The public website of former patent case file-and-settle powerhouse IP Edge LLC may now be under construction, but one of its plaintiffs, Bishop Display Tech LLC, continues to file, this past week hitting BOE Technology (2:25-cv-00309, 2:25-cv-00310) with a pair of Eastern District of Texas complaints. Asserted are separate sets of LCD panel patents, the complaints targeting the provision of BOE liquid crystal modules (LCMs) that incorporate thin-film transistor liquid crystal displays (TFT-LCDs), the TFT-LCDs themselves, and related components and products.

Last year, Light Guide Innovations LLC filed separate complaints against first TCL (TCT Mobile and multiple subsidiaries) and then Hisense, both in the Eastern District of Texas, targeting the provision of LED strips used for television or other display backlighting. Each defendant has yet to answer (or otherwise respond). Now, Light Guide has sued Walmart (2:25-cv-00312) in the same district, asserting 16 patents from the same former Suzhou Lekin Semiconductor Co. Ltd. (d/b/a LEKIN) portfolio. The plaintiff targets the provision of VIZIO Quantum, Quantum Pro, 4k, Full HD, HD, M-Series, V-Series, and D-Series televisions. VIZIO is not named as a defendant.

Innovation Sciences, LLC has dismissed its first case against Xiaomi, filed in early January, and refiled against the defendant (1:25-cv-00394), again in the Western District of Texas. The plaintiff asserts three of the six wireless communications patents from the prior complaint. Xiaomi is accused of infringement through a wide array of products—including its various air purifier, home security, mobile device, smart home, TV, and vacuum products—with device communication features (through Xiaomi’s “centralized HUB systems” or Wi-Fi) at issue.

In its latest complaint, filed against Infineon Technologies (1:25-cv-00358) in the Western District of Texas, MOSAID Technologies Inc. (f/k/a Conversant Intellectual Property Management) targets the provision of processors (i.e., programmable systems-on-chip) and wireless connectivity SoCs (i.e., the AIROC Wi-Fi and Bluetooth Combo products) that are used in a “a variety of end-products in the communications, IoT, automotive, computer, and/or consumer electronics industries”. The plaintiff pleads that the alleged infringement has been willful, contending that “between at least November 2017 and August 26, 2024”, MOSAID and Infineon and/or Cypress (acquired by Infineon in 2020) “engaged in many discussions” regarding the infringement of MOSAID’s patents.

No substantive litigation occurred in the first round of suits filed by Media Key LLC, the cases against defendants Amazon, LG Electronics (LGE), and Microsoft each dismissed with prejudice; and those against F5 and Open Text (Micro Focus), both dismissed without prejudice. Now, Media Key has sued ASUSTek (2:25-cv-00259), Compagnie Financiere Richemont (Montblanc International) (2:25-cv-00266), Getac Holdings (2:25-cv-00261), HTC (2:25-cv-00262), Hytera Communications (2:25-cv-00263), Ledger (2:25-cv-00264), Mobvoi (2:25-cv-00265), Qisda (BenQ) (2:25-cv-00260), Radix Technologies (2:25-cv-00267), RugGear (2:25-cv-00268), Sonim Technologies (2:25-cv-00269), WinMate (2:25-cv-00270), and Zepp Health (2:25-cv-00271), each over the support of content and software update tools in their various products (e.g., device management solutions, smartphones, and smartwatches).

Last year, SoundClear Technologies LLC filed a pair of cases against each of Alphabet (Google) (2:24-cv-00321, 3:24-cv-00540) and Amazon (2:24-cv-00320, 1:24-cv-01283) in the Eastern District of Virginia over patents from a portfolio received from JVCKenwood. In one of the two cases against Amazon, District Judge Anthony J. Trenga granted a motion to dismiss based on Alice challenges to the claims of the three patents asserted. In an unusual turnaround, however, the court granted SoundClear’s motion to alter the corresponding judgment, allowing SoundClear to file an amended complaint to add deposition testimony from an Amazon witness that SoundClear contends changes the patent eligibility analysis, at least at the pleadings stage. Both defendants have also filed motions to transfer for convenience, to the Northern District of California, in response to which SoundClear has identified its president and its CTO.

Vortical Systems LLC has sued Yuneec International (2:25-cv-00158) over a pair of former IBM patents generally related to navigating an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). The provision of drones is targeted here, the third campaign over this particular patent family, the first litigated by Daedalus Blue LLC from January 2020 to November 2022 and the second, by Wildcat Licensing LLC, from June 2023 to January 2025. Yuneec was a defendant in the Wildcat Licensing campaign.

This year, K.Mizra LLC has sued Alphabet (Google) (1:25-cv-00236) in the Western District of Texas and SonicWall (1:25-cv-00047) in the District of Delaware, each over two former Radix Holdings patents; and Seiko (Epson America, Seiko Epson) (8:25-cv-00027) in the Central District of California over three former Sharp patents. In the last complaint, K.Mizra puts Seiko on notice as to infringement of a fourth such patent, arguing that the defendants are “exclusively in possession of the information (e.g., source code and/or encrypted signal-related information) necessary to confirm [its] infringing activity”. There, K.Mizra also discloses backing by a prominent third-party litigation funder.

An Eastern District of Texas jury has returned a verdict for Force MOS Technology and against ASUSTek Computer. Per the verdict, Force MOS prevailed on inventorship and invalidity questions as to one of the two patents tried, both of which the jury found infringed, willfully, to the tune of $10.5M, characterized as the “sum of money, if paid now in cash” to “compensate [Force MOS] for its damages as to any infringement found”. This result follows Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap precluding Force MOS from using an alter ego theory of infringement to combat ASUSTek’s late-breaking argument that Force MOS had sued the wrong party.

Amazon (2:25-cv-00201) and Comcast (2:25-cv-00202) are the latest defendants to be added to the litigation campaign of New Mexico plaintiff Lattice Technologies LLC, begun last October with separate Eastern District of Texas suits against Apollo Global Management (ADT), My Alarm Center (Alert360), and NRG Energy (Vivint). Seven other companies have also been sued in this campaign, several of them in either the Eastern District of Virginia or the Northern District of Texas, where local rules require heightened disclosure. Lattice Technologies, represented by Rabicoff Law LLC, has ignored those obligations, filing bare boilerplate corporate disclosures across the board. Meanwhile, Vivint has renewed a motion to dismiss, attacking Lattice for “attempt[ing] to force a square peg into a round hole”.