Unified Patents v. Tianma Microelectronics Co Ltd

This case, Unified Patents v. Tianma Microelectronics Co Ltd, is a Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), challenging the validity of US Patent 12293691. The petitioner, Unified Patents, is a member-based organization dedicated to improving patent quality and deterring unsubstantiated patent assertions, often by non-practicing entities (NPEs). They operate by challenging patents in specific technology areas through administrative patent reviews like PGRs. The defendant and patent owner, Tianma Microelectronics Co Ltd, is a China-based operating company specializing in display solutions for a wide range of products, including smartphones, automotive displays, and industrial instrumentation. While a specific one-line technical sketch of US Patent 12293691 is not immediately available from public search results, given Tianma's business, the patent likely pertains to display technology.

The procedural posture of this case is a Post-Grant Review (PGR2026-00028) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The PTAB is an administrative tribunal that reviews patentability challenges. This venue is significant because PGRs allow petitioners to challenge a patent's validity on a broader range of grounds, including patent eligibility (35 U.S.C. § 101) and written description/enablement (35 U.S.C. § 112), in addition to anticipation and obviousness (35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103), unlike the more restricted inter partes review (IPR). PGR petitions must be filed within nine months of a patent's grant or reissue, making them an early challenge mechanism.

This case is notable for several reasons. Unified Patents' involvement highlights its ongoing mission to target patents it deems to be of questionable quality, irrespective of whether the patent owner is an NPE or an operating company. Challenging a patent owned by a significant operating company like Tianma Microelectronics, a major player in the global display market, underscores the potential impact on that industry. Furthermore, Tianma Microelectronics has recently been involved in other PTAB proceedings where its eligibility to act as a petitioner in IPRs was challenged based on its ownership structure, leading to a precedential USPTO Director's decision concerning foreign government real parties in interest. While that particular ruling pertained to Tianma as a petitioner in other cases, it adds a layer of complexity and scrutiny to PTAB proceedings involving foreign-owned entities.

This summary details the key legal developments and outcome for the PTAB Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding PGR2026-00028, involving US Patent 12293691.

Note on Parties: The provided case metadata lists the plaintiff as Unified Patents. However, public records for PGR2026-00028 consistently identify LG Display Co., Ltd. as the Petitioner and Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd. as the Patent Owner for U.S. Patent 12293691. For the purpose of providing accurate information from public dockets, this summary will detail the developments of PGR2026-00028 with LG Display Co., Ltd. as the Petitioner, while acknowledging the discrepancy with the prompt's stated plaintiff.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome:

• 2025-12-09: Parallel District Court Litigation Filed
  Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against LG Display Co., Ltd. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Case No. 1:25-cv-02021. U.S. Patent 12293691 was among the patents asserted by Tianma in this co-pending litigation.

• 2026-02-06: PGR Petition Filed
  LG Display Co., Ltd. filed a Post-Grant Review (PGR) petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), designated as PGR2026-00028, challenging the patentability of U.S. Patent 12293691. The patent owner is Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd., which had acquired the patent from NLT Technologies, Ltd.

• Early 2026: Patent Owner's Mandatory Notices
  Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd. filed its Mandatory Notices for PGR2026-00028, identifying itself as the real party-in-interest and disclosing related matters, including the co-pending district court litigation (1:25-cv-02021 WDTX) where the '691 patent was asserted. The notices also indicated that Xiamen Jincai Industry Development Co., Ltd., AVIC Innovation Holding Limited, and CATIC Shenzhen Holdings Limited each owned 10% or more of Tianma's stock.

• March 2026: Discretionary Denial of Tianma's IPR Petitions (Contextual)
  In separate, but related, inter partes review (IPR) proceedings (e.g., IPR2025-01579) filed by Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd. challenging patents owned by LG Display Co., Ltd., the USPTO Director denied institution. The Director ruled that foreign governments are not "persons" eligible to file IPR petitions and that Tianma failed to demonstrate that certain undisclosed entities linked to the Chinese government did not control or direct the IPR. This established a precedent regarding Tianma's eligibility as a petitioner in PTAB proceedings, though PGR2026-00028 has LG Display as the petitioner.

• 2026-05-22: District Court Settlement Approved
  The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas approved a settlement in the patent infringement lawsuit filed by Tianma against LG Display.

• 2026-05-27 to 2026-05-28: Global Settlement and Dismissal of PTAB Proceedings
  LG Display and Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd. publicly announced they had settled all patent disputes in the United States. This comprehensive agreement included the withdrawal of all mutual patent infringement lawsuits in Texas courts and all PTAB invalidation proceedings. The dismissals were "with prejudice," meaning neither party can refile lawsuits on the same matters, effectively concluding the litigation between the two companies. This settlement implies the termination of PGR2026-00028, although the PTAB docket may still reflect a "Pending" status due to the recency of the agreement.

Counsel Identified for Petitioner LG Display Co., Ltd. in PGR2026-00028

The counsel of record representing the petitioner, LG Display Co., Ltd., in the Post-Grant Review (PGR) case PGR2026-00028 are from the firm Fish & Richardson P.C. The following attorneys have been identified:

• W. Karl Renner

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Washington, D.C. office (though the service address listed is Minneapolis, MN)
  • Experience Note: Mr. Renner is known for his patent litigation work, particularly in post-grant proceedings before the PTAB and appeals to the Federal Circuit.

• Jeremy Monaldo

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Minneapolis, MN office
  • Experience Note: Mr. Monaldo is active in patent prosecution and post-grant proceedings, as evidenced by his appearance in this PGR.

• Won S. Yoon

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Minneapolis, MN office
  • Experience Note: Mr. Yoon is involved in patent litigation, particularly in the realm of post-grant review at the PTAB.

It is important to note that the case status remains "Pending", however, the parties have reached an agreement to resolve all issues in this proceeding and expect to file a motion to terminate within two months. This PGR is related to broader patent disputes between LG Display and Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd., which have recently seen settlements in co-pending district court litigation.

(Note: Initial searches had incorrectly suggested Unified Patents as the plaintiff and Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP as representing the petitioner. Subsequent, more detailed review of PTAB filings and service information clarified that LG Display Co., Ltd. is the petitioner, and their counsel is Fish & Richardson P.C. Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP represents the patent owner, Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd., with T. Vann Pearce, Jr. and Christopher J. Higgins serving as lead and back-up counsel respectively.)

Counsel of Record for Tianma Microelectronics Co. Ltd. (Patent Owner/Defendant) in PGR2026-00028

In the Post-Grant Review case PGR2026-00028, LG Display Co., Ltd. is the Petitioner, and Tianma Microelectronics Co., Ltd. is the Patent Owner, defending U.S. Patent 12,293,691.

The following attorneys from Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP represent Tianma Microelectronics Co. Ltd. in this PGR proceeding:

• Name: T. Vann Pearce, Jr.

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Washington, D.C. Office (2100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. 20037)
  • Experience Note: T. Vann Pearce, Jr. has experience representing clients in patent disputes before the PTAB and in district courts. He has been involved in other PTAB proceedings.

• Name: Christopher J. Higgins

  • Role: Back-Up Counsel
  • Firm: Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Washington, D.C. Office (2100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. 20037)
  • Experience Note: Christopher J. Higgins is also involved in patent litigation, including representations before the PTAB.