Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC v. ASUSTeK Computer, Inc.

Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC, a patent assertion entity (PAE) also referred to as a non-practicing entity (NPE), initiated this patent infringement lawsuit against ASUSTeK Computer, Inc., a prominent Taiwanese multinational computer hardware and electronics company. Velocity Communication Technologies reportedly holds a portfolio of over 220 patent assets in wireless communications, acquired from major technology developers such as Marvell Technology, Inc., NXP Semiconductors N.V. (which previously acquired Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. and BlackBerry Ltd. assets), and ZTE Corporation. ASUSTeK, known for manufacturing a wide array of products including laptops, motherboards, networking equipment, and smartphones, is accused of infringing with devices that support the IEEE 802.11ax (Wi-Fi 6) standard.

The primary patent asserted in this specific case is U.S. Patent No. 8,675,570, titled "Scalable OFDM and OFDMA bandwidth allocation in communication systems". This patent details technologies related to efficient allocation of bandwidth in wireless communication systems using Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) and Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiple Access (OFDMA), which are foundational elements of modern Wi-Fi 6 technology. Although only this patent is listed in the case metadata, Velocity is widely reported to be asserting a portfolio of eleven wireless communication patents in its broader enforcement campaign, all of which pertain to Wi-Fi 6 and Wi-Fi 6E standards and associated technologies like UL MU-MIMO, BSS Coloring, TWT, and Beamforming.

The litigation was filed in the Eastern District of Texas (E.D. Tex.) under case number 5:25-cv-00100 on July 9, 2025. The Eastern District of Texas is a highly favored venue for patent plaintiffs, particularly NPEs, due to its reputation as a "rocket docket" offering an accelerated path to trial, plaintiff-friendly local rules, and a history of higher success rates and substantial damage awards compared to other districts. This case is notable as part of a widespread patent enforcement campaign by Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC, which simultaneously filed similar infringement suits against numerous other significant hardware manufacturers, including Acer, Cisco, D-Link, HP, Lenovo, LG, OnePlus, and TP-Link, targeting their Wi-Fi 6 compliant products. This broad assertion highlights a trend of NPE activity in the evolving 802.11 wireless communication technology space.

Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC filed a patent infringement lawsuit against ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas, asserting US patent 8,675,570. The case is part of a broader patent enforcement campaign by Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC targeting numerous companies over patents related to Wi-Fi 6 (IEEE 802.11ax) standards.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings:

  • Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC (VCT) filed the patent infringement complaint against ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. on July 9, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, assigned Case No. 5:25-cv-00100.
  • The complaint included a demand for a jury trial.
  • A waiver of service was returned executed by Velocity on August 4, 2025, indicating ASUSTeK's answer was due by October 15, 2025.
  • Velocity's assertion included US Patent No. 8,675,570, among a total of eleven patents (8,213,870; 8,238,832; 8,238,859; 8,260,213; 8,265,573; 8,270,343; 8,644,765; 8,675,570; 9,083,401; 9,596,648; 10,200,096) related to wireless communication technologies. The accused products in these related cases typically include devices supporting the Wi-Fi 6 standard, such as access points, computers, laptops, and routers.

• Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

  • As of the latest publicly available docket information for this specific case, no substantial pre-trial motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay have been reported. However, other cases in Velocity's concurrent litigation campaign against different defendants (e.g., D-Link, Acer) have seen joint motions to dismiss, resulting in negotiated resolutions.

• Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes:

  • There is no public record of a Markman hearing or claim construction order specific to this case (5:25-cv-00100) as of the available information. Given the case's filing date in July 2025, it is unlikely to have reached the claim construction stage yet or have its outcome publicly reported.

• Discovery Milestones with Strategic Significance:

  • No specific discovery milestones for this particular case against ASUSTeK are detailed in the available public records.

• Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-Trial Motions:

  • No trial has occurred in this case, and therefore no verdict or post-trial motions have been reported.

• Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal – Final Disposition or Present Posture:

  • As of the last retrieval date of the Justia docket on August 4, 2025, the case was active. However, given that the current date is August 4, 2026, and an answer was due in October 2025, the case would have progressed significantly since then. While the specific outcome for Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC v. ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. (5:25-cv-00100) beyond August 4, 2025, is not publicly detailed in the provided search results, it is noteworthy that other cases in Velocity's related Wi-Fi 6 litigation campaign have concluded with agreed dismissals. For example, Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC v. D-Link was dismissed with prejudice on January 23, 2026, and Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC v. Acer, Inc. was dismissed with prejudice on June 18, 2026. These dismissals typically involve negotiated resolutions where the plaintiff's claims are dismissed with prejudice and defendant's counterclaims are dismissed without prejudice, with each party bearing its own costs. Without direct, more recent docket access or specific news for the ASUSTeK case, its current disposition cannot be definitively stated beyond being active as of August 2025.

• Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

  • No information regarding parallel PTAB IPR (Inter Partes Review) or PGR (Post-Grant Review) proceedings on US Patent No. 8,675,570 initiated by ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. or any other entity against Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC has been found in the search results.

The following attorneys represent Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC in its patent infringement case against ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas:

• Daniel P. Hipskind

  • Role: Lead Counsel (Attorney in Charge)
  • Firm: Berger & Hipskind LLP, Beverly Hills, California
  • Experience Note: Specializes in intellectual property litigation and represents clients nationwide in federal trial and appellate courts, with particular experience in Texas.

• Erin E. McCracken

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Berger & Hipskind LLP, Beverly Hills, California
  • Experience Note: Represents clients in high-stakes commercial disputes with a specialization in intellectual property litigation and has obtained multi-million dollar verdicts.

• Dorian S. Berger

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Berger & Hipskind LLP, Beverly Hills, California
  • Experience Note: Specializes in intellectual property litigation, representing clients in federal trial and appellate courts nationwide.

• Elizabeth L. DeRieux

  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Capshaw DeRieux, LLP, Gladewater, Texas
  • Experience Note: Has a broad federal practice including intellectual property litigation and is located centrally to federal courthouses in the Eastern District of Texas.

Based on available information, the defendant ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. in Velocity Communication Technologies, LLC v. ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 5:25-cv-00100) is represented by the following counsel:

Jeffrey L. Johnson

• Role: Challenger Counsel
• Firm: Baker Botts LLP
• Location: Not specified in the search results, but Baker Botts has offices in Dallas, Houston, and Austin, Texas, among others.
• Experience Note: Jeffrey L. Johnson has significant experience in patent litigation, particularly in the Eastern District of Texas, and has represented clients in cases involving communications, computer architecture, and software. His case history shows him representing challengers (defendants) in numerous patent infringement lawsuits across various technology sectors.

It's worth noting that ASUSTeK Computer, Inc. has been involved in several other patent infringement cases, and other firms like Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP and Alston & Bird have represented them in the past, securing favorable outcomes in other patent disputes, including a stay in the Western District of Texas and an ITC win against Lenovo. However, for the specific Velocity Communication Technologies case (5:25-cv-00100), Jeffrey L. Johnson of Baker Botts LLP is listed as representing ASUSTeK.