Top-5 Patent Litigation Venues Seen Nearly Half of the Cases Related to a Super NPE

As the post-pandemic world begins to shape up, the patent litigation world has seen billion dollar verdicts to record-breaking amounts of litigation financing. The explosive growth in litigation financing has come from a backlog of capital during the covid pandemic and investors seeking non-cyclical returns. As highlighted from last year’s report on NPE patent financing in the Western District of Texas, this trend can be seen among the top-5 patent venues. From Waco to Silicon Valley to Delaware, the effect of aggregations and financing can be seen. 

These venues were chosen, since the Western District of Texas now accounts for 25% of all patent litigation, while the remaining four account for 43% in the first quarter of 2021. Collectively, these five venues have seen the most litigation over the last five years, with nearly 70%. 

As identified last year the rise, anecdotally, seemed tied to frequent filers, co-owned entities, and entities underwritten by private litigation financing. Unified examined public databases, such as Edgar, to determine if there was an aggregator and known financing. NPE aggregators were defined as NPEs that have more than one affiliated subsidiary also bringing patent litigation. Third-party financing was defined as any third party with a financial interest, other than the assertors. 

When looking at the new rocket docket, the Western District of Texas, the momentum has not stopped. Nearly 64% of all cases can be attributed to patent aggregators---i.e., entities like WSOU or Uniloc. 

The year-by-year data would suggest that this momentum is only growing. The Western District of Texas–-fueled almost entirely by the Waco division–-has already seen 172 of it's cases linked to an aggregator, of the 333 cases brought in 2021 to date.

In addition, nearly 50% of all of the cases brought in the Western District of Texas can be tied to litigation financing.

Judge Albright has made the Western District of Texas not only a safe haven for small-time NPEs, but also one for those investors who are looking to use US patent litigation to reap non-cyclical, non-correlated returns.

And although the Eastern District of Texas has seen a dramatic decrease in cases, 90% of cases it has seen can be attributed to aggregators.

This trend of decreasing caseload increasingly dominated by patent aggregators can be seen below.

And with the aggregation effect comes financing, with nearly 63% of all cases being financed.

The yearly trend can be seen below.

New to this year's report, but has a long tradition in litigation, is Delaware. Interestingly, between 2015 and 2021, over 62% of all patent cases can be attributed to an aggregator.

The yearly breakdown of this trend can be seen below.

The financing identified attributes to nearly 30% of all aggregators.

While litigation may also be declining in Delaware, litigation-financed suits over the last couple of years have picked up steam.

California Northern has also seen a rise in aggregation, with nearly 57% of filed cases associated with aggregators.

Looking at the year-by-year trends, aggregation in this district appears to remain steady.

Around 16% of all aggregation has some form of financing.

Last year, despite the pandemic, financing found its way into the most cases ever recorded.

California Central has seen nearly 50% of all cases can be attributed to an aggregator.

The year-by-year breakdown can be seen below.

While not as prominent, financing can be attributed to over 13% of all cases.

There has been some movement in recent years regarding financing in California Central.

Obviously, financing and third-party economic backing is shrouded in secrecy, so this data necessarily underestimates the total percentage of cases funded by third parties, whether through private capital groups like Magnetar, Starboard, Vector Capital, or Burford Capital, or via private sources unwilling or unable to acknowledge their stake.  But what is clear from an honest assessment of filed cases is that in all of these top venues, more than 50% of patent litigation is related to patent aggregators. 


Copyright © 2021, Unified Patents, LLC. All rights reserved.

$2,000 for Acacia subsidiary, R2 Solutions, prior art

On June 28, 2021, Unified Patents added a new PATROLL contest, with a $2,000 cash prize, seeking prior art on U.S. Patent No. 8,341,157. The patent is owned by R2 Solutions LLC, an Acacia Research Corporation entity. The '157 generally relates to to using query keywords to determine a user's intent for a search entry. It is currently being asserted against Walmart, iHeartRadio, Target, Expedia, Roku, Workday, and Deezer.

The contest will expire on September 30, 2021. Please visit PATROLL for more information and to submit an entry for this contest.

Prior Art ProviderClaim Chart Link
Apex StandardsPseudo Claim Charting
Techson IPLimestone|Report
Amplified Invalidity Report
Traindex Prior Art Report
InQuartik Semantic Prior Art
IPscreener Relevant Prior Art
Google Similar Documents - Patents
Google Similar Documents - NPL
Unified Portal Relevant Prior Art

$5,000 Awarded for '715 WSOU prior art

Unified is pleased to announce PATROLL crowdsourcing contest winner, Preeti Dua, who received a cash prize of $5,000 for her prior art submission for U.S. Patent 7,409,715. The patent is owned by the most prolific NPE assertor in 2020, WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a/ Brazos Licensing and Development. The ‘715 patent generally relates to an impersonation attack detection system for a wireless node of a wireless communication network. The ‘715 patent is currently being asserted against Arista Networks in the Western District of Texas.

We would also like to thank the dozens of other high-quality submissions that were made on this patent. The ongoing contests are open to anyone, and include tens of thousands of dollars in rewards available for helping the industry to challenge NPE patents of questionable validity by finding and submitting prior art in the contests. Visit PATROLL today to learn more about how to participate.

WINNING SUBMISSIONS

Prior art found on '304 MagnaCross patent

Unified is pleased to announce prior art has been found on U.S. Patent 6,917,304. This patent is owed by MagnaCross, LLC, an IP Edge entity and well-known NPE. The ’304 patent generally relates to wireless data transmission through wireless access points or routers and has been asserted in over 100 litigations against many networking companies, including T-Mobile, Sprint, Acer, Logitech, and ZTE. Prior art search service provider, Parola Analytics, found the art shown below.

We would also like to thank the dozens of other high-quality submissions that were made on this patent. The ongoing contests are open to anyone, and include tens of thousands of dollars in rewards available for helping the industry to challenge NPE patents of questionable validity by finding and submitting prior art in the contests. Visit PATROLL today to learn more about how to participate.

WINNING SUBMISSION

U.S. Semiconductor Industry Confronts a Two-Front War

Semiconductor fabrication in the United States has been on the wane for years.  This resulted in the current microchip shortage.  Nonetheless, as legislation is being debated to add incentives for semiconductor manufacturing in the United States, several companies have already begun to increase their efforts.  Intel recently announced in March that it would build two chip plants in Arizona, and TSMC (Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company) also announced it is opening a plant there as well. Reportedly totalling USD $32 Billion, these projects are at least in part an attempt to address the ever growing chip shortage that is affecting many industries. 

For example, the chip shortages recently hit automotive manufacturing hard. As car dealerships run out of inventory, many vehicles are stuck at the assembly lines, virtually completed and simply awaiting a chip or two. It seems that the perfect storm of a long pandemic, a brief recession, and an unanticipated increase in demand for chips in personal devices spurred by a remote-based work environment all contributed to the chip shortage in many industries, including automotive manufacturing. 

But there is another storm sweeping over semiconductors in the United States. Just as companies begin efforts to address the chip shortages, patent litigation related to semiconductors is on the rise.  In particular, non-practicing entities (NPEs) are bringing a major portion of semiconductor patent litigation, fueled largely by an influx of litigation financing into the once-aloof area. Indeed, while overall litigation is expected to see a slight drop (mostly attributed to operating companies focusing on recovery rather than rapacity), with a 42% decrease from 2019 to 2020, semiconductor litigation has risen steadily for the past three years, and could overtake last year’s all-time high if the threatened clouds break.

That increase in litigation is driven by increased non-practicing entity (NPE) suits in the semiconductor space. Indeed, the NPE litigation accounted for nearly 80% of all litigation in 2021, a 7% increase from 2020, and is set to rise, given the selloffs of major semiconductor portfolios owned by Intellectual Ventures, LG, and other large patent holders.

This is in stark contrast to the industry’s rise in the 80s and 90s, when operating companies fought large cross-licensing battles. Now, the litigation landscape is dominated by NPEs. Overall, NPEs have accounted for nearly 75% of all semiconductor litigation over the past five years.

And recently, the NPEs have been backed by a new breed of moneymaker, with 52.4% of all NPE litigation related to a patent aggregator—an entity responsible for multiple patent portfolios litigated through multiple subsidiaries. (NPE aggregators are defined as NPEs that have more than one affiliated subsidiary also bringing patent litigation.)

And third-party financing has found its way to NPE bringing chip-related suits, with 25% of suits being backed by third-party financing—i.e., patent litigation funding from private, unrelated sources. (Third-party financing is defined as any third party with a financial interest supporting the litigation or assertion, other than the assertors themselves.)

This trend can be seen below when looking at the top-10 plaintiffs of 2021, with the financially backed IP Edge bringing 19 separate semiconductor assertion campaigns to date. The much better-funded Vector Capital Corporation and its cohort, however, brought bigger, longer-term litigation targeted for much bigger settlement numbers, and the Fortress IP-backed Netlist reportedly signed a $40 million licensing agreement with SK Hynix; the Magnetar Capital-backed Neodron has reportedly settled for eight figures against multiple defendants, including in the ongoing disputes with Samsung over the scope of potentially related litigation-driven settlement licenses.

The targets of 2021 have generally been either chip manufacturers or, quite frequently, on device manufacturers or product manufacturers whose products nonetheless rely on semiconductors. Not listed above are multiple selloffs from Intellectual Ventures to subsidiaries of Longhorn IP, like Katana Silicon Technologies or Trenchant Blade Technologies, which have immediately been turned around against chip manufacturers and their customers. Perennial NPE Dominion Harbor, listed above, has filed a number of chip-level campaigns. PTAB activity against semiconductor patents is at an all-time high, and even smaller repeat NPEs like the Jon Rowan entities have gotten into the game with their Liberty Patents subsidiary, listed above.

The defendant list above is partially obscured by indemnification requests and suits against consumer-facing end user products, but the representative list above shows that chip manufacturers themselves are seeing a fair number of NPE litigation asserted directly against them on their chips or fabrication processes. Recent suits by companies backed by Magnetar Capital—such as the Arigna suit—target automotive manufacturers, but rely in part on chips and hardware; other suits have originally sued some chip manufacturers, then moved on to the end users. Either way, it is clear that NPEs and litigation financiers are attracted to chip portfolios 

2021 is proving to be a two-front battle for most semiconductor manufacturers. While they actively address the world-wide chip shortage, they are being faced with litigation brought by NPEs that have access to large portfolios and financing. 


Copyright © 2021, Unified Patents, LLC. All rights reserved.