Photonics IP Update offers a monthly brief of intellectual property-related legal activities in the U.S. photonics community. Designed to inform scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs, and business leaders, the series highlights the competitive technologies of interest not only in the marketplace but also in the courtroom—to provide insight into the strategies of major and emerging players and offer tips about the IP vital to protect.
Written by a U.S.-based IP attorney, this series covers the primary areas of IP, including trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets.
August’s photonics-related IP activities include 42 cases concerning various technologies, including displays; lighting and light sources; solar energy; optical communications; cameras, imaging systems, and image processing; sensors; biological applications; optical data storage; equipment control; and manufacturing.
Displays
On August 5th, BOE Technology Group Co., Ltd. filed a petition for an Inter Partes Review (IPR) on U.S. Patent No. 11,126,025, owned by Paneltouch Technologies LLC. The patent describes electrical circuitry used in a liquid-crystal touch display for handling display information signals and touch signals. BOE Technology filed the petition in response to being sued for infringement of the patent in February this year. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) will determine whether to institute the IPR by early February 2026.
On August 13th, Sinotechnix LLC sued TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd., f/k/a TCL Multimedia Holdings Ltd., TCL Industries Holdings Co. Ltd., and TCL Technology Group Corp. f/k/a TCL Corp. in the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of five patents relating to the illumination of a liquid-crystal display (LCD). The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 7,748,873; 7,901,113; 7,951,626; 8,132,952; and 9,412,913.
BOE Technology Group Co. Ltd. filed IPR petitions for U.S. Patent No. 7,636,146 and 8,319,512, owned by 138 East LCD Advancements Ltd. The patents describes a flexible display substrate and a driving circuit for an LCD display panel. BOE filed the petitions after being sued for infringement of the patents. The PTAB is expected to determine whether to institute the IPRs in February 2026.
On August 18th, Entelekon LLC sued OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd. in the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,620,663. The patent describes a portable device having different displays that run different applications.
On August 28th, Baker Laser Technology LLC sued multiple defendants in separate lawsuits in the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,185,373. The patent describes a laser diode projector that uses a rotating wheel of lenses to direct the light to appropriate positions on a screen. The defendants are: Barco NV; BenQ Corp.; Christie Digital Systems USA Inc.; Delta Electronics Inc.; LG Electronics Inc.; Optoma Corp.; Panasonic Corp.; Sharp Corp.; and Sony Corp.
Control Sync Systems LLC sued Sony Electronics Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,812,889. The patent discloses a control system for synchronously controlling a display device and a play device.
Ultravision Technologies LLC sued Ledvance GmbH in the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of four patents relating to a lighting assembly that uses an array of lenses matched to an array of LEDs. The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 9,589,488; 9,659,511; 9,685,102; and 10,891,881.
BOE Technology Group Co. Ltd. filed petitions for IPRs on a number of patents owned by Samsung Display Co. Ltd. The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 9,299,730; 10,541,279; 10,720,483; 11,081,503; 11,500,496; 11,574,990; and 11,574,991. The patents describe various aspects of OLED display technology. BOE filed the petitions in response to being sued for infringement by Samsung. The PTAB will decide by the end of February 2026 whether to institute the IPRs.
On August 29th, the International Trade Commission (ITC) made public a complaint based on U.S. Patent Nos. 7,570,334 and 7,705,948, which describe LCD devices. The complainant is BH Innovations LLC. The respondents are Chongqing HKC Optoelectronics Technology Co. Ltd.; Hisense Co. Ltd.; Hisense International Co. Ltd.; Hisense USA Corp.; Hisense Visual Technology Co. Ltd. f/k/a Hisense Electric Co. Ltd.; HKC Corporation Ltd.; HKC Overseas Ltd.; LG Electronics Inc.; LG Electronics USA Inc.; Shenzhen TCL New Technology Co. Ltd.; TCL Electronics Holdings f/k/a TCL Multimedia Technology Holdings Ltd.; TCL Industries Holdings Co. Ltd.; TCL King Electrical Appliances (Nanching) Co. Ltd.; TCL Moka International Ltd.; TCL Overseas Marketing Ltd.; TCL Smart Device (Vietnam) Company Ltd.; TCL Technology Group Corp. f/k/a TCL Corp.; TTE Technology Inc. d/b/a TCL North America; VIZIO Holding Corp.; and Westinghouse Electric Corp. The ITC will likely make an initial finding of liability by November 2026.
Lighting and light sources
Pathway IP LLC sued Chengdu ShiQiaoShang Technology Co. Ltd., Chengdu Zheshe Suipan Technology Co. Ltd., and Shenzhen Yulonglong Technology Co. Ltd. in the Southern District of New York for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,500,293. The patent describes an LED-based lighting system for use with a personal computer.
On August 11th, ams-OSRAM International GmbH sued Shenzhen Meizhi Optoelectronics Technology Co. Ltd. in the District of Massachusetts for infringement of six patents relating to the fabrication and mounting of LED chips for lighting applications. The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 8,431,937; 8,816,375; 10,164,143; 10,629,486; 11,398,586; and 11,437,540.
On August 13th, the PTAB issued a Final Written Decision in an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 10,299,336, owned by Signify Holdings B.V. The patent describes an LED lighting fixture that is configured to produce illumination of different color temperatures. Of the 20 claims challenged in the IPR, all but three claims were found to be invalid. The IPR had been sought by Luminex International Co. Ltd. and Menard Inc. after Menard was accused of infringing the patent.
BridgeComm LLC sued Shenzhen Zhenhuan Technology Co. Ltd. and Hampton Products International Corp. in separate lawsuits for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,203,275 and 8,390,206. The patents describe a variable-effect lighting system that permits LEDs of emitting colors to be operated separately, thus providing illumination of different colors.
On August 19th, Dense Matrix LLC sued Oledcomm SAS and pureLiFi Ltd. in separate lawsuits in the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,826,597. The patent describes a solid-state light system with broadband optical communication capability.
On August 22nd, EdisonLED LLC sued The Home Depot Inc. in the Western District of Texas for the infringement of 15 patents relating to LED lighting technology. The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 7,489,068; 7,560,738; 8,240,881; 9,065,022; 9,166,116; 9,368,483; 9,664,340; 9,741,699; 9,793,451; 10,224,455; 10,281,123; 10,319,703; 10,989,396; 11,519,564; and 11,808,436.
BX LED LLC sued ASUSTeK Computer Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas for infringement of three patents relating to high-power indium gallium aluminium nitride LEDs, heat sinks for high-power LED light sources, and light sources having tunable color temperature. The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 6,869,812; 7,901,109; and 8,203,260.
Solar energy
On August 14th, the PTAB denied the petitions for IPRs on U.S. Patent Nos. 8,222,516 and 11,251,315, owned by Maxeon Solar Pte. Ltd. The petitions had been filed by REC Solar Holdings AS after being sued by Maxeon for patent infringement. The patents describe a solar cell with improved lifetime and efficiency, and a front contact solar cell with a formed emitter.
On August 15th, Mundra Solar PV Ltd. filed a petition for an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 9,666,732, owned by First Solar Inc. The patent describes high-efficiency solar cell structures and methods of manufacture. The PTAB should decide whether to institute the IPR by mid-February 2026.
Ningbo Voltage Smart Production Co. and Voltage LLC filed a petition of an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 12,015,375, owned by Shoals Technologies Group LLC. The patent describes a lead assembly for connecting solar panel arrays to an inverter. The petition was filed in response to Shoals suing for patent infringement earlier this year. The PTAB will decide whether to institute the IPR by mid-February 2026.
On August 22nd, Canadian Solar (USA) Inc. filed a petition for an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 9,130,074, owned by First Solar Inc. The patent describes high-efficiency solar cell structures and methods of manufacture. Canadian Solar filed the petition in response to being sued for patent infringement by First Solar. The PTAB should determine whether to institute the IPR by late February 2026.
Optical communications
CommScope Technologies LLC was successful in multiple IPRs on patents owned by Belden Canada ULC, who disclaimed the claims in U.S. Patent Nos. 10,795,107; 11,435,542; 11,656,422; and 11,740,423. The patents relate to fiber-optic management using modular fiber-optic cassettes.
Nokia of America Corp. f/k/a Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. filed a petition for an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 11,589,142, owned by SPADA Innovations Inc. The patent describes a method of operating a mutually secure optical data network. The PTAB should determine whether to institute the IPR by the end of February 2026.
In a mixed result for the parties, the PTAB decided not to institute an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 10,313,024, but did institute an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 10,788,690, both patents being owned by Applied Optoelectronics Inc. The first patent describes a transmitter optical subassembly with trace routing to provide electrical isolation between power and RF traces. The second patent describes an optical isolator array for use in an optical subassembly module. The petitions had been brought by Cambridge Industries USA Inc. after being sued for infringement by Applied Optoelectronics.
Cameras, imaging systems, and image processing
Pointwise Ventures LLC sued Neiman Marcus Group Ltd. LLC, PlantSnap Inc., and Ashley Furniture Industries LLC in separate lawsuits for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,471,812. The patent describes a pointing and identification system in which the user points at an object (e.g., using a laser pointer) and then a digital camera takes an image of the identified object, identifying a list of likely pointed-to objects and letting the user select a member of the list. The ‘812 patent has now been asserted against 35 different parties.
On August 27th, the PTAB instituted an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 11,875,580, owned by Motive Technologies Inc. f/k/a Keep Truckin Inc. The patent describes a method of initializing a monocular camera for lane detection and distance estimation. The IPR was sought by Samsara Inc. after being sued by Motive Technologies for infringement of the patent.
Sensors
On August 28th, Samsung Austin Semiconductor LLC, Samsung Electronics America Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., and Samsung Semiconductor Inc. filed a petition for a Post Grant Review (PGR) of U.S. Patent No. 12,243,948, owned by W&Wsens Devices Inc. The patent describes a large bandwidth semiconductor photodetector with microstructure-enhanced sensitivity. Samsung filed the petition in response to being sued for infringement of the patent by W&Wsens. The PTAB should decide whether to institute the PGR by the end of February 2026.
Biological applications
On August 5th, Fossil Group Inc.; Fossil Partners LP; Fossil Stores Inc.; OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd.; Oura Health Oy; Samsung Electronics America Inc.; and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. filed petitions for IPRs on U.S. Patent Nos. 9,651,533, 10,874,304; 11,160,455; 12,193,790; and 12,268,475, owned by Omni MedSci Inc. The patents relate to a shortwave-infrared supercontinuum laser and semiconductor-based infrared sources used in noninvasive blood measurements, such as blood flow and pulse rate. The petitions were filed in response to a lawsuit started by Omni in December 2024. The PTAB will determine whether to institute the IPRs by early February 2026.
Optical data storage
The PTAB denied the petition for an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 7,266,055, owned by TS-Optics Corp. The petition had been filed by Microsoft Corp. after being sued by TS-Optics for patent infringement. The patent describes an optical pickup actuator employing a Lorenz force generated in a coil by electromagnetic induction.
Equipment control
On August 4th, the PTAB denied institution of petitions for IPRs on U.S. Patent Nos. 9,031,259 and 9,070,374, owned by SoundClear Technologies LLC. The petitions were filed by Google LLC. The patents describe the use of noise reduction microphones that include a light-emitting device to indicate whether noise reduction conditions are satisfied.
Manufacturing
Blue 425 LLC sued Trumpf Inc., Trumpf Photonics Inc., and Trumpf SE & Co. KG in the District of New Jersey for infringement of four patents related to devices and systems for three-dimensional printing and laser welding systems. The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 10,940,536; 10,940,562; 11,654,489; and 12,220,764.
This article is the author’s opinion, not that of Laser Focus World or Carlson Caspers. The information presented here should not be relied upon as legal advice.
About the Author
Iain McIntyre
Iain A. McIntyre, J.D., Ph.D., is a partner at the Minneapolis law firm Carlson Caspers. He gained his doctorate in laser physics from The University of St. Andrews in Scotland. After working as a professional physicist in lasers and electro-optics for 10 years, he switched careers and has worked in patent law for over 25 years. He is experienced in patent prosecution, litigation, counseling, FTO, and due diligence analyses.