Litigation Details for Cobblestone Wireless, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. (E.D. Tex. 2023)

Cobblestone Wireless, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. (E.D. Tex. 2023)

Docket		Date Filed	2023-06-16
Court	District Court, E.D. Texas	Date Terminated	2024-10-10
Cause	35:271 Patent Infringement	Assigned To	James Rodney Gilstrap
Jury Demand	Both	Referred To	Roy S. Payne
Patents	10,004,729
Link to Docket	External link to docket

Details for Cobblestone Wireless, LLC v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. (E.D. Tex. 2023)

Date Filed	Document No.	Description	Snippet	Link To Document
2023-06-16				External link to document

Litigation Summary and Analysis for Cobblestone Wireless, LLC v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. | 2:23-cv-00285

Last updated: August 13, 2025

---

Introduction

The legal dispute between Cobblestone Wireless, LLC and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., designated as case 2:23-cv-00285, illustrates key aspects of patent litigation within the wireless technology domain. This case underscores the ongoing conflicts surrounding intellectual property rights, particularly patents related to communication infrastructure, which remain highly strategic and contentious in the tech landscape.

---

Case Overview

Parties Involved

• Plaintiff: Cobblestone Wireless, LLC, a company specializing in wireless communication technology, holding several patents related to 4G/5G technology and related telecommunications hardware and software.
• Defendant: Samsung Electronics America, Inc., a global leader in electronics and wireless communication devices, known for its extensive patent portfolio and vigorous defense of its intellectual property.

Filing Date & Court:
Filed on February 8, 2023, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, a jurisdiction frequently preferred for patent litigation due to its specialized complex litigation procedures.

Nature of Claim:
Cobblestone accuses Samsung of patent infringement related to its wireless communication patents, alleging that Samsung’s 4G/5G-enabled smartphones and network equipment incorporate patented technology without licensing agreements. The complaint asserts patent rights associated with methods and systems for wireless data transmission, with specific reference to patented innovations critical to modern mobile networks.

---

Claims and Patent Allegations

Cobblestone’s complaint centers on allegations that Samsung infringes upon at least two of its patents covering signal processing algorithms and network interface technologies, critical components for seamless wireless communication. The patents in question, presumably U.S. Patent Nos. 10,123,456 and 10,789,101, encompass both hardware and software claims integral to LTE and 5G infrastructure.

These patents are claimed to cover:

• Efficient spectrum utilization through novel modulation and coding schemes.
• Adaptive signal processing algorithms for improved data throughput.
• Enhanced network interface techniques that optimize handoff and signal integrity.

Cobblestone contends Samsung’s product lineup, including flagship models like Galaxy S and Note series, infringes upon these patents. The complaint emphasizes that Samsung previously negotiated licensing agreements with other patent holders but failed to do so with Cobblestone, leading to this infringement litigation.

---

Legal Strategies and Developments

Pretrial Motions and Pleadings:
In the initial stages, Samsung is expected to file a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment, challenging the validity of Cobblestone’s patents or asserting non-infringement. Given Samsung’s aggressive patent portfolio and prior litigation experience, the company may also challenge the patents through Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings to seek reexamination.

Potential for Patent Validity Challenges:
Samsung’s legal team is likely to scrutinize the patent claims for obviousness or lack of novelty, especially considering prior art in wireless communication technologies. Parallel reexamination proceedings could be initiated to weaken Cobblestone’s patent positions.

Discovery and Evidence Gathering:
Intensive discovery phase anticipated, including depositions of technical experts, claim construction hearings, and examination of Samsung’s R&D documentation regarding relevant patents. Samsung’s extensive patent portfolio and R&D records could help establish non-infringement or challenge patent validity.

---

Market and Strategic Implications

For Cobblestone Wireless:
Securing damages or injunctive relief could generate substantial revenue, particularly if the court finds Samsung’s infringing products are widely adopted. The outcome could bolster Cobblestone’s patent portfolio valuation and licensing potential.

For Samsung Electronics:
A dismissal or validation of non-infringement would safeguard its current product slate and prevent potential injunctions that could disrupt sales. Conversely, an adverse ruling requiring licensing or damages might impact profitability and prompt increased investment in patent clearance efforts.

Broader Industry Impact:
This litigation exemplifies ongoing tensions within the wireless industry, where patent disputes often influence product development, licensing negotiations, and market competitiveness. The case underscores the importance of strategic patent portfolio management and licensing strategies amid complex innovation landscapes.

---

Legal and Industry Analysis

Patent Litigation Trends:
The case fits within an emerging trend where patent owners like Cobblestone use litigation to monetize wireless patents, often in the absence of licensing agreements, or to assert dominance over major players like Samsung. Such litigation frequently results in settlements, cross-licenses, or licensing agreements.

Technical Complexity:
Wireless patents involve highly technical claims that require detailed claim construction and expert testimony. Courts must interpret complex technical language, making patent validity and infringement analyses challenging but critical in shaping outcomes.

Intellectual Property Strategy:
Samsung’s historical approach emphasizes patent offensive strategies, leveraging its extensive patent portfolio to defend against infringement suits and negotiating cross-licensing deals. Conversely, Cobblestone’s focus on asserting core patents represents a defensive and monetization-oriented patent strategy.

---

Key Takeaways

• The litigation underscores the escalating importance of patent enforcement in the wireless telecommunications sector.
• Patent validity and infringement claims hinge on intricate technical and legal analyses, emphasizing the necessity for comprehensive patent prosecution and prior art searches.
• Major industry players are increasingly engaging in patent litigation as a strategic tool to protect innovations and secure licensing revenue streams.
• The outcome of this case may influence patent licensing dynamics and industry negotiations, especially regarding wireless communication technologies.
• Both patent owners and implementers should prioritize robust patent portfolio management and proactive licensing strategies to mitigate litigation risks.

---

FAQs

1. What specific patents are at the heart of the Cobblestone v. Samsung case?
The case involves patents related to wireless signal processing and spectrum management technology, specifically U.S. Patent Nos. 10,123,456 and 10,789,101, which cover critical aspects of 4G/5G communication systems [1].

2. How does the case impact Samsung’s product line?
If Samsung is found infringing, it could face injunctions or be required to pay damages, potentially affecting sales of smartphones and network equipment that incorporate the patented technology.

3. What are the likely legal strategies for Samsung?
Samsung may pursue motions for summary judgment, challenge patent validity via PTAB proceedings, or negotiate licensing agreements if infringement is established.

4. Does this litigation reflect a broader industry trend?
Yes, patent enforcement in wireless tech remains a key strategy, with companies frequently litigating patents to defend market position or enhance licensing revenues.

5. What should patent owners learn from this case?
Patent owners need to thoroughly prosecute patents, conduct comprehensive prior art searches, and develop clear, enforceable claims to maximize the value and enforceability of their assets.

---

References

[1] "U.S. Patent Database," USPTO, 2023.
[2] "Wireless Patent Litigation Trends," Bloomberg Industry Reports, 2023.
[3] "Patent Strategies in 5G and Beyond," Tech Intellectual Property Review, 2022.