In June 2018, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) saw petitioners wage validity challenges against a variety of prominent NPEs. Among those hit by petitions for AIA review in June was Intellectual Ventures LLC (IV), which has not filed any new litigation in the US since October 2017, but continues to assert patents overseas; and NPEs affiliated with Fortress Investment Group LLC and Industrial Technology Research Institute. Also in June, the PTAB instituted trial for two IPRs against affiliates of top litigant IP Edge LLC, which remains the most prolific patent plaintiff of the past 18 years by the number of defendants added to US patent suits. In addition, the Board issued final decisions in IPRs against IV, the California Institute of Technology, inventor Daniel L. Flamm, and frequent litigants Realtime Data LLC and Uniloc Corporation Pty. Limited.

Since the US Supreme Court issued its decision in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, RPX has seen an upswing in venue-related filings by both plaintiffs and defendants—with indications that some NPEs may be throwing in the towel on Texas, while others are seemingly digging in. Defendants have also begun to adapt their defensive strategies, asserting more comprehensive interpretations of the patent venue statute and proactively maintaining their right to bring venue challenges down the road.

On the same day of a dismissal in a case filed against Apple in April 2014, CyWee Group Ltd., a British Virgin Islands entity affiliated with Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI), has filed a second suit asserting the same two patents (8,441,438; 8,552,978), this time against Samsung (2:17-cv-00140). The patents, the earliest two to issue from a family of three, generally relate to measuring, calculating, and outputting the movement of a device so that those movements can be translated to a two-dimensional screen. The accused products are certain Samsung smartphones and tablets.

Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) sued LGE asserting two patents that have been seen in previous litigation. This is the eighth time the entity has sued LG or one of its subsidiaries. The patents-in-suit relate to frame structures for data transmission (8,249,204, 8,265,096). LGE’s devices, including laptops, smartphones, smart TVs, and tablets, are accused of infringing the patents-in-suit. ITRI has filed all of its suits against LG in the Eastern District of Texas, including this one. Most of those cases were transferred to the District of New Jersey; two were transferred to the Southern District of California. Three of the previous suits against LG remain open.

Following reexamination of patent 6,459,413, Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) asserted the patent against LG Electronics. The patent-in-suit relates to a microstrip antenna, and LGE’s mobile phones are accused of infringement. ITRI previously asserted the patent against LGE in December 2010, and the action was dismissed pending reexamination of the ‘413 patent. A reexam certificate issued on October 10, 2014, cancelling claim 1 of the patent and adding claims 18-30. The other claims of the patent were not reexamined.