Patent 8102833

Litigation summary

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

Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-flash

No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged through Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review at the USPTO. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs.

Cases on file (1)

Group view →

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8102833. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.

  • Untitled casefiled 2017
    2:17-cv-00123Texas Eastern District CourtCritical litigation

Litigation summary

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

✓ Generated

US Patent 8102833, titled "Method for transmitting uplink signals," has been involved in multiple litigation cases, including district court patent infringement lawsuits, appeals to the Federal Circuit, and inter partes reviews (IPRs) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

Known litigation involving US patent 8102833 includes:

  • Optis Wireless Technology, LLC, et al. v. [Apple Inc.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Apple%20Inc.)

    • Plaintiff(s): Optis Wireless Technology, LLC; Optis Cellular Technology, LLC; PanOptis Patent Management, LLC; Unwired Planet, LLC; and Unwired Planet International Limited (collectively, "Optis").
    • Defendant(s): Apple Inc.
    • Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division.
    • Case Number: 2:19-cv-00066-JRG.
    • Filing Date: February 25, 2019.
    • Outcome/Current Status: A jury found Apple Inc. willfully infringed asserted patents, including US8102833, on August 11, 2020, and awarded $506,200,000 in damages. The district court entered final judgment on February 25, 2021. Apple appealed, and Optis cross-appealed. The Federal Circuit, in related appeals (22-1904, 22-1925), vacated both the infringement and second damages judgments and remanded for a new trial on infringement and damages on June 16, 2025. As of January 27, 2026, motions for summary judgment were being considered in the Eastern District of Texas.

  • Huawei Device Co., Ltd. v. Optis Cellular Technology, LLC (PTAB IPR)

    • Plaintiff(s)/Petitioner: Huawei Device Co., Ltd.
    • Defendant(s)/Patent Owner: Optis Cellular Technology, LLC.
    • Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
    • Case Number: IPR2018-00807.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly provided in the snippets, but the case was filed.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not Instituted - Merits.

  • Apple Inc. v. Optis Cellular Technology, LLC, et al. (U.S. Supreme Court)

    • Plaintiff(s)/Petitioner: Apple Inc.
    • Defendant(s)/Respondents: Optis Cellular Technology, LLC, Optis Wireless Technology, LLC, and Unwired Planet International Limited.
    • Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of the United States.
    • Case Number: 21-118.
    • Filing Date: The petition for a writ of certiorari was dated July 26, 2021.
    • Outcome/Current Status: This was a petition for a writ of certiorari by Apple Inc. challenging a Federal Circuit approach to mandamus in the IPR context. The ultimate disposition by the Supreme Court is not provided in the available information.

  • PTAB case IPR2020-00465

    • Plaintiff(s)/Petitioner: Apple Inc. (implied from the Google Patents listing, often associated with IPRs against Optis patents).
    • Defendant(s)/Patent Owner: Not explicitly named in snippets, but likely an Optis entity.
    • Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).
    • Case Number: IPR2020-00465.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly provided in the snippets.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not Instituted - Procedural.

  • Optis Wireless Tech., LLC, et al. v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd., et al.

    • Plaintiff(s): Optis Wireless Tech., LLC, PanOptis Patent Management, Optis Wireless Tech LLC, and Optis Cellular Tech LLC (collectively, “PanOptis” or “Plaintiffs”).
    • Defendant(s): Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd., Huawei Device USA, Inc.
    • Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
    • Case Number: 2:17-cv-00123-JRG-RSP.
    • Filing Date: February 10, 2017.
    • Outcome/Current Status: A bench trial determined that Optis Wireless, Optis Cellular, and PanOptis failed to present evidence that they offered a U.S.-patents-only license. US8102833 was among the patents alleged to be infringed. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law were filed on September 28, 2018.

  • Optis Cellular Technology, LLC, et al. v. BlackBerry Limited, et al.

    • Plaintiff(s): Optis Cellular Technology, LLC and PanOptis Patent Management, LLC.
    • Defendant(s): BlackBerry Limited, et al.
    • Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
    • Case Number: 2:16-cv-00060.
    • Filing Date: January 17, 2016.
    • Outcome/Current Status: The case settled in March 2017, with trial having been scheduled for August 2017.

  • PanOptis Patent Management, LLC & Optis Cellular Technology, LLC v. Kyocera Communications, Inc., et al.

    • Plaintiff(s): PanOptis Patent Management, LLC & Optis Cellular Technology, LLC.
    • Defendant(s): Kyocera Communications, Inc., Kyocera Corporation, Kyocera International, Inc., Blackberry Corporation, Blackberry Ltd., & ZTE Corporation.
    • Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
    • Case Number: 2:16-cv-00059.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly provided in the snippets.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly provided in the snippets.

  • Apple Inc. v. Optis Cellular Technology, LLC, et al. (CAFC Appeals)

    • Plaintiff(s)/Appellant: Apple Inc.
    • Defendant(s)/Appellee: Optis Cellular Technology, LLC.
    • Jurisdiction: United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
    • Case Number: 21-1043; 22-1904; 22-1925.
    • Filing Date: 21-1043: December 21, 2020. Filing dates for 22-1904 and 22-1925 are not explicitly provided, but they are appeals from the E.D. Tex. case 2:19-cv-00066-JRG.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Appeals 22-1904 and 22-1925 were decided on June 16, 2025, where the Federal Circuit vacated both the infringement and second damages judgments from the district court and remanded for a new trial on infringement and damages.

Generated 5/29/2026, 8:53:32 PM