Background
Samsung and Maxell have been locked in a global patent war since Samsung’s ten-year license agreement with Hitachi Consumer Electronics (Maxell’s former parent company) expired in 2021. When Samsung declined to renew, Maxell sued in the Eastern District of Texas, Germany, and Japan. In a June 2025 trial before Judge Robert W. Schroeder III in the Eastern District of Texas, a jury found Samsung willfully infringed three Maxell patents covering video processing and smart device technologies, awarding approximately $112 million in damages.
Samsung fought back on multiple fronts, filing a series of inter partes review (IPR) petitions at the PTAB challenging the validity of Maxell’s patent portfolio. In October 2025, the PTAB issued final written decisions invalidating all challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,017,815 (a multi-user media management patent). Then in September 2025, Judge Schroeder himself granted Samsung’s motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL), overturning the jury verdict after finding Maxell had failed to offer legally sufficient evidence of infringement.
The Court’s Holding
On April 28, 2026, the PTAB issued final written decisions invalidating all challenged claims in two additional Maxell video processing patents. The decisions found the challenged claims unpatentable, continuing Samsung’s systematic campaign to dismantle the Maxell portfolio that underpinned the $112 million verdict.
The patents at issue in these latest decisions relate to video display, wireless video transmission, and smart device processing technologies. Samsung was represented by DLA Piper, while Maxell was represented by Mayer Brown and Patton Tidwell & Culbertson.
These decisions add to Samsung’s earlier PTAB victories on related Maxell patents and come on top of Judge Schroeder’s JMOL ruling overturning the jury verdict. Together, these developments have effectively dismantled Maxell’s patent infringement case against Samsung, though appeals remain pending in several of the proceedings.
Key Takeaways
- Samsung’s multi-pronged strategy of challenging Maxell’s patents through both JMOL motions and parallel PTAB proceedings has proven devastatingly effective, turning a $112 million jury loss into a comprehensive defense victory.
- The PTAB continues to serve as a critical tool for defendants facing large patent verdicts—even after a jury finds infringement and awards substantial damages, the PTAB can independently invalidate the underlying patents.
- The case illustrates the risks patent holders face when license agreements expire: the former licensee may have detailed knowledge of the patent portfolio’s weaknesses that can be leveraged in both district court and PTAB challenges.
Why It Matters
The Samsung-Maxell saga is a textbook example of how modern patent litigation plays out across multiple forums simultaneously. A patent holder can win a massive jury verdict only to see it eroded by JMOL rulings in district court and invalidity findings at the PTAB. For companies managing large patent portfolios, the case underscores the importance of maintaining patents that can withstand validity challenges from sophisticated defendants with the resources to mount parallel attacks. For accused infringers, Samsung’s approach demonstrates that IPR petitions remain a powerful—and often decisive—defense strategy, particularly when filed early enough to influence the district court proceedings.