various wireless services. Specifically, U.S. Patent 11,443,344 describes a system where a service device generates a wireless service identifier (WSID) including a service type and provider, and a control device processes this WSID to determine the service type and provider for connection. The case was assigned to Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap, with Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne referred for pretrial matters. The Eastern District of Texas is a well-known venue for patent litigation, often favored by plaintiffs for its expedited dockets and historically patentee-friendly reputation, with plaintiffs sometimes employing strategies like suing foreign affiliates to establish venue post-TC Heartland.

While the initial prompt noted the case as "Ongoing," public records indicate that Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics (2:24-cv-00484) was dismissed with prejudice after a notice of settlement, with the case closed on August 14, 2025. This settlement came after Samsung had filed a trio of inter partes review (IPR) petitions against the asserted patents in May 2025. Despite the settlement with Samsung, Secure Communication Technologies has continued its assertion campaign by filing new lawsuits against other major technology companies, including Apple and Google, in 2025, asserting the same wireless communication patents.

The patent infringement litigation Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics, case number 2:24-cv-00484, was filed in the Eastern District of Texas. The lawsuit, launched around July 2024, alleges that Samsung infringes US patent 11443344, among others, through its laptops, smartphones, and tablets supporting features like Fast Pair, Find My Mobile, Nearby Share, Quick Share, and/or SmartThings Find.

Here are the key legal developments and outcomes to date:

Filing & Initial Pleadings:

• Complaint Filing: Secure Communication Technologies, LLC filed its complaint against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. around July 3, 2024. The complaint accuses Samsung of infringing US patents 11,334,918; 11,443,344; and 11,687,971.

Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

• Docket Control Order: A Docket Control Order was issued on December 3, 2024.
• Motion to Transfer (mentioned in PTAB context): A pending motion to transfer the case to the District of New Jersey was noted in a PTAB document (IPR2025-00333), with the petitioner arguing that a grant would "certainly reset the trial schedule." The outcome of this motion is not yet publicly detailed in the provided search results.

Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:

• No specific Markman hearing dates or claim construction orders have been found in the provided search results to date.

Discovery Milestones:

• No specific discovery milestones with strategic significance have been publicly detailed in the provided search results to date.

Trial Events:

• Trial Scheduled: A jury selection is set for May 4, 2026, before District Judge Rodney Gilstrap. A pretrial conference is scheduled for May 30, 2026, before Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. It has been noted in PTAB filings that this case is one of several scheduled for trial on May 4, 2026, before Judge Gilstrap, leading to uncertainty about the exact trial commencement date for this specific case.

Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings:

• IPR2025-00333: An Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding, IPR2025-00333, has been initiated, and a Petitioner's Discretionary Denial Opposition Brief was filed in this IPR. This IPR is relevant to the ongoing district court litigation, as discussions within it touch upon the trial schedule in the Eastern District of Texas. The search results suggest at least one other IPR, IPR2024-01130, may also be related, though its direct connection to patent 11443344 specifically needs further verification. The outcome and full impact of these IPRs on the litigation are still pending.

Secure Communication Technologies, LLC is represented by attorneys from two firms: McKool Smith P.C. and Nelson Bumgardner Conroy P.C..

Here is the identified counsel of record for the plaintiff:

McKool Smith P.C.

• Firm Office: The firm has offices in various locations, including Dallas, Texas, which is a common base for attorneys practicing in the Eastern District of Texas.
• Relevant Experience: McKool Smith is a prominent litigation firm widely known for its work in intellectual property, particularly patent litigation, and has a strong presence in the Eastern District of Texas. The firm frequently represents patent holders in high-stakes cases and has secured significant verdicts.

Nelson Bumgardner Conroy P.C.

• Firm Office: The firm is based in Fort Worth, Texas.
• Relevant Experience: Eric M. Albritton, who managed Secure Communication Technologies, LLC's formation, was a former named partner with Nelson Bumgardner Albritton P.C. (now Nelson Bumgardner Conroy P.C.) through March 2021. This indicates a direct connection and suggests that attorneys from this firm likely serve as either lead or local counsel, bringing their experience with the plaintiff's management and potentially the underlying patent portfolios. Firms in the Eastern District of Texas, such as Nelson Bumgardner Conroy P.C., often serve as local counsel, assisting with compliance with local rules and court procedures.

Specific names and roles of individual attorneys from these firms appearing in this particular case were not explicitly detailed in the direct search results. To identify individual attorneys, a PACER search for specific appearance filings would be necessary. However, the firms themselves are confirmed as counsel.

The following attorneys represented Samsung Electronics in Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Electronics, Case No. 2:24-cv-00484, in the Eastern District of Texas:

• Benjamin Haber
  • Role: Counsel for Samsung Electronics.
  • Firm: (Firm information not explicitly provided in the search results regarding his appearance in this specific case, but he signed a filing for Samsung in an associated IPR).
  • Note: Benjamin Haber signed a document related to an IPR (IPR2025-01049) concerning a patent asserted in this litigation, indicating his involvement in representing Samsung's interests.

The case was filed on July 3, 2024, and was closed on August 14, 2025, following a Patent License Agreement between Secure Communication Technologies, LLC and Samsung, which resolved all pending disputes and led to joint motions to dismiss all claims with prejudice. Due to the case's closure via settlement, detailed information on other counsel of record beyond the named individual in the IPR filing was not readily available in the provided search results. Docket filings that would typically list appearances are not directly accessible through the provided snippets to identify additional attorneys, their specific roles (e.g., lead counsel, local counsel), or their firms and office locations. If filings were sealed or specific appearances were not publicly detailed in the snippets, it's not possible to provide further information from the given search.