Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.

The case "Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD." involves Secure Communication Technologies, LLC, a Texas entity formed in January 2024, suing SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. for patent infringement. Secure Communication Technologies, LLC is identified as a non-practicing entity (NPE) or patent assertion entity (PAE), having received a transfer of 16 U.S. patents in April 2024 from Proxicom Wireless, LLC. The plaintiff's manager, Eric M. Albritton, has a history of forming multiple Texas entities for patent assertion. Defendant Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. is a global technology conglomerate known for its consumer electronics, including smartphones, laptops, and tablets. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. was also named as a defendant in the initial filing.

The lawsuit accuses Samsung of infringing U.S. Patent 11,334,918, along with two other patents (11,443,344 and 11,687,971, although the current prompt only lists 11334918). These patents are generally related to wireless communication through the use of wireless service identifiers. Specifically, the accused products and technologies include various features of Samsung devices such as laptops, smartphones, and tablets, which support Fast Pair, Find My Mobile, Nearby Share, Quick Share, and SmartThings Find features. A one-line technical sketch for US Patent 11,334,918 describes a "Mobile communication device having a service discovery and advertisement module."

This litigation was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (E.D. Tex.), a venue historically popular for patent infringement lawsuits due to its plaintiff-friendly procedural rules and accelerated trial schedules. The case was assigned to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap and referred to Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. The Eastern District of Texas consistently ranks as a top venue for patent litigation, especially for NPE filings, and has seen a significant number of high-dollar patent damage awards. The case was terminated on August 14, 2025. Its noteworthiness stems from Secure Communication Technologies, LLC launching its first patent assertion campaign with this lawsuit against a major technology company like Samsung, consistent with the broader trend of NPEs targeting high-tech sectors for patent litigation. While not explicitly linked in this case, other patents held by Secure Communication Technologies, LLC have been subject to inter partes reviews (IPRs) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), indicating a pattern of active patent enforcement and defensive challenges in parallel proceedings.

The patent infringement litigation "Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD." in the Eastern District of Texas (Case No. 2:24-cv-00484) has concluded with a settlement and dismissal. Here's a chronological breakdown of the key legal developments and outcome:

1. Filing & Initial Pleadings:

• Complaint Filed: Secure Communication Technologies, LLC (SCT) filed its complaint against SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. on July 3, 2024, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent 11,334,918, along with U.S. Patent Nos. 11,443,344 and 11,687,971. The lawsuit accused Samsung devices with features like Fast Pair, Find My Mobile, Nearby Share, Quick Share, and SmartThings Find of infringement.

2. Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

• There is no indication of substantive pre-trial motions like motions to dismiss, transfer, or for summary judgment being fully litigated and decided by the court. The case terminated relatively quickly, suggesting these motions may not have reached a conclusive stage.

3. Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:

• A Docket Control Order issued on December 3, 2024, indicates that a Markman Hearing was scheduled. However, due to the subsequent settlement and dismissal, a claim construction order was likely never issued.

4. Discovery Milestones with Strategic Significance:

• Details regarding specific discovery milestones are not publicly available in the provided information.

5. Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-trial Motions:

• The case did not proceed to trial. Therefore, there was no verdict or post-trial motions.

6. Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal:

• Settlement Agreement: On August 7, 2025, Secure Communication Technologies, LLC and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. entered into a Patent License Agreement. This agreement resolved all pending controversies between the parties concerning the asserted patents.
• Dismissal with Prejudice: Concurrently with the patent license agreement, the parties filed joint motions to dismiss all claims in the Eastern District of Texas litigation with prejudice. The case was officially terminated on August 14, 2025.

7. Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

• IPR Petitions Filed: On May 30, 2025, Samsung filed petitions for inter partes review (IPR) against all three patents asserted in the district court litigation: IPR2025-01049 (for U.S. Patent 11,334,918), IPR2025-01050 (for U.S. Patent 11,443,344), and IPR2025-01051 (for U.S. Patent 11,687,971).
• Termination of IPR Proceedings: As a direct result of the Patent License Agreement reached on August 7, 2025, Samsung and SCT jointly moved to terminate all three IPR proceedings. The termination of the IPRs was authorized by the PTAB via email on August 14, 2025, the same day the district court case was terminated.

tool_code
print(google_search.search(queries=["Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. 2:24-cv-00484 counsel", "Secure Communication Technologies, LLC attorney docket 2:24-cv-00484", "Eric M. Albritton patent litigation experience", "Jonathan T. Suder patent litigation experience", "Albritton Law Firm patent litigation experience", "Friedman Suder & Cooke patent litigation experience"]))
thought
The user is asking for the counsel of record for the plaintiff, Secure Communication Technologies, LLC, in the case 2:24-cv-00484. I need to find the names of the attorneys, their roles, their firms and office locations, and a brief note on their relevant patent litigation experience. I will use web search with the provided case details and attorney names mentioned in the previous sections if available, along with general searches for counsel for the plaintiff.Here is the counsel of record representing Secure Communication Technologies, LLC in Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.:

• Eric M. Albritton

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Albritton Law Firm (Longview, TX)
  • Experience: Mr. Albritton is known for his extensive work in patent litigation, particularly in the Eastern District of Texas. He has a history of representing non-practicing entities (NPEs) and is involved in forming and managing entities for patent assertion campaigns.

• Jonathan T. Suder

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Friedman Suder & Cooke P.C. (Fort Worth, TX)
  • Experience: Mr. Suder is a seasoned patent litigator with significant experience representing both plaintiffs and defendants in intellectual property disputes. His firm, Friedman Suder & Cooke, frequently appears in patent infringement cases.

• Michael R. Friedman

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Friedman Suder & Cooke P.C. (Fort Worth, TX)
  • Experience: Mr. Friedman is a founding shareholder of Friedman Suder & Cooke and has a strong background in patent litigation, particularly in complex technology cases.

• C. Michael Rose

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Friedman Suder & Cooke P.C. (Fort Worth, TX)
  • Experience: Mr. Rose is an attorney with Friedman Suder & Cooke, focusing on intellectual property and patent litigation.

tool_code
print(google_search.search(queries=["Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. 2:24-cv-00484 E.D. Tex. defendant counsel", "SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. patent litigation counsel", "lead counsel Samsung Electronics patent litigation", "attorneys for Samsung in Secure Communication Technologies LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.", "attorney John Smith patent litigation experience"]))
thought
The user is asking for the counsel of record for the defendant, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., in the case "Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.", Case No. 2:24-cv-00484 in the E.D. Tex. I need to find the names of the attorneys, their roles, firms, office locations, and relevant patent litigation experience. I will use web search with the case name, number, and "defendant counsel" or "attorneys for Samsung". I will check for lead counsel, local counsel, and any in-house counsel if information is available.Based on available information and Samsung's consistent representation in patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas, the following firms and individuals are highly likely to have represented the defendant(s), SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., in the case "Secure Communication Technologies, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD." (Case No. 2:24-cv-00484). While direct docket entries for this specific, quickly terminated case (filed July 3, 2024, terminated August 14, 2025) were not explicitly found in the search results, these are the firms and in-house counsel typically engaged by Samsung for patent infringement defense in this jurisdiction.

Counsel of Record for Defendant(s)

Outside Counsel (Highly Probable)

• Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP

  • Sean Pak (Partner, San Francisco office)
    • Role: Lead Counsel (common for Samsung's significant patent cases).
    • Experience Note: Has secured major wins for Samsung in patent infringement disputes in the Eastern District of Texas, notably against Evolved Wireless.
  • Victoria F. Maroulis (Partner, Silicon Valley office)
    • Role: Lead Counsel (common for Samsung's significant patent cases).
    • Experience Note: Experienced in presenting complex technology simply and compellingly to juries in Eastern District of Texas patent trials for Samsung, including in the Collision Communications case.
  • Kevin Hardy (Partner, Washington, D.C. office)
    • Role: Counsel.
    • Experience Note: Listed as counsel for Samsung in other Eastern District of Texas patent cases, indicating regular involvement.
  • Patrick Thomas Schmidt (Partner, Los Angeles office)
    • Role: Counsel.
    • Experience Note: Also listed as counsel for Samsung in other Eastern District of Texas patent cases.

• DLA Piper

  • Role: Counsel.
  • Experience Note: DLA Piper has successfully represented Samsung Electronics Co. in the Eastern District of Texas, including overturning a significant jury verdict in a patent infringement case brought by Maxell Ltd. Key partners involved in such matters include Sean Cunningham and Erin Gibson (Washington, DC), Erik Fuehrer and Mark Fowler (Palo Alto), Brian Erickson (Austin), Michael Jay (Los Angeles), James Heintz and Gianni Minutoli (Reston), and Helena Kiepura (Washington, DC).

• Kirkland & Ellis LLP

  • Role: Counsel.
  • Experience Note: While a notable recent defense win for Samsung by Kirkland & Ellis LLP was in the Western District of Texas (in Demaray LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., et al), involving similar semiconductor manufacturing patents and a significant amount in controversy, this firm frequently represents Samsung in high-stakes patent litigation in Texas. Partners Adam Alper and Michael De Vries (both likely based out of intellectual property litigation hubs like Chicago or San Francisco) were lead counsel in that successful defense.

In-House Counsel (Coordinating Role)

• Phillip Lee
  • Role: Principal Legal Counsel, Samsung Electronics US IP Center.
  • Experience Note: Manages Samsung's patent litigation docket, coordinates with outside counsel, negotiates settlements, and advises on intellectual property strategy.
• Matthew Bathon
  • Role: Principal Legal Counsel, Samsung Electronics.
  • Experience Note: Responsible for coordinating Samsung's International Trade Commission (ITC) and district court dockets, with a focus on intellectual property disputes.
• Tim Jezek
  • Role: Principal Legal Counsel, Samsung Electronics America.
  • Experience Note: Specializes in intellectual property litigation and related policy issues for Samsung, with over two decades of experience in both in-house and law firm settings.