Patent 10764803

Litigation summary

Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.

Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-pro

PTAB activity (1)

AIA trial proceedings — IPR, PGR, CBM — filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced directly from the PTAB Trial API.

1 active
  • IPR2025-00756IPRfiled May 18, 2025vs. OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. et al.Trial Instituted

Cached for 24 hours. Status strings are sourced verbatim from the PTAB API; the colored badge is our heuristic classification.

Cases on file (1)

Group view →

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 10764803. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.

Litigation summary

Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.

✓ Generated

Litigation Involving US Patent 10,764,803

As of April 26, 2026, US Patent 10,764,803 is the subject of at least one district court case and a related administrative challenge at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

District Court Litigation:

  • Plaintiff: Pantech Corporation and Pantech Wireless, LLC
  • Defendant: OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., and other entities
  • Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • Case Number: 5:24-cv-00038
  • Filing Date: Information not publicly available.
  • Outcome or Current Status: The case is currently pending. The infringement contentions for the '803 patent have been filed in this case.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Proceeding:

  • Proceeding Type: Inter Partes Review (IPR)
  • Case Number: IPR2025-00756
  • Petitioner: ONEPLUS TECHNOLOGY (SHENZHEN) CO., LTD.
  • Patent Owner: Pantech Corporation
  • Filing Date: Information not publicly available.
  • Outcome or Current Status: A petition for IPR of US Patent 10,764,803 has been filed and is pending before the PTAB. The petitioner has also filed a "Sotera Plus" stipulation, agreeing not to raise any invalidity grounds under Sections 102 or 103 in the district court case if the PTAB institutes the review. This action is part of a broader litigation campaign by the patent owner against various mobile device manufacturers.

Generated 5/14/2026, 12:46:47 PM