Display Control Circuits and Semiconductor Devices Patent litigation record

Technology 7 cases

7 cases on record in Display Control Circuits and Semiconductor Devices. Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

Map this field in Eureka
Litigation indexPatsnap Litigation Data··Docket source: PACER

7 cases on record

Cases on record
7
Classification
G09G5/00 · H05B44/00 · G09G3/20 · G09G3/30 · G09G3/32 · H10K50/10 · H10K50/12 · H10K59/00 · H10K59/10 · H10K59/12 · H10K59/123 · H10K59/95 · H01L29/04 · H10D62/40 · H10K50/88 · H10K59/131 · H10K59/30 · H10K59/35 · H10K59/82 · H10K59/88 · H10K71/00 · H01L33/00 · H01L27/32 · H10P95/00
Courts involved
E.D. Tex. · United States International Trade Commission · W.D. Tex.
Case no.PartiesCourtFiledDurationOutcome
2:21-cv-00104 Solas OLED, Ltd. v. Samsung Display Co., Ltd. E.D. Tex. 22 Mar 2021 351 d Closed
337-TA-1243 Solas OLED, Ltd. v. BOE Technology America, Inc. United States International Trade Commission 2 Feb 2021 409 d Closed
337-TA-1225 Solas OLED, Ltd. v. Apple, Inc. United States International Trade Commission 28 Oct 2020 27 d Closed
2:20-cv-00307 Solas OLED, Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. E.D. Tex. 15 Sep 2020 540 d Voluntary dismissal
6:20-cv-00841 Solas OLED, Ltd. v. Dell Technologies, Inc. W.D. Tex. 15 Sep 2020 113 d Voluntary dismissal
6:20-cv-00842 Solas OLED, Ltd. v. Motorola Mobility, LLC W.D. Tex. 15 Sep 2020 115 d Voluntary dismissal
6:19-cv-00631 Solas OLED, Ltd. v. HP, Inc. W.D. Tex. 24 Oct 2019 291 d Voluntary dismissal
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases classified under Display Control Circuits and Semiconductor Devices. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

Where the claim space is crowded

Which patents are asserted most in this field, and which branches are still open.

Map this field
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.