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.
October’s photonics-related IP activities include 32 cases concerning various technologies, including displays; cameras, imaging systems, and image processing; lighting and light sources; sensors; medical applications; solar energy; manufacturing and computer vision; optical communications; augmented reality/virtual reality (AR/VR); wearable optical devices; and optical testing.
Displays
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied institution of Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs) on U.S. Patent No. 7,159,988 and 9,900,569, owned by Maxell Ltd. f/k/a Hitachi Maxell Ltd. The patents describe a projection display system. The IPRs had been sought by Coretronic Corp. and Optoma Corp. after being sued for patent infringement.
The PTAB denied institution of IPRs on U.S. Patent Nos. 8,642,491 and 9,512,025, owned by Corning Inc. The patents describe methods of making glass sheets for use in a liquid crystal display (LCD). The IPRs had been sought by Caihong Display Devices Co. Ltd. in response to being sued for patent infringement by Corning.
On October 14th, Guangzhou Yuehong Technology Co. Ltd. sued Buffalo Games LLC in the Southern District of New York for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,927,672. The patent describes a multicolored, pressure-sensitive liquid crystal device.
On October 16th, Control Synch Systems LLC sued TTE Technology Inc. in the Central District of California for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,812,889. The patent describes a control system for synchronously controlling a display device and a gaming device.
On October 23rd, Tianma Microelectronics Co. Ltd. filed a petition for an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 11,251,394, owned by LG Display Co. Ltd. The patent describes a touch-sensitive organic light-emitting diode (OLED) display. Tianma filed the petition in response to being sued for infringement of the patent earlier this year. The PTAB should decide by the end of April 2026 whether to institute the IPR.
On October 27th, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. was found not to infringe U.S. Patent No. 8,314,547, owned by Pictiva Displays International Ltd. by a court in the Eastern District of Texas. The patent describes an OLED display that has a desired color when in the “off” state.
On October 28th, Alpha Touch Group LLC sued multiple Lenovo companies in the Eastern District of Texas for infringing four patents that describe touch-sensitive screen and display technologies used in electronic devices. The defendants are LCFC (Hefei) Electronics Technology Co. Ltd. d/b/a LC Future Center and Lenovo Compal Future Center; Lenovo (Beijing) Ltd.; Lenovo Centro Tecnologico S de RL CV; Lenovo Group Ltd.; Lenovo Information Products Shenzhen Co. Ltd.; Lenovo PC HK Limited; Lenovo (Shanghai) Electronics Technology Co. Ltd.; Lenovo (Thailand) Limited; Motorola Mobile Communication Technology Ltd. d/b/a Lenovo Mobile Communication Technology Ltd.; and Motorola (Wuhan) Mobility Technologies Communication Co. Ltd. The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 8,482,542; 9,395,857; 9,606,675; and 11,493,794.
On October 31st, Light Guide Innovations LLC filed suit against Samsung Electronics America LP and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. in the Eastern District of Texas for the infringement of 16 patents. The patents cover various aspects of LED lighting and image enhancement technologies for televisions and displays. The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 7,922,380; 7,936,415; 8,052,307; 8,213,093; 8,237,352; 8,267,537; 8,292,447; 8,395,183; 8,506,122; 8,562,200; 8,616,729; 8,723,411; 8,823,048; 9,534,744; 9,638,378; and 10,030,823.
Cameras, imaging systems, and image processing
On October 8th, the Artificial Intelligence Industry Association Inc. (AIIA) sued Exposure Software LLC in the Eastern District of North Carolina for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,508,580; 8,965,121; and 9,185,388. These patents describe image color matching and the creation of 3D images of a scene.
VDPP LLC continued to assert its image-processing patent portfolio, suing Marriott International Inc. d/b/a Courtyard by Marriott Middleton for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,030,902 and 9,948,922. The patents describe image processing and video frame manipulation to convert 2D images into 3D motion pictures. The ‘902 patent has now been asserted against seven parties and the ‘922 patent against 36 parties.
On October 17th, Samsara Inc. filed a petition for an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 12,136,276, owned by Motive Technologies Inc. f/k/a Keep Truckin Inc. The patent describes a method of initializing a camera for lane detection and distance estimation using single-view geometry. Motive Technologies sued Samsara for infringement of the patent last year. The PTAB should decide whether to institute the IPR by mid-April 2026.
On October 27th, the University of Southern California sued Google LLC in the Western District of Texas for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,026,929 and 8,264,504. The patents describe methods for overlaying 2D images onto 3D models, as used in Google Earth, Google Maps, and Google Street View.
On October 30th, SICK Product & Competence Center Americas LLC, SICK AG, and SICK Inc. filed a patent infringement suit in the District of Minnesota against Vision Augmentation Technology LLC for the infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,433,021. The patent describes stereoscopic targeting, and a tracking and navigating device that uses the method.
Lighting and light sources
On October 6th, the PTAB instituted an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 8,614,539, owned by Feit Electric Company Inc. The patent describes a wavelength conversion component for an LED that includes a photoluminescent material and a light scattering material. The IPR was sought by Savant Technologies LLC d/b/a GE Lighting, Elong International USA Inc., and Xiamen Longstar Lighting Co. Ltd. in response to a patent infringement suit filed by Feit. The PTAB should issue a written decision in the IPR by early October 2026.
On October 10th, Pacem IP Holdings LLC sued Maxim Lighting International Inc. and Sunco Lighting Inc. in separate lawsuits in the Central District of California for infringement of patents relating to LED lamps with gas cooling and filament-style LED assemblies. The four patents asserted against Maxim are U.S. Patent Nos. 8,591,062; 8,752,983; 9,410,687; and RE48489. Pacem asserted the same patents against Sunco, in addition to U.S. Patent No. 8,684,559.
The PTAB denied institution of the petition filed by Astera Manufacturing Limited and Chauvet and Sons LLC for an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 7,651,245, owned by ElectraLED Inc. The patent describes an LED light fixture with an internal power supply.
In a mixed decision, the PTAB issued a final written decision in an IPR of U.S. Patent No. 10,393,363, owned by Delta Faucet Co. The patent describes the incorporation of a light into a shower head. The IPR had been sought by Kohler Co. Of claims 1-24 challenged by Kohler, the PTAB found claims 1, 2, and 9 to be invalid, while the remaining 21 claims remain valid.
On October 17th, Vernon Lombard sued Lumen Labs (HK) Limited in the Eastern District of Texas for the infringement of seven patents relating to the provision of a light source into a helmet to, for example, improve the wearer’s visibility. The patents are U.S. Patent Nos. 8,608,333; 10,030,864; 10,039,336; 11,291,261; 11,717,045; 11,867,387; and 12,310,444.
Sensors
On October 10th, the PTAB denied institution of the petition filed by OmniVision Technologies Inc. for an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 6,838,651, owned by RE Secured Networks LLC. The patent describes a high-sensitivity snapshot complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS) image sensor.
On October 13th, WHOOP Inc. filed a petition for a Post Grant Review (PGR) on U.S. Patent No. 12,193,790, owned by Omni MedSci Inc. The patent describes wearable devices that include semiconductor light sources for measuring physiological parameters using optical sensing. WHOOP filed the petition in response to being sued for infringement of the ‘790 patent by Omni. The PTAB should decide by mid-April 2026 whether to institute the PGR.
The PTAB denied institution of IPRs on U.S. Patent Nos. 10,468,543 and 10,446,700, owned by W&Wsens Devices Inc. The patents describe broadband, microstructure-enhanced, absorption-photosensitive devices. The IPRs had been sought by Samsung Austin Semiconductor LLC after being sued for infringement of the patents.
Medical applications
GE Healthcare Ltd. filed a petition for an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 11,938,201, owned by John Hopkins University. The patent describes low molecular weight radiopharmaceuticals and optical imaging agents with a modular three-component design comprising a radiolabeling moiety, a linker, and a targeting moiety for fibroblast activation protein-α. The PTAB should decide by mid-April 2026 whether to institute the IPR.
On October 24th, Erchonia Corporation LLC sued a group of partnerships and unincorporated associations identified as operating under the brand “Perfect Laser” for infringing its U.S. Patent Nos. 7,947,067 and 9,149,650. The patents describe a scanning treatment laser and a method for slimming a human body using laser energy of wavelengths shorter than 632 nm.
Solar energy
Voltage LLC and Ningbo Voltage Smart Production Co. filed a petition for an IPR of U.S. Patent No. 12,015,376, owned by Shoals Technologies Group LLC. The patent describes a lead assembly for connecting solar panel arrays to an inverter. Voltage and Ningbo filed the petition in response to a patent infringement suit filed by Shoals earlier this year. The PTAB should decide whether to institute the IPR by mid-April next year.
The PTAB instituted IPRs at the request of Canadian Solar (USA) Inc. for IPRs in U.S. Patent Nos. 9,722,104 and 10,230,009, owned by Trina Solar Co. Ltd. The patents describe solar cells and a method of manufacturing them. The PTAB also granted Canadian Solar’s motions to join the IPRs with current IPRs against the same patents in which Runergy Alabama Inc. is the petitioner.
On October 31st, Shanghai Jinko Green Energy Enterprise Management Co. Ltd. and Zhejiang Jinko Solar Co. Ltd. filed suit in the Southern District of Texas against New Energy Imports Inc., PT SEG Solar Manufaktur Indonesia, SEG Energy Singapore Pte. Ltd, SEG Manufacturing Inc., SEG Soar Inc., and SEG Solar Jiangsu Co. Ltd. for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 11,824,136. The patent describes a solar cell substrate with textured structures on each side.
Manufacturing and computer vision
On October 7th, Blue 425 LLC sued Laserline GmbH, Laserline Inc., and WBC Photonics Inc. in the Eastern District of Michigan for the infringement of five patents. U.S. Patent Nos. 10,940,562; 11,612,957; and 12,220,764 describe laser welding, including copper welding, using blue lasers. U.S. Patent Nos. 11,654,489 and 11,980,970 describe 3D printing and laser-based additive manufacturing.
The PTAB instituted an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 10,514,711, owned by Airspace Systems Inc. The patent describes a method of controlling an aerial vehicle based on capturing an image, identifying a target in the image, determining the relative location of the target with respect to the vehicle, and controlling the vehicle based on the location. The IPR was sought by Axon Enterprise Inc. f/k/a TASER International Inc.; Dedrone Holdings Inc., and Skydio Inc. after Airspace sued Dedrone for infringement. The PTAB should issue a final written decision by mid-October 2026.
Optical communications
On October 10th, Accelight Technologies Inc. and Eoptolink Technology USA Inc. filed a petition for an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 9,448,367, owned by Applied Optoelectronics Inc. The patent describes a multichannel optical transceiver module that includes a dual fiber-type direct link adapter for optical coupling optical subassemblies in the transceiver module. The petitioners sought the IPR in response to being sued by Applied Optoelectronics in 2024 for infringement of the patent. The PTAB should decide by mid-April 2026 whether to institute the IPR.
AR/VR
The PTAB instituted IPRs on U.S. Patent Nos. 9,662,582; 9,744,448; 10,179,277; 10,967,270; 10,974,151; 11,033,821; 11,904,243; and 12,019,791, owned by Mullen Industries LLC. The patents describe location-based games and AR video game systems, and their implementation on location-enabled devices. The IPRs are based on petitions filed by Meta Platforms Inc. f/k/a Facebook Inc. after being sued by Mullen for patent infringement. The PTAB should issue final written decisions by mid-October 2026.
Wearable optical devices
On October 3rd, Flick Intelligence LLC sued Epson America Inc. and Seiko Epson Corp. in the Western District of Texas for infringement of its U.S. Patent No. 9,465,237. The patent describes prescription eyeglasses with automatically focusable lenses.
Optical testing
The PTAB issued a final written opinion in an IPR on U.S. Patent No. 7,487,684, owned by the University of California, finding all claims valid. The patent describes a method and apparatus of using glass-modified stress waves to separate ultrathin films from a substrate, for measuring the tensile strength of the film/substrate interface. The IPR had been sought by The Boeing Company after being sued for infringement by the University of California’s licensee, Laser Spallation Technologies LLC.
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 earned his doctorate in laser physics from The University of St. Andrews in Scotland. After working in lasers and electro-optics for 10 years, he switched careers and has worked in patent law for more than 25 years. He is experienced in patent prosecution, litigation, counseling, FTO, and due diligence analyses.