Polaris PowerLED Technologies, LLC v. Hisense Electronics Manufacturing Company of America Corporation et al DC

In January of this year, Central District of California Judge James V. Selna denied a VIZIO motion for attorney fees, finding nothing exceptional in the conduct of the last active case filed by Polaris PowerLED Technologies, LLC. Now, that plaintiff has filed another case in the campaign, suing Dell and Microsoft (6:22-cv-00254) in a single Western District of Texas complaint. Asserted is a single former Microsemi patent generally related to adjusting an LED display backlight, with direct infringement allegations targeting Dell laptops and Microsoft Surface products “that contain ambient light sensors and automatic brightness control features”. Microsoft is also charged with indirect infringement through the alleged inducement of “third parties who use Microsoft’s software (e.g., Windows) on their computers”, including Dell.

The day after an 18-month standstill provision in a settlement agreement that ended prior litigation between Polaris PowerLED Technologies, LLC and Samsung, the latter has asked the District of Delaware for a declaratory judgment of noninfringement of a single Polaris patent (1:21-cv-00068). That patent generally relates to adjusting an LED display backlight, with earlier allegations of infringement targeting certain Samsung televisions, displays, and monitors. The resumption of litigation between the two parties comes as Polaris PowerLED appeals a grant of summary judgment of noninfringement of the same patent in VIZIO’s favor, from a case filed in the Northern District of California.

Polaris PowerLED Technologies, LLC has filed another round in its LED display adjustment campaign, hitting Hisense (8:20-cv-00123), LG Electronics (LGE) (8:20-cv-00125), and TCL (8:20-cv-00127) in the Central District of California, where an earlier case against VIZIO is set for trial in September 2020. The asserted patents generally relate to adjusting an LED display backlight, with the defendants accused of infringement through the provision of televisions with certain LED backlight adjustment features (e.g., local dimming, black frame insertion, and scanning backlight features).