DCT

5:25-cv-00108

Velocity Communication Tech LLC v. LG Electronics Inc

Log In
Key Events
Amended Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 5:25-cv-00108, E.D. Tex., 10/31/2025
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper for LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. due to its regular and established place of business within the district in Fort Worth, Texas. For LG Electronics Inc., a Korean corporation, venue is alleged to be proper based on its minimum contacts with Texas and the court's personal jurisdiction.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s products compliant with the IEEE 802.11ax (Wi-Fi 6) standard infringe eleven U.S. patents related to wireless communication technologies, including bandwidth allocation, RF tuning, and beamforming.
  • Technical Context: The technology resides in the field of high-efficiency wireless local area networks (WLANs), where standardization is critical for interoperability and performance in dense device environments.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that the technologies underlying the patents-in-suit were developed by companies (NXP, ZTE) that submitted Letters of Assurance to the IEEE, indicating the patents may be essential to the 802.11ax standard. Plaintiff also alleges it sent a letter to LG on April 15, 2025, inviting it to license the patent portfolio before filing the original complaint on July 9, 2025.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2004-12-20 U.S. Patent No. 8,270,343 Priority Date
2005-12-07 U.S. Patent No. 8,265,573 Priority Date
2006-03-09 U.S. Patent No. 8,238,859 Priority Date
2007-03-23 U.S. Patent No. 8,675,570 Priority Date
2007-08-28 U.S. Patent No. 8,238,832 Priority Date
2007-10-15 U.S. Patent Nos. 8,213,870, 8,644,765, 9,083,401, 10,200,096 Priority Date
2008-09-15 U.S. Patent No. 8,260,213 Priority Date
2012-06-29 U.S. Patent No. 9,596,648 Priority Date
2012-08-07 U.S. Patent No. 8,238,832 Issue Date
2012-08-07 U.S. Patent No. 8,238,859 Issue Date
2012-09-04 U.S. Patent No. 8,213,870 Issue Date
2012-09-04 U.S. Patent No. 8,260,213 Issue Date
2012-09-11 U.S. Patent No. 8,265,573 Issue Date
2012-09-18 U.S. Patent No. 8,270,343 Issue Date
2014-02-04 U.S. Patent No. 8,644,765 Issue Date
2014-03-18 U.S. Patent No. 8,675,570 Issue Date
2015-07-14 U.S. Patent No. 9,083,401 Issue Date
2017-03-14 U.S. Patent No. 9,596,648 Issue Date
2019-02-05 U.S. Patent No. 10,200,096 Issue Date
2020-09-29 NXP submits Letter of Assurance to IEEE for 802.11ax
2024-03-04 ZTE submits Letter of Assurance to IEEE for 802.11ax
2025-04-15 Velocity sends notice letter to LG
2025-07-09 Original Complaint Filed
2025-10-31 First Amended Complaint Filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 8,675,570 - Scalable OFDM and OFDMA Bandwidth Allocation in Communication Systems, issued March 18, 2014

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses spectral inefficiency in wireless communication systems like Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM), where non-data-bearing "guard bands" are inserted between channels to prevent interference, creating wasteful gaps in the usable spectrum (Compl. ¶¶29-31). The specification notes that prior art subcarrier spacing (e.g., 9.6 kHz) often could not be divided evenly by nominal carrier bandwidths (e.g., 1.25 MHz, 5 MHz), forcing some edge subcarriers to be left unused as guard subcarriers (Compl. ¶32; ’570 Patent, col. 6:27-34).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes using a common, precisely chosen subcarrier spacing that is mathematically aligned with both the channel raster and all nominal channel bandwidths (Compl. ¶33). This precise alignment allows for the aggregation of multiple carriers with reduced or eliminated guard bands, which minimizes inter-carrier interference and maximizes the use of available spectrum, thereby enhancing data capacity and efficiency (Compl. ¶¶33, 35).
  • Technical Importance: This approach improves the performance and capacity of wireless equipment by enabling more flexible and dense bandwidth allocation than was possible with conventional methods that sacrificed spectral efficiency to manage interference (Compl. ¶34).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶159).
  • Claim 1 is a method for allocating spectral bandwidth, including the elements of:
    • choosing a common subcarrier spacing for orthogonal subcarriers;
    • selecting a sampling frequency that is equal to or greater than a given nominal channel bandwidth of a carrier; and
    • using subcarriers within the given nominal channel bandwidth for signal transmission without assigning subcarriers as guard subcarriers at both ends of the given nominal channel bandwidth of the carrier.
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert other claims of the ’570 Patent (Compl. ¶160).

U.S. Patent No. 8,260,213 - Method and Apparatus to Adjust a Tunable Reactive Element, issued September 4, 2012

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent is directed to solving impedance mismatch and "reactance drift" in wireless radio frequency (RF) systems (Compl. ¶41). It identifies that tunable components, such as Voltage Variable Capacitors (VVCs), can drift in reactance due to changes in temperature or residual polarization, causing a mismatch that reduces antenna performance and degrades signal quality (Compl. ¶43; ’213 Patent, col. 1:19-26).
  • The Patented Solution: The patent teaches an adaptive tuning architecture that dynamically corrects for reactance drift in real time (Compl. ¶44). The system employs a reactance detection circuit to monitor the properties of a transmitted signal and an error correction circuit that detects any drift from a desired reactance, generating a correction signal to maintain optimal tuning for signal integrity and power efficiency (Compl. ¶45).
  • Technical Importance: This technology improves the function of RF hardware in wireless devices by ensuring efficient and high-fidelity signal transmission, which is particularly valuable for devices compliant with standards like 802.11ax that must operate across multiple frequencies and bandwidths (Compl. ¶46).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶177).
  • Claim 1 is a method, including the elements of:
    • receiving a first signal from a signal source coupled to a first tunable reactive element;
    • producing a second signal representing a measure of reactance of the first tunable reactive element;
    • receiving a control signal representing a desired reactance;
    • comparing the second signal to the control signal to produce a difference signal;
    • integrating the difference signal to produce a third signal; and
    • applying the third signal to the first tunable reactive element to reduce the difference between the measured reactance and the desired reactance.
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert other claims of the ’213 Patent (Compl. ¶178).

U.S. Patent No. 8,238,832 - Antenna Optimum Beam Forming for Multiple Protocol Coexistence on a Wireless Device, issued August 7, 2012

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent addresses signal interference when a single device communicates simultaneously using different wireless protocols (e.g., Wi-Fi and Bluetooth) (Compl. ¶50). The solution involves generating and shaping multiple antenna beam patterns so that each beam is directed toward its intended recipient while actively suppressing its signal strength in the direction of other simultaneous communications, reducing crosstalk (Compl. ¶53).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claim 18 is asserted (Compl. ¶192).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges that all Access Points practicing the IEEE 802.11ax standard, including the listed LG products, infringe the ’832 patent (Compl. ¶189).

U.S. Patent No. 8,270,343 - Broadcasting of Textual and Multimedia Information, issued September 18, 2012

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent addresses the inefficient broadcast of mixed-media files (Compl. ¶¶60-61). It teaches a method where a single block of text and multiple sub-blocks of related multimedia data are packaged together into time-sliced packets, enabling efficient, simultaneous transmission of disparate data types (Compl. ¶62). This improves network throughput by uniquely processing different data types for unified broadcast (Compl. ¶67).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claims 1, 3, 7, 10, 11, 13, and 15 are asserted (Compl. ¶210).
  • Accused Features: All LG devices that practice the 802.11ax standard are accused of infringing the ’343 patent (Compl. ¶207).

U.S. Patent No. 8,213,870 - Beamforming Using Predefined Spatial Mapping Matrices, issued September 4, 2012

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent claims improvements to MIMO systems by using a "codebook" of predefined spatial mapping matrices (Compl. ¶72). The invention involves iteratively transmitting data packets using different matrices, measuring reception quality (e.g., packet-error-rate or data rate), and selecting or re-selecting a matrix for subsequent transmissions to maintain higher modulation and improve throughput (Compl. ¶¶72, 75).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are asserted (Compl. ¶228).
  • Accused Features: All accused LG Access Points that practice the 802.11ax standard are accused of infringing the ’870 patent (Compl. ¶225).

U.S. Patent No. 8,644,765 - Beamforming Using Predefined Spatial Mapping Matrices, issued February 4, 2014

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent, related to the ’870 patent, improves MIMO communications by using predefined spatial mapping matrices stored in memory (Compl. ¶88). The claimed solution involves iteratively transmitting data packets with different matrices, receiving channel estimates from the receiver, selecting a matrix based on those estimates, and re-selecting another matrix if a packet error rate threshold is exceeded, thereby adapting dynamically to channel conditions (Compl. ¶88).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 16, and 17 are asserted (Compl. ¶246).
  • Accused Features: All accused LG Access Points that practice the 802.11ax standard are accused of infringing the ’765 patent (Compl. ¶243).

U.S. Patent No. 9,083,401 - Beamforming Using Predefined Spatial Mapping Matrices, issued July 14, 2015

  • Technology Synopsis: Also related to the ’870 patent family, this patent discloses a method for improving MIMO reliability and range (Compl. ¶96). It addresses shortcomings of traditional beamforming by iteratively transmitting data packets using matrices from a codebook, receiving channel estimates in response, selecting the best matrix based on those estimates, and continuing to adapt by selecting another matrix if a quality metric (like packet error rate) falls below a threshold (Compl. ¶99).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 15, 16, 17, and 18 are asserted (Compl. ¶264).
  • Accused Features: All accused LG Access Points that practice the 802.11ax standard are accused of infringing the ’401 patent (Compl. ¶261).

U.S. Patent No. 10,200,096 - Beamforming Using Predefined Spatial Mapping Matrices, issued February 5, 2019

  • Technology Synopsis: Continuing the ’870 patent family, this patent discloses a non-conventional solution to the range limitations of prior art sounding methods (Compl. ¶¶109, 111). The invention uses a codebook of predefined spatial mapping matrices, measures a reception quality metric (e.g., packet error rate or data rate) for each, and then selects the matrix with the highest quality for subsequent transmissions, thereby moving channel selection into the data path (Compl. ¶111, 114).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7 are asserted (Compl. ¶282).
  • Accused Features: All accused LG Access Points that practice the 802.11ax standard are accused of infringing the ’096 patent (Compl. ¶279).

U.S. Patent No. 8,238,859 - Radio Receiver, issued August 7, 2012

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent addresses performance degradation in radio receivers operating in dynamic environments (Compl. ¶121). The invention teaches a method of dynamically configuring a receiver by iteratively setting an adjustable component to different values, measuring the resulting signal quality for each setting, and repeating the process to determine the optimal configuration for robust and efficient data reception (Compl. ¶¶120, 125, 127).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claims 1-5, 7-16, and 18-22 are asserted (Compl. ¶300).
  • Accused Features: All accused LG devices that practice the 802.11ax standard are accused of infringing the ’859 patent (Compl. ¶297).

U.S. Patent No. 8,265,573 - Wireless Subscriber Communication Unit and Method of Power Control with Back-Off Therefore, issued September 11, 2012

  • Technology Synopsis: The patent is directed to solving interference and inefficient spectrum use in crowded wireless environments (Compl. ¶132). It introduces methods for advanced power control where a transmitter adjusts and "backs off" its output power in response to network conditions, such as interference, to prevent "spectral degradation of the transmit signal" and improve data transmission reliability (Compl. ¶¶133, 136).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claim 12 is asserted (Compl. ¶318).
  • Accused Features: All accused LG devices that practice the 802.11ax standard with the 6E extension are accused of infringing the ’573 patent (Compl. ¶315).

U.S. Patent No. 9,596,648 - Unified Beacon Format, issued March 14, 2017

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent addresses inefficient broadcasting of network information via beacon frames, which can consume excessive airtime and power (Compl. ¶¶143, 145). The solution is a "unified beacon format" that allows a device to determine whether to send a concise "short" beacon or a comprehensive "full" beacon, with an indicator of the type included in the frame, improving efficiency (Compl. ¶¶147-148).
  • Asserted Claims: At least claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶336).
  • Accused Features: All accused LG Access Points that practice the 802.11ax standard are accused of infringing the ’648 patent (Compl. ¶333).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The accused products are a broad range of LG devices that "practice the IEEE 802.11ax (Wi-Fi 6) standard," including, but not limited to, various models of LG Smart TVs, smartphones (LG V60 ThinQ, Velvet 5G), laptops (LG gram series), and LG CreateBoards (Compl. ¶¶153, 171, 189).

Functionality and Market Context

The core accused functionality is the implementation of the 802.11ax standard, also known as Wi-Fi 6 (and the 6E extension for the ’573 patent) (Compl. ¶¶3, 153, 315). The complaint alleges that LG advertises these products as compliant with this standard, citing LG's own website which states, for example, that "Wi-Fi 6E is the next generation standard in WiFi technology" (Compl. p. 41, fn. 1). The complaint includes a photograph of Defendant LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.'s facility in Fort Worth, Texas, to support its allegation that LG has a regular and established place of business in the district from which it offers its products for sale (Compl. p. 3, ¶11).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint alleges that infringement charts for each asserted patent are attached as Exhibits 12 through 22. As these exhibits were not provided, a summary of the narrative infringement theory is presented below.

The complaint’s central infringement theory for all asserted patents is one of standard-essentiality. It repeatedly alleges that the functionality recited in each patent "has been incorporated into the 802.11ax Standard" (Compl. ¶¶156, 174, 192). Therefore, by "making, using, testing, offering for sale, and/or selling wireless networking devices compliant with the 802.11ax Standard," LG is alleged to directly infringe the patents-in-suit (Compl. ¶¶159, 177). The infringement allegations do not distinguish between specific operations of the accused products beyond their compliance with the standard.

Identified Points of Contention

  • Scope Questions: A primary question will be whether compliance with the 802.11ax standard mandates the practice of each element of the asserted claims. The defense may argue that the standard allows for optional, non-infringing implementations or that the accused products' specific implementation of the standard does not map onto the claim limitations.
  • Technical Questions: For the ’570 patent, a potential dispute is whether the 802.11ax signal structure, which must adhere to regulatory spectral masks, can be fairly characterized as operating "without assigning subcarriers as guard subcarriers at both ends" of the channel as required by claim 1. For the ’213 patent, a key technical question is whether the general RF tuning and performance optimization functions required by the 802.11ax standard embody the specific, multi-step feedback loop of claim 1, which requires generating a "second signal representing a measure of reactance" and integrating a difference signal to produce a correction.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

U.S. Patent No. 8,675,570

  • The Term: "without assigning subcarriers as guard subcarriers at both ends" (from claim 1).
  • Context and Importance: This term is central to the claimed invention, which seeks to improve spectral efficiency by eliminating the waste associated with guard bands. The infringement analysis will likely depend on whether the signal allocation in 802.11ax-compliant devices meets this negative limitation.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification’s objective is to "improve[] spectral efficiency by allowing multiple carriers to be aggregated with reduced or eliminated guard bands" (Compl. ¶33). This focus on reduction or elimination could support an interpretation where any method that avoids the rigid, wasteful guard bands of the prior art meets the limitation.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent criticizes prior art where "some of the edge subcarriers are left as guard subcarriers with no signal transmission" (Compl. ¶32; ’570 Patent, col. 6:31-33). A defendant may argue that if any subcarriers at the channel edges are unused for data transmission—for instance, to meet regulatory out-of-band emission requirements—they are functionally "guard subcarriers," and thus the limitation is not met.

U.S. Patent No. 8,260,213

  • The Term: "a second signal representing a measure of reactance" (from claim 1).
  • Context and Importance: The claim recites a specific, closed-loop control system. Infringement depends on whether the accused devices generate a signal that can be properly construed as a "measure of reactance," rather than a more general performance metric. Practitioners may focus on this term because it tethers the claim to a specific physical property, not just general system performance.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent’s background explains that reactance drift "results in a reduction in antenna performance" (Compl. ¶43; ’213 Patent, col. 1:25-26). Plaintiff could argue that any signal used in an adaptive tuning circuit that correlates with and is used to correct for such performance degradation is, by extension, a "measure of reactance."
  • Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's detailed description discloses specific circuits for measuring reactance, such as an AM/peak detector or a frequency discriminator (’213 Patent, Figs. 5-8). A defendant may argue that the term should be limited to signals generated by such specific means, and that general performance metrics like Error Vector Magnitude (EVM) or Received Signal Strength Indicator (RSSI) are not a direct "measure of reactance" as taught by the invention.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement for all patents. Inducement is based on allegations that LG advertises and provides instructions (e.g., user manuals) encouraging customers to use the accused products in their normal, 802.11ax-compliant manner, with knowledge that this use is infringing (Compl. ¶¶160, 163). Contributory infringement is based on allegations that the 802.11ax-compliant components are material to the inventions, are not staple articles of commerce, and have no substantial non-infringing uses (Compl. ¶164).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willfulness based on both pre-suit and post-suit knowledge. It claims LG had knowledge of relevant patents held by Velocity's predecessors-in-interest (NXP, ZTE) via their submissions of Letters of Assurance to the IEEE standards body, with the latest alleged date being March 4, 2024 (Compl. ¶¶24, 161). It further alleges direct pre-suit knowledge of the patents-in-suit via a letter from Velocity's counsel dated April 15, 2025, and post-suit knowledge from the filing of the original complaint on July 9, 2025 (Compl. ¶¶161-162).

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

  • A core issue will be one of standard-essentiality versus implementation: will the court find that compliance with the IEEE 802.11ax standard, as written, necessarily requires practicing every element of the asserted claims, or will the analysis turn on whether LG’s specific implementation of the standard happens to do so? This will be a central battleground for both infringement and damages.
  • A second key question will be one of definitional scope: can patent claims directed at specific circuit-level operations, such as generating a "measure of reactance" (in the ’213 patent), be construed to read on the more abstract, functional requirements of a high-level communications standard and the systems that implement it?
  • A third key question will be one of pre-suit knowledge: the court will have to determine whether the alleged notices—including Letters of Assurance submitted to a standards body by third parties and a single pre-suit letter from Plaintiff—were sufficient to establish that LG acted with the requisite knowledge or willful blindness to support a claim for enhanced damages.