DCT

2:25-cv-01035

Peninsula Tech LLC v. T-Mobile USA Inc

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:25-cv-01035, E.D. Tex., 10/09/2025
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because Defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction, has committed acts of patent infringement, and maintains regular and established places of business, including retail stores and cellular infrastructure, within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s 4G and 5G cellular networks and services infringe seven patents related to wireless communication technologies for power control, network timing, and multi-access sessions.
  • Technical Context: The technology domain is advanced wireless telecommunications, specifically protocols and features defined within 3GPP standards that govern the operation of 4G/LTE and 5G mobile networks.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff and its predecessors provided Defendant with pre-suit notice of the asserted patents and its infringement. Notice was allegedly first provided on April 11, 2023, for one patent and several applications that later issued as the other patents-in-suit. Subsequent notice, including claim charts for all asserted patents, was allegedly provided on April 14, 2025, and May 6, 2025. These allegations may form the basis for claims of willful infringement.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2015-06-20 ’201 Patent Priority Date
2016-05-09 ’549 Patent Priority Date
2016-05-09 ’087 Patent Priority Date
2016-09-26 ’404 Patent Priority Date
2017-03-27 ’009 Patent Priority Date
2017-12-12 ’009 Patent Issue Date
2018-06-21 ’775 Patent Priority Date
2019-04-12 ’471 Patent Priority Date
2023-04-11 Pre-suit notice letter sent to Defendant
2024-01-30 ’471 Patent Issue Date
2024-02-20 ’404 Patent Issue Date
2024-02-27 ’549 Patent Issue Date
2024-06-04 ’087 Patent Issue Date
2024-10-15 ’775 Patent Issue Date
2025-01-21 ’201 Patent Issue Date
2025-04-14 Second pre-suit notice letter sent to Defendant
2025-05-06 Claim charts sent to Defendant
2025-10-09 Complaint Filing Date

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 9,844,009 - "Power headroom report in a wireless device with carrier aggregation"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: In wireless networks using carrier aggregation (combining multiple frequency bands), a mobile device must report its available transmission power ("power headroom") for numerous component carriers to the base station for efficient power control. As the number of aggregated carriers grows, creating these reports without excessive signaling overhead becomes a technical challenge (’009 Patent, col. 1:44-53).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention provides a structured Power Headroom Report (PHR) message that uses a presence field of a "fixed size" to indicate for which secondary cells a power report is included. The presence field's size is one octet for systems with up to seven configured secondary cells, and expands to a fixed size of four octets for systems with more than seven, providing a scalable yet efficient reporting mechanism (’009 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:5-15).
  • Technical Importance: This method provided a standardized and efficient PHR format for increasingly complex carrier aggregation scenarios (e.g., beyond five carriers), balancing the base station's need for detailed power information with the need to conserve scarce radio resources (’009 Patent, col. 1:44-53).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶29).
  • The essential elements of independent claim 1, a base station claim, include:
    • Transmitting a message to configure one or more secondary cells.
    • Receiving a power headroom report (PHR MAC CE) containing a presence field of a specific fixed size, wherein:
      • the size is one octet for up to seven configured secondary cells; and
      • the size is four octets for more than seven configured secondary cells.
    • Transmitting control commands that employ the received PHR MAC CE.
  • The complaint expressly reserves the right to assert additional claims (Compl. ¶29, fn. 1).

U.S. Patent No. 11,889,471 - "Paging time adjustment in a wireless network"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: A wireless device with multiple SIM cards may need to monitor two different networks (PLMNs) simultaneously. Paging occasions—specific times when a device wakes to listen for incoming calls or data—are calculated based on the device's identity (IMSI). This can lead to "paging collision," where the paging occasions for the two networks overlap, causing the device to miss a page from one network while monitoring the other (’471 Patent, Fig. 26A; col. 1:19-30).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention allows the wireless device to request an "IMSI offset value" from a core network node. The network responds with an "accepted IMSI offset value." A new "alternative IMSI" is then created by adding the accepted offset to the device's real IMSI. The network then uses this alternative IMSI to calculate new paging occasions, effectively shifting them in time to avoid collisions with the other network's paging schedule (’471 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:48-67).
  • Technical Importance: This solution enhances the reliability of multi-SIM devices by preventing missed pages, thereby improving user experience and ensuring continuous connectivity on multiple networks simultaneously (’471 Patent, col. 1:29-30).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶39).
  • The essential elements of independent claim 1, a method claim, include:
    • Receiving, at a core network node, a requested IMSI offset value from a wireless device.
    • Transmitting an accepted IMSI offset value from the core network node to the wireless device.
    • Wherein paging occasions are derived using an "alternative IMSI" that is determined based on the sum of the device's IMSI and the accepted IMSI offset value.
  • The complaint expressly reserves the right to assert additional claims (Compl. ¶29, fn. 1).

U.S. Patent No. 11,910,404 - "Physical uplink shared channel processing period"

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses uplink transmission timing in wireless networks. It describes a method where a wireless device reports its required processing time (a "PUSCH processing period") to a base station, which then ensures any subsequent uplink data transmission assignments (via DCI) provide a time delay equal to or greater than that period, preventing timing errors (’404 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts at least independent claim 11 (Compl. ¶49).
  • Accused Features: T-Mobile's 5G base stations (gNBs) are accused of receiving "UECapabilityInformation" messages that indicate PUSCH processing capabilities and subsequently transmitting DCI messages that schedule uplink resources with a sufficient time offset to accommodate the device's reported processing period (Compl. ¶50, ¶52).

U.S. Patent No. 11,917,549 - "Scaling transmission power of uplink signals of a wireless device"

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent relates to power control for devices in a dual connectivity environment operating on two different frequency bands (e.g., NR-DC). A base station transmits separate maximum power parameters for each band or cell group. If a device determines its combined transmission power would exceed a maximum, it scales down the power on one or both of the groups to remain compliant (’549 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts at least independent claim 16 (Compl. ¶60).
  • Accused Features: T-Mobile's 5G network base stations are accused of sending "RRCReconfiguration" messages containing power parameters ("p-NR-FR1", "p-NR-FR2") for master and secondary cell groups and receiving uplink signals from devices that have scaled their power according to those parameters (Compl. ¶61-62).

U.S. Patent No. 12,004,087 - "Prioritizing uplink signals of a radio access technology"

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent describes a power management method in a dual connectivity setting with two different radio access technologies (e.g., 4G LTE and 5G NR). The base station sets maximum power levels for both technologies. If a device's total required power exceeds a limit, it drops or reduces power for the lower-priority technology's signals to ensure the higher-priority signals are transmitted (’087 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶69).
  • Accused Features: T-Mobile's network operating in E-UTRA NR Dual Connectivity (EN-DC) mode is accused. Base stations allegedly transmit power limits for both 4G and 5G cell groups and then receive signals where the device has dropped the 5G uplink transmission to prioritize the 4G uplink when power-limited (Compl. ¶70-74).

U.S. Patent No. 12,120,775 - "Multi access packet/protocol data unit session"

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent relates to Multi-Access PDU (MA-PDU) sessions, which allow a device to use 3GPP (e.g., 5G) and non-3GPP (e.g., Wi-Fi) access simultaneously. The invention details a signaling flow where a Session Management Function (SMF), upon receiving a data notification from a User Plane Function (UPF), requests an Access and Mobility Management Function (AMF) to activate user plane resources on a specific access network type (’775 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶81).
  • Accused Features: T-Mobile's 5G core network is accused of implementing the claimed method. The complaint alleges that when a UPF receives downlink data for an MA-PDU session, it sends a Data Notification to the SMF, which in turn signals the AMF to activate the necessary user plane resources (Compl. ¶82-85).

U.S. Patent No. 12,207,201 - "Uplink power control in a wireless device"

  • Technology Synopsis: The technology concerns uplink power control for the control channel (PUCCH) in carrier aggregation. It describes a system where a base station configures cells into primary and secondary PUCCH groups and sends downlink control information (DCI) with a transmit power control (TPC) command. The wireless device then calculates and applies transmit power based on the TPC command for the appropriate PUCCH group (’201 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: The complaint asserts at least independent claim 11 (Compl. ¶92).
  • Accused Features: T-Mobile's 4G and 5G base stations are accused of configuring PUCCH groups via RRC messaging, transmitting DCI with TPC commands, and receiving PUCCH signals from devices that have calculated power based on those commands (Compl. ¶93-98).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused instrumentalities are T-Mobile's 4G/LTE and 5G cellular networks, including network infrastructure components such as base stations (gNBs, eNBs), core network nodes (MMEs, SMFs, UPFs, AMFs), and the services provided over these networks (Compl. ¶11, ¶29, ¶39).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges that T-Mobile operates a nationwide cellular network compliant with 3GPP standards for 4G and 5G communications (Compl. ¶12). For the ’009 Patent, the accused functionality involves the 5G network's base stations sending "RRCReconfiguration" messages and processing Power Headroom Reports for carrier aggregation (Compl. ¶30). Figure 5.3.5.1-1 in the complaint illustrates the RRC reconfiguration message exchange between a user device (UE) and the network (Compl. ¶30). For the ’471 Patent, the accused functionality is the 4G/LTE core network's Mobility Management Entity (MME) receiving and granting requests for an IMSI offset value to adjust paging occasions for mobile devices (Compl. ¶40-41).
  • Plaintiff asserts that T-Mobile is the second-largest mobile network operator in the United States, serving over 132 million subscribers, underscoring the commercial significance of the accused networks (Compl. ¶10).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

’009 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
transmit at least one message comprising configuration parameters of one or more secondary cells Defendant's Next Generation NodeB (gNB) transmits an "RRCReconfiguration" message to configure secondary cells for a user device. ¶30 col. 2:1-5
receive a power headroom report media access control control element (PHR MAC CE) comprising a presence field...wherein: the presence field is of a fixed size of one octet when up to seven secondary cells are configured...and the presence field is of a fixed size of four octets when the...secondary cells comprise more than seven secondary cells with configured uplinks The gNB receives a PHR MAC CE message containing a bitmap indicating the presence of power headroom per serving cell. This bitmap is one octet for fewer than eight configured secondary cells and four octets otherwise, as specified by 3GPP standards. A visual from 3GPP TS 38.321 is provided to illustrate the one-octet versus four-octet structure (Compl. ¶31). ¶31 col. 2:5-15
transmit one or more control commands employing at least the PHR MAC CE The gNB uses the received PHR MAC CE information to support power-aware packet scheduling by transmitting Downlink Control Information (DCI) commands, which include Transmit Power Control (TPC) commands to the user device. ¶32 col. 2:16-18

Identified Points of Contention

  • Scope Questions: The infringement theory relies on T-Mobile’s network adhering to 3GPP standards. A point of contention may be whether the term "fixed size" in the claim can be construed to read on a system with two distinct fixed sizes (one octet and four octets) that are selected based on the number of configured cells, or if it implies a single, unchangeable size regardless of configuration.
  • Technical Questions: A central factual question will be what evidence demonstrates that T-Mobile's commercially deployed network equipment actually implements the specific version of the 3GPP standard cited in the complaint, which dictates the one-octet/four-octet structure for the PHR presence field.

’471 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
receiving, from a wireless device by a core network node...a requested international mobile subscriber identity (IMSI) offset value for offsetting an IMSI of the wireless device Defendant's Mobility Management Entity (MME) receives a "Requested IMSI Offset value" from a user device in an Attach Request or Tracking Area Update Request message. ¶40 col. 2:48-52
transmitting, from the core network node to the wireless device, an accepted IMSI offset value for offsetting the IMSI of the wireless device The MME transmits an "Accepted IMSI Offset value" to the user device in an Attach Accept or Tracking Area Update Accept message to acknowledge and provide the value. ¶41 col. 2:53-56
wherein first paging occasions...are derived using an alternative IMSI determined based on a sum of: the IMSI of the wireless device; and the accepted IMSI offset value The MME and the user device use the accepted offset to calculate an "alternative IMSI value" based on a sum of the original IMSI and the offset. The MME then uses this alternative IMSI to compute an index value for deriving the device's paging occasions. ¶42 col. 2:59-67

Identified Points of Contention

  • Scope Questions: The method claim is performed by a "core network node." A potential issue is whether the alleged steps are all performed by a single party (T-Mobile), or if actions by the user device are required, which could raise questions of divided infringement.
  • Technical Questions: The complaint alleges infringement based on a 3GPP standard feature for avoiding paging collisions in multi-SIM devices. A technical question will be the extent to which this feature is enabled and utilized across T-Mobile's 4G/LTE network, as its implementation may be optional for network operators.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

For the ’009 Patent

  • The Term: "fixed size"
  • Context and Importance: This term is critical to the infringement analysis for the ’009 Patent. The claim requires the PHR presence field to have a "fixed size" of one octet in one scenario and a "fixed size" of four octets in another. The case may turn on whether T-Mobile’s system, which allegedly selects between two different sizes based on configuration, meets this "fixed size" limitation.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not define "fixed size." A party could argue the term means the size is not arbitrary or variable based on the content of the report itself, but is instead predetermined by a specific system parameter (i.e., the number of configured cells).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification repeatedly describes two discrete modes: "the presence field is of a fixed size of one octet when up to seven secondary cells are configured" and "the presence field is of a fixed size of four octets when the one or more secondary cells comprise more than seven" (’009 Patent, col. 2:8-15). This language suggests two distinct, internally rigid states rather than a single, variably-sized field, which could support a narrow construction where "fixed" applies to the size within each defined scenario.

For the ’471 Patent

  • The Term: "paging occasions... are derived using an alternative IMSI"
  • Context and Importance: This term is central to establishing the final step of infringement. The dispute may focus on the causal link between the "alternative IMSI" and the resulting "paging occasions." Practitioners may focus on this term because if the accused system uses the alternative IMSI merely as one of many inputs in a complex algorithm different from that contemplated by the patent, it might not satisfy the "derived using" limitation.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The plain language "derived using" suggests that the alternative IMSI is an input to the derivation process, but does not necessarily require it to be the sole or primary input.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent’s abstract states that "First paging occasions of the first PLMN are derived using an alternative IMSI." The patent's context implies a direct computational link where the modified IMSI directly leads to a shifted paging occasion to resolve a collision. A defendant could argue that "derived using" requires a more direct and controlling relationship than merely being one factor among many in a complex scheduling algorithm.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: For each asserted patent, the complaint includes a conclusory allegation that Defendant has knowledge of the patent and directly and/or indirectly infringes (Compl. ¶35, ¶45, ¶56, ¶65, ¶77, ¶88, ¶101). However, the complaint does not plead specific facts to support the elements of induced or contributory infringement, such as alleging that T-Mobile instructs its customers or equipment suppliers to perform infringing acts.
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement for all asserted patents. This allegation is based on pre-suit knowledge stemming from a letter dated April 11, 2023, which identified the ’009 Patent and the applications corresponding to the other patents-in-suit, and subsequent correspondence on April 14, 2025, and May 6, 2025, which allegedly provided claim charts identifying the infringement (Compl. ¶23-25). The complaint alleges that Defendant's infringement continued despite this knowledge (Compl. ¶35).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

This case presents a standards-based infringement assertion against a major telecommunications carrier. The dispute will likely focus less on the existence of the accused features within the 3GPP standards and more on their actual implementation and the precise scope of the patent claims.

  • A core issue will be one of evidentiary proof: The complaint extensively cites 3GPP technical specifications to allege infringement. A key question for the court will be whether the evidence demonstrates that T-Mobile’s commercially deployed 4G and 5G networks actually practice the specific, and in some cases optional, functionalities described in those standards in a way that maps directly onto the claim elements.
  • A second central question will be one of definitional scope: The case may turn on claim construction, particularly for terms like "fixed size" in the ’009 Patent. The court will need to determine whether this term can encompass a system that switches between two predetermined sizes based on configuration, or if it requires a more rigid interpretation, which could prove dispositive for infringement.