TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Patent litigation record

Company 20 cases

20 cases on record naming TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd.: 1 as claimant, 19 as respondent. Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

Litigation indexPatsnap Litigation Data··Docket source: PACER

20 cases on record

Cases on record
20
As claimant
1
As respondent
19
Patents held
Not recorded
Core tech
Not recorded
Case no.PartiesRoleCourtFiledDurationOutcome
25-1039 TP-Link Technologies, Co. v. Atlas Global Technologies LLC Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 8 Oct 2024 609 d Appeal Dismissed
2:24-cv-00272 Rothschild Patent Imaging, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies, Co. Defendant E.D. Tex. 23 Apr 2024 97 d Dismissed with Prejudice
2:23-cv-02540 Netgear, Inc. v. TP-Link Technologies, Co. Defendant C.D. Cal. 4 Apr 2023 62 d Case Stayed
2:22-cv-07571 Stingray IP Solutions, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies, Co. Defendant C.D. Cal. 18 Oct 2022 85 d Case Transferred
2:22-cv-07541 Stingray IP Solutions, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies, Co. Defendant C.D. Cal. 17 Oct 2022 86 d Case Transferred
2:22-cv-00372 Redwood Technologies, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies, Co. Defendant E.D. Tex. 26 Sep 2022 101 d Case Dismissed
6:21-cv-01340 Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc. v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant W.D. Tex. 22 Dec 2021 30 d Voluntary dismissal
2:21-cv-00430 Atlas Global Technologies, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies, Co. Defendant E.D. Tex. 22 Nov 2021 751 d Judgment on the merits for Plaintiff
2:21-cv-00045 Stingray IP Solutions, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies, Co. Defendant E.D. Tex. 8 Feb 2021 759 d Consent Judgment
2:21-cv-00046 Stingray IP Solutions, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies, Co. Defendant E.D. Tex. 8 Feb 2021 759 d Consent Judgment
6:20-cv-01150 BE Labs, Inc. v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant W.D. Tex. 16 Dec 2020 401 d Voluntary dismissal
2:20-cv-10096 VenKee Communications, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant C.D. Cal. 3 Nov 2020 17 d Voluntary dismissal
6:20-cv-01015 WSOU Investments, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant W.D. Tex. 31 Oct 2020 671 d Voluntary dismissal
6:20-cv-01016 WSOU Investments, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant W.D. Tex. 31 Oct 2020 671 d Voluntary dismissal
6:20-cv-01018 WSOU Investments, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant W.D. Tex. 31 Oct 2020 671 d Voluntary dismissal
6:20-cv-01020 WSOU Investments, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant W.D. Tex. 31 Oct 2020 671 d Voluntary dismissal
6:20-cv-01021 WSOU Investments, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant W.D. Tex. 31 Oct 2020 671 d Voluntary dismissal
8:20-cv-00759 International License Exchange of America, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant C.D. Cal. 17 Apr 2020 180 d Stayed
6:20-cv-00088 VenKee Communications, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant W.D. Tex. 5 Feb 2020 271 d Case Transferred
4:19-cv-00765 American Patents, LLC v. TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. Defendant E.D. Tex. 18 Oct 2019 297 d Voluntary dismissal
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases naming TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. in the current snapshot. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

See what TP-Link Technologies is protecting

Portfolio, claim scope and where its coverage is thin. Every answer cites the records behind it.

Analyse this portfolio
10,000 free credits to start

About this summary. This page summarises the litigation records within the coverage and snapshot dates stated here. Counts describe records in that dataset and do not, by themselves, establish the conduct, litigation success or legal position of any person or organisation.

Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.

No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed. The filing of a claim is not a court finding, and a docket marked “closed” does not by itself establish infringement, validity, settlement or a decision on the merits.

No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.

Third-party names and marks. Party, attorney, judge and company names appear for identification only. Company names may be trademarks of their owners; their appearance does not, by itself, imply affiliation with or endorsement by Patsnap.

Corrections and privacy requests. To report an inaccurate record or attribution, use the “Report an incorrect record” link on this page. For requests concerning your personal information, including, where applicable, the rights to access, rectify, erase, restrict or object to processing, use the “Privacy request” link. We assess requests under applicable law. See our Privacy Policy for details of this processing.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.