Delaware District Judge Richard G. Andrews has granted a motion by plaintiff L2 Mobile Technologies LLC to file its latest complaint (and associated exhibits) under seal. The defendant is TCL (TCT Mobile) (1:22-cv-01306), with L2 Mobile contending that the complaint contains information falling under a May 2019 confidentiality agreement between the parties, as it allegedly discloses information related to negotiations over a potential patent license and specific terms from that potential license. Three wireless communications patents are at issue in the case, including patents that L2 Mobile has alleged to be essential to the practice of the 3G standard.
Two of those patents (8,054,777; 8,179,913) appeared in L2 Mobile’s prior complaints, one filed in the Western District of Texas against Alphabet (Google) in April 2021 and the other in the District of Delaware against Ford in October of last year. The Google case was transferred to the Northern District of California, where little happened before it was dismissed with prejudice in July 2022. The Ford suit was voluntarily dismissed, without prejudice, this past June. L2 Mobile now asserts a third patent (8,483,144) against TCL, the ‘144 patent making its litigation debut.
A redacted version of L2 Mobile’s complaint, filed ten days after the version under seal, reveals that TCL is accused of infringing those patents through the provision of smartphones and tablets compliant with either the 3G standard alone or both the 3G and 4G standards. Numerous exemplary devices are listed, including products sold under the defendant’s own brand as well as those of Alcatel, BlackBerry, and T-Mobile. While many details of the parties’ licensing negotiations have been omitted, the public version complaint alleges that TCL did not respond to a series of emails from L2 Mobile’s counsel sent as early as February 2017, and that the parties only began to engage in negotiations in 2019 after L2 Mobile sent a demand letter to one of TCL’s customers.
Formed in Texas in December 2016, L2 Mobile acquired the patents in a portfolio of 19 from Innovative Sonic Limited—which picked up the patents from ASUSTek—in January 2017. The patents appear to belong to a portfolio described on the website of patent monetization firm Longhorn IP LLC as originating with a “world renowned consumer electronics company” and comprising over 150 assets related to “3G and 4G/LTE cellular technologies”. Christian (“Chris”) Dubuc and Khaled Fekih-Romdhane, both past executives of Acacia Research Corporation, formed Longhorn IP, also in 2016, also in Texas. Dubuc has since left the firm (and formed Harfang IP Investment Corp).
Longhorn IP identifies its “portfolios” via the Texas entities that hold them: Carthage Silicon Innovations LLC (holding patents issuing to either SK hynix or Magnachip); Dido Wireless Innovations LLC (described on the Longhorn IP website as “holding LTE and 5G standard patents”, with no such assets yet appearing in publicly available USPTO records); Hamilcar Barca IP LLC (holding former MediaTek patents); HANNIBAL IP LLC (holding patents issuing to FG Innovation Company Ltd. (f/k/a FG IP Innovation Company Ltd.)); Katana Silicon Technologies LLC (holding and litigating former Samsung, Sharp, and Toshiba portfolios); L2 Mobile (holding the former ASUSTek patents received from Innovative Sonic); Lone Star Silicon Innovations LLC (holding and litigating multiple patents received from AMD); Nordic Interactive Technologies LLC (having received from Intellectual Ventures LLC over 20 US patents originally developed by Firepad, Voicecraft, or Nokia); Nyckel UI Technologies LLC (holding five patents from a pair of individual inventors); Ox Mobile Technologies LLC (holding several patents received from ZTE); and Trenchant Blade Technologies, LLC (holding and now litigating former TSMC assets).
As noted, Fekih-Romdhane and Longhorn IP are involved in litigation filed by various of these entities, as well as in an escalation of a long-running fight with Micron in Idaho and a declaratory judgment action filed in Northern California by SK hynix. Micron accuses the monetization firm of violating a largely untested Idaho law barring bad-faith patent assertion—seeking both damages from Longhorn IP and asking the court to impose a $15M bond against it. For details concerning that row, see “Idaho’s Bad-Faith Assertion Statute Not Federally Preempted, State Argues in Longhorn IP Suit” (September 2022). Longhorn IP, as well as Hamilcar Barca IP and Trenchant Blade, have contested jurisdiction—Longhorn IP both personal and subject matter; and the other two, just personal—in response to the DJ complaint filed by SK hynix, in response to which motions SK Hynix has filed an amended complaint pleading additional jurisdictional facts, based on, among other things, notice letters sent into the district. For background concerning the case, see “SK hynix Sues Longhorn IP and Two of Its ‘Portfolio’ Entities” (July 2022).
Although the L2 Mobile case against TCL was initially assigned to Judge Andrews, it has since been moved to the docket of Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly. Litigants in Judge Connolly’s courtroom are subject to several recent standing orders, including one governing disclosure of any third-party litigation finance and another requiring comprehensive corporate disclosure. To dig into how those requirements have been implemented (rigorously) and how some plaintiffs have responded (by dropping cases), see “NPEs Beat Fast Retreats as Managers Ordered to Appear—in Person—Before Judge Connolly” (September 2022). 10/4, District of Delaware.
