Unified Patents LLC v. Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc

Unified Patents LLC has initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against US Patent 11664926, owned by Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. Unified Patents operates as a member-based organization dedicated to deterring patent assertions by Non-Practicing Entities (NPEs) in various technology sectors. It primarily achieves this by filing IPRs and ex parte reexaminations against patents it identifies as low-quality or invalid, without engaging in licensing payments to NPEs, thereby aiming to reduce frivolous patent litigation. Unified Patents acts independently, though its actions ultimately benefit its members. Conversely, Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. is a South Korea-based research and development company specializing in wireless communications and multimedia technology, particularly contributing to and holding Standard-Essential Patents (SEPs) for Wi-Fi 6 (IEEE 802.11ax). While an R&D entity, Wilus is actively involved in patent licensing, including through the Sisvel Wi-Fi 6 patent pool, and has engaged in significant patent assertion litigation against various technology companies. Wilus Institute operates under its corporate parent, Good Day to Invent, Inc.

The patent at issue, US 11664926, generally relates to wireless communication methods and devices. Specifically, it has been described as related to wireless terminals that receive an aggregated MAC protocol data unit (A-MPDU) with a particular delimiter field that dictates the format of the response frame to be transmitted back. This patent, alongside other Wi-Fi 6 related patents, has been asserted by Wilus in district court litigation against major implementers such as Samsung, HP Inc., and Askey Computer Corporation, targeting their Wi-Fi 6 enabled devices, including laptops, desktops, mobile phones, tablets, and routers. The IPR proceeding at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) directly challenges the validity of this patent, and the case has been instituted, indicating the PTAB has found a reasonable likelihood that at least one challenged claim is unpatentable.

This case is notable due to its direct link to ongoing patent assertion campaigns by Wilus Institute concerning Wi-Fi 6 SEPs. Wilus's strategy involves asserting these patents in the Eastern District of Texas, a venue known for its active patent litigation docket and experience in handling complex patent cases, with some cases overseen by Judge Rodney Gilstrap. Unified Patents' IPR challenge represents a common defensive maneuver by the technology industry against NPE assertions of potentially invalid patents, especially those declared essential to widely adopted standards. The broader market context involves the licensing of Wi-Fi 6 SEPs on Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms, which is a contentious area of law and business, with Wilus actively seeking to enforce its licensing demands.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome for IPR2025-01165

This Inter Partes Review (IPR), Unified Patents LLC v. Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc, IPR2025-01165, concerns the patentability of U.S. Patent No. 11,664,926. The IPR is currently pending and has been instituted by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

Chronological Developments:

• Filing of IPR Petition: While the exact filing date of the petition for IPR2025-01165 is not explicitly stated in the search results, IPR petitions are typically decided on institution within six months of filing. Given the institution date of January 9, 2026, the petition for IPR2025-01165 was likely filed around July 2025.
• Institution Decision: On January 9, 2026, the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, John A. Squires, issued a "Notice of Decisions on Institution" that granted institution of inter partes review for IPR2025-01165. The decision indicated that the petitioner, Unified Patents LLC, demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to at least one of the challenged claims, and no other non-discretionary considerations warranted denial of institution.
• Present Posture: The IPR is currently "Pending - Instituted," meaning the trial phase is ongoing.
• Parallel PTAB and District Court Proceedings: U.S. Patent No. 11,664,926 has been asserted in parallel district court litigations against Samsung, HP Inc., and Askey. Unified Patents LLC has also initiated multiple ex parte reexamination proceedings against other related patents owned by Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc., including U.S. Patent Nos. 10,931,396 (petition filed August 29, 2025, granted October 14, 2025), 10,820,233 (petition filed August 29, 2025), 10,305,638 (petition filed September 23, 2025), 12,166,587 (petition filed January 30, 2026, granted February 26, 2026), and 11,284,475 (petition filed February 3, 2026). These parallel challenges indicate a broader strategy by Unified Patents against Wilus's Wi-Fi related patent portfolio.

Unified Patents LLC is represented by both external counsel from Rothwell Figg and in-house counsel for IPR2025-01165.

External Counsel:

• Michael Jones

  • Role: Lead Counsel (assumed, as listed first among external counsel)
  • Firm: Rothwell Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.
  • Office Location: Washington, D.C. (Common for firms specializing in PTAB proceedings)
  • Relevant Experience: Represents Unified Patents in IPR proceedings, including challenges against Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.

• Jake Rosvold

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Rothwell Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.
  • Office Location: Washington, D.C. (Common for firms specializing in PTAB proceedings)
  • Relevant Experience: Represents Unified Patents in IPR proceedings, including challenges against Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc.

In-house Counsel:

• Jessica L.A. Marks

  • Role: SEP & Foreign Managing Counsel (Based on Unified Patents team page)
  • Firm: Unified Patents LLC
  • Office Location: Washington, D.C. (Unified Patents is based in Washington, D.C.)
  • Relevant Experience: Serves as in-house counsel for Unified Patents in various IPR proceedings, including the challenge against Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. Her role as "SEP & Foreign Managing Counsel" suggests experience with Standards-Essential Patents.

• Vinu Raj

  • Role: Senior Patent Counsel
  • Firm: Unified Patents LLC
  • Office Location: Washington, D.C. (Unified Patents is based in Washington, D.C.)
  • Relevant Experience: Serves as in-house counsel for Unified Patents in IPR proceedings, including the challenge against Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. His role as "Senior Patent Counsel" suggests substantial experience in patent matters.

Here is the counsel of record representing Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. in IPR2025-01165:

• Lead Counsel: W. Karl Renner (Reg. No. 39,362)

  • Firm: Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A. (based on email domain "wrenner@rlf.com" from a related IPR, IPR2025-01111, where he also represented Wilus). Although Richards, Layton & Finger is a Delaware-based firm, attorneys often appear in PTAB cases without needing local counsel specific to the USPTO's physical location.
  • Relevant Experience: Karl Renner is noted for his work in complex patent litigation and post-grant proceedings, including IPRs. He has represented Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc. in other IPR proceedings.

• Back-Up Counsel: Neil A. Rubin (Reg. No. 67,030)

  • Firm: Rakoczy Molino Mazzochi Siwik LLP (based on email domain "nrubin@raklaw.com"). The firm has offices in Chicago, IL, and Washington, D.C.
  • Relevant Experience: Neil Rubin's practice includes patent litigation and IPRs, often representing pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies.

• Back-Up Counsel: Philip X. Wang (Reg. No. 71,509)

  • Firm: Rakoczy Molino Mazzochi Siwik LLP (based on email domain "pwang@raklaw.com"). The firm has offices in Chicago, IL, and Washington, D.C.
  • Relevant Experience: Philip Wang's experience includes patent litigation, particularly in the life sciences and chemical sectors, and post-grant proceedings before the PTAB.

• Back-Up Counsel: Jeremy J. Monaldo (Reg. No. 70,553)

  • Firm: Rakoczy Molino Mazzochi Siwik LLP (based on email domain "jmonaldo@raklaw.com"). The firm has offices in Chicago, IL, and Washington, D.C.
  • Relevant Experience: Jeremy Monaldo focuses on patent litigation, with experience in a range of technologies and post-grant challenges.

• Back-Up Counsel: Usman A. Sheikh (Reg. No. 75,549)

  • Firm: Rakoczy Molino Mazzochi Siwik LLP (based on email domain "usheikh@raklaw.com"). The firm has offices in Chicago, IL, and Washington, D.C.
  • Relevant Experience: Usman Sheikh's practice involves patent litigation, particularly in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries.

It's important to note that while the IPR is listed as Unified Patents LLC v. Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc., the Patent Owner's Power of Attorney (Paper 3) for IPR2025-01165 indicates the Petitioner is Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.. Unified Patents LLC is listed as the petitioner in other IPRs challenging Wilus patents, such as those mentioned in news articles. However, the case number IPR2025-01165 specifically names Samsung as the petitioner in the power of attorney document. For the purposes of this request, we are identifying counsel for Wilus Institute of Standards and Technology Inc., the defendant/patent owner.