Texas Juries in 2025 awarded billions of dollars in damages in patent infringement and injury cases.
The largest single award was handed down in a driving under the influence-related personal injury trial in Bexar County, where a Seguin Independent School District employee was left partially paralyzed following a motorcycle crash.
Like last year, Samsung was on the losing side of four of the largest jury awards in patent infringement jury trials in the Eastern District of Texas.
Here is a list of the 10 largest jury awards in the state last year, compiled by The Texas Lawbook.
Leticia J. Mendez v. River Road Entertainment District Corporation et al. — Bexar County
$831M in Drunken Driving Case
A San Antonio jury in May awarded $831 million to the family of Blas Mendez Jr., who was left partially paralyzed and who now requires a wheelchair after a 2021 motorcycle crash.
Mendez had worked as a behavior specialist with Seguin Independent School District’s special education department for 21 years at the time of the accident.
He was almost home when he hit debris left in the road after Alex Portillo crashed his car into a guardrail. Test results showed that Portillo had a blood alcohol concentration of 0.23 percent at the time of the crash.
The San Antonio Express-News reported that Portillo was charged with intoxicated assault with a motor vehicle causing serious bodily injury. He pleaded guilty and received a 10-year suspended sentence with probation.
Leticia Mendez, Blas’s wife, sued Portillo and the bar that served him prior to the accident, Koozies Ice House.
The 12-member jury apportioned 45 percent of the responsibility to Koozies Ice House, 45 percent to its owner, Robert Kane, and 10 percent to Portillo.
A total of $281.45 million was awarded to Blas Mendez, $249.88 million to Leticia Mendez. Koozies and Kane were hit with an exemplary damages award of $300 million.
Koozies Ice House is no longer in operation.
An appeal has not been filed at this time.
Todd A. Hunter of Hunter Trial Law and E. Chevo Pastrano and Ginna G. Pastrano of The Pastrano Law Firm represented the Mendez family.
Charles W. Sullivan represented River Road Entertainment District Corporation and Koozies Ice House.
The case number is 2022CI12617.
Milena Loree v. TNT Crane & Rigging Inc. — Harris County
$640M for Construction Site Fatality
Also in May, jurors in Harris County awarded the family of David Lester Loree II, who was killed at a construction site, a total of $640 million, most of which came in the form of a $480 million assessment of punitive damages against Houston-based TNT Crane & Rigging.
Loree was killed in September 2021 at a job site during the construction of the College of Business and Library building on the Texas A&M University-San Antonio campus. Loree, a journeyman pipefitter, was part of a crew working to install HVAC units on the fourth floor of the building at the time of the incident, according to the lawsuit.
Wind gusts were as high as 45 miles per hour when the HVAC units were being lifted to the fourth floor of the building. The lawsuit claimed that such lift jobs should be called off when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour.
Loree was crushed by an unsecured load.
Loree’s wife, Milena, and her two children filed suit in October 2021 against Loree’s employer, Way Engineering, as well as McCorvey Sheet Metal Works and Byrne Construction Services. But the trial went forward only against TNT Crane & Rigging.
The jury found TNT Crane & Rigging liable and awarded the family $159.8 million in compensatory damages.
TNT Crane & Rigging’s attorneys argued that plaintiffs’ counsel Tony Buzbee’s social media posts made after phase one was completed were “inappropriate” and sought a mistrial, dismissal of the punitive damages and sanctions.
Harris County District Judge Erica R. Hughes denied TNT Crane & Rigging’s motion.
An appeal has not been filed at this time.
Tony Buzbee, David L. Bergen, Ryan S. Pigg, and Thomas C. Holler of The Buzbee Law Firm and Jackson R. Reed and Travis B. Terry of Reed & Terry represented the Loree family.
Susan Noe Wilson and Marilyn Vilandos of Schouest, Bamdas, Soshea, BenMaier & Eastham and John H. Kim, Denise Kim and David McDougald of The Kim Law Firm represented TNT.
The case number is 2021-68047.
Collision Communications Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. — Eastern District of Texas
$445.5M for Patent Infringement Trial Against Samsung
A jury awarded $445.5 million to Collision Communications on Oct. 10 in an infringement trial against Samsung after finding the company was using the technology covered by four patents it had not licensed.
The technology covered by the patents-in-suit reduces signal interference in cellular network communications, and the idea was conceived of in the early 2000s by inventors and engineers at defense contractor BAE Systems, which intended to sell the tool to the military.
But when the military decided not to implement the technology, BAE recognized that its ability to prevent signal interference and make phones on busy networks more reliable had commercial value, and it partnered with Collision to try to take the product to the civilian market.
Collision acquired the patents in 2010 and 2011 and approached companies like Nokia, Ericsson and Samsung with the technology. The company also hired inventors and engineers from BAE.
Samsung and Collision discussed simulations using the technology from 2011 to 2014. The business deal never went through.
During the October trial, which took place during the recent government shutdown, Samsung’s internal emails were read, which revealed its desire to use the technology but not pay for it. One of the emails mentioned hiring a university to develop similar technology.
Samsung had argued that it hadn’t infringed the technology and that the patents were invalid. The company also argued that if the jury did find infringement, damages should be $10 million or less. The jury rejected those arguments, awarding the damages to Collision in the form of a running royalty.
An appeal has not been filed at this time.
Brad Caldwell, Chris Stewart, Justin Nemunaitis, Aisha Mahmood Haley, John Summers, Seth Reich, James Smith, James Yang, Alexander Gras and Xu Zhou of Caldwell Cassady & Curry and Andrea Fair of Miller Fair Henry represented Collision.
Sean S. Pak, Victoria Maroulis, Patrick Stafford, Olga Slobodyanyuk, Nagendra Setty, Kevin Hardy, Joseph Reed, John McKee, Brice Lynch, Brian E. Mack, Brady Huynh and Austin Buscher of Quinn Emanuel represented Samsung.
The case number is 2:23-cv-00587.
Headwater Research LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co. — Eastern District of Texas
$279M Awarded to Headwater Against Samsung
In April, an East Texas jury awarded $279 million to Tyler-based investor Headwater Research against Samsung in a patent infringement case.
The dispute was over wireless communications technology. Headwater claimed the patented technology allows wireless devices to “reduce data usage and network congestion, extend battery life by decreasing power consumption, and enable users to stay connected.” The alleged infringing devices included Samsung’s Galaxy phones and tablets.
Following the four-day trial, jurors in Judge Rodney Gilstrap’s courtroom returned a $279 million verdict.
In September, the Korean-based technology giant settled the case and asked the court in a joint motion to dismiss Headwater’s claims for relief against Samsung with prejudice. The companies also asked the court to dismiss Samsung’s counterclaims for relief against Headwater without prejudice.
Marc Fenster, Reza Mirzaie, Brian Ledahl, Ben Wang and Adam Hoffman of Russ August & Kabat represented Headwater.
Ruffin Cordell, Michael McKeon, Tom Reger, Thad Kodish and Benjamin Thompson of Fish & Richardson and Lance Yang of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan represented Samsung.
The case number is 2:23-cv-00103.
Pictiva Displays International Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al. — Eastern District of Texas
$191.4M Verdict Against Samsung in Infringement Trial
A month later, a jury in East Texas on Nov. 3partially sided with Pictiva Displays International and Key Patent Innovations on claims that Samsung Electronics infringed patented technology used in OLED displays for phones and televisions, awarding the plaintiffs a total of $191.4 million.
Pictivia filed its suit in October 2023, claiming the technology giant infringed five patents.
While the jury found that Samsung had infringed just two patents, it also found that the infringement was willful and awarded lump sum royalty damages of $98.8 million for infringement of one patent and $92.6 million for infringement of the other.
Samsung filed a motion for a mistrial, arguing that statements made by opposing counsel both during closing arguments and throughout the trial mandated that result. Judge Rodney Gilstrap did not address the motion in his final judgment order. The docket did not indicate that a ruling had been issued on the motion for mistrial.
Pictivia and Key Patent Innovations have filed a motion for a new trial, arguing that the court’s no-damages instruction to the jury lead to its finding that Samsung did not infringe the other three patents. There has not been an order on a new trial from the court at this time.
An appeal has not been filed at this time.
Samuel F. Baxter and Jennifer Truelove of McKool Smith and Jason G. Sheasby, Annita Zhong, Rebecca Carson, Jie Gao and Jeffrey Linxwiler of Irell & Manella represented Pictivia.
Lance Yang, D. James Pak, Patrick Schmidt, Sean S. Pak, Melissa J. Bailey and John Bash of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan represented Samsung. Harry Gillam, Melissa Smith and Andrew Gorham of Gilliam & Smith served as local counsel.
The case number 2:23-cv-00495.
Headwater Research LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc. — Eastern District of Texas
$175M Verdict Against Verizon in Infringement Case
Verizon Wireless and two of its affiliated businesses were ordered to pay $175 million in damages in another infringement case brought by Headwater Research.
The Tyler-based technology firm filed its lawsuit in July 2023, claiming the defendants infringed two of its patented wireless communications technologies through the sale of Apple and Android tablets and cellphones.
The federal jury in Marshall on July 23 found that Verizon did infringe but not willfully.
Since the jury trial, Verizon and Headwater have reached settlements over the Samsung and Apple devices.
A bench trial has been scheduled for 9 a.m. on Feb. 4 before Judge Rodney Gilstrap in Marshall to address the Google devices Verizon sells.
Adam Hoffman, Benjamin Wang, Qi Tong, Marc Fenster, Reza Mirzaie, Brian Ledahl, Dale Chang, Ben Wang and Kris Davis of the Russ August & Kabat law firm in Los Angeles; Andrea Fair and Garrett Parish of Miller Fair Henry in Longview; and Robert Blunt of Parker Blunt & Ainsworth in Tyler represented Headwater.
Robert Vincent, Josh Krevitt, Allen Kathir and Andrew Robb of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and Deron Dacus of the Dacus Law Firm represented Verizon.
The case number is 2:23-cv-00352.
Carlo Giuseppe Civelli, et al. v. Philippe Emanuel Mulacek, et al. — Southern District of Texas
$138M in Breach of Contract Business Dispute
After eight years of litigation and a six-week trial, a Houston jury returned a $138 million verdict on Dec. 4 after two and a half hours of deliberation over 22 questions, finding breach of contract and promissory estoppel.
Carlo Civelli and Philippe Mulacek were business partners at InterOil, which invested in properties in Papua New Guinea for potential oil and gas. There was a discovery of gas on properties, which were sold for $900 million.
Civelli had invested in InterOil and made loans to Mulacek, which he believed would be paid back. Mulacek argued that the money was his and didn’t need to be paid back.
The dispute focused on oral agreements made between the two men.
The jury found Mulacek in breach of contract and awarded Civelli $138 million.
A hearing is set on Feb. 12 before Chief Judge Randy Crane in Houston on pending motions.
Richard Schwartz, and Michael Harvey of Munsch Hardt Kopf and Harr; Andrew Bender of Andrew Myers; and Michael Martin of Martin Walton Law Firm represented Civelli.
Paul Yetter, Reagan Simpson, Justin Rowinsky and David Gutierrez of Yetter Coleman; Michael M. Fay, Jenny Kim and Valecia Battle of Boies Schiller Flexner; and Warren Harris and Jacob McIntosh of Bracewell represented the defendants.
The case number is 4:17-cv-03739.
Caitlin E. Carpenter et al. v. Wings LLC, et al. — Travis County
$112.9M Verdict in Drunken Driving Crash
An Austin jury in September found a drunken driver, the restaurant where he drank and the two employees who served him negligent and awarded $112.9 million to the victims of a 2023 crash.
Pedro Suarez was allegedly overserved at Wings ‘N More in August 2023 when he struck the rear of Lorenzo Marquez’s car. The impact forced Marquez’s car under the trailer of an 18-wheeler. The momentum of Suarez’s truck caused it to climb the back of Marquez’s car, where Caitlin Carpenter’s daughter, Willow Walker, who was 6 years old at the time, was strapped in a car seat. The roof of the car collapsed under the weight and force of Suarez’s truck.
Bystanders helped Marquez and Carpenter, who was a passenger, from the front seat of the car. However, Walker was trapped until first responders arrived. She was in cardiac arrest and required resuscitation before being transported to Dell Seton Medical Center.
Walker sustained a traumatic brain injury and cardiac arrest. She has undergone multiple surgeries, including procedures to remove portions of her skull because of brain swelling. Doctors placed her in a medically induced coma. The impact crushed numerous bones in her face, requiring reconstructive surgery. She lost vision in her right eye.
The jury apportioned liability as follows: 60 percent to Suarez, 37 percent to Wings ‘N More and 3 percent to two of its employees, Leo Viera and Mireya Cruz-Marquez
The jury awarded Walker $767,807.75 for past physical pain and mental anguish and $11 million for future suffering, $767,807.75 for past disfigurement, $11 million for future disfigurement, $767,807.75 for past impairment, $11 million for future impairment, $5.6 million in past medical expenses, $6.2 million for medical costs until age 18, $23.5 million in medical expenses after age 18 and $2.5 million for loss of earning capacity.
Carpenter received $1.25 million for past physical pain and mental anguish and $1.25 million for future pain, as well as $17.66 million for past mental anguish as a bystander and $17.66 million for future mental anguish.
Marquez was awarded $1.25 million for past pain and mental anguish and $1.25 million for future pain and mental anguish.
An appeal has not been filed at this time.
Robert Alden of Byrd Davis Alden & Henrichson represented the plaintiffs.
Austin defense attorney Jon Michael Smith represented Wings ‘N More. Lisa Michaux of Leighton Michaux & Brown represented Suarez. Austin defense attorney Jim Clements represented Viera and Cruz-Marquez.
The case number is D-1-GN-23-004486.
Maxell Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics — Eastern District of Texas
$111.7M in Patent Infringement Trial
An East Texas jury returned a $111.7 million verdict on May 28 against Samsung for violating the patented technology of rival Maxell.
Japan-based Maxell sued Samsung in 2023, alleging it willfully infringed on three patents related to its technology on smartphones and home devices, including appliances. It claimed that Samsung had a license for its technology for several years but did not renew its agreement.
Maxell’s patents involve techniques for video processing, managing digital data and unlocking functions. Samsung used the technologies in its SmartThings Station products.
The weeklong trial before U.S. District Judge Robert Schroeder III resulted in a federal jury in Texarkana ordering Samsung to pay $111.7 million.
In September, following a posttrial hearing, the court entered a final judgment that found Samsung had not infringed on three patents and granted the company’s request for a new trial on the invalidity of claims on two patents. The court also denied Maxell’s request for entry of judgment, enhanced damages, prejudgment interest, postjudgment interest and a permanent injunction.
Maxell has appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Jamie Beaber, Alan Grimaldi, Kfir Levy, Amanda Bonner, Andrew Pincus, Bryan Nese, Clark Bakewell, Courtney Krawice, James Fussell, Michael Lindinger, Minh Nguyen-Dang, Nicole Saharsky, Robert Pluta, Saquib Siddiqui, Seke Godo, Seth Bruneel, So Ra Ko, Tariq Javed, Tatsuya Koyama, Tiffany Miller and Alison Gelsleichter of Mayer Brown and Geoffrey Patton Culbertson and Kelly Tidwell of Patton Tidwell & Culbertson represented Maxell.
Mark Fowler, Benjamin S. Mueller, Eric Fuehrer, Erin Gibson, Gianni Minutoli, Helena Kiepura, James Heintz, Kathryn Grasso, Martin Ellison, Michael Jay, Paulina Starostka, Sangwon Sung, Sean Cunningham, Stan Panikowski, Tessa Duxbury and Brian Erickson of DLA Piper represented Samsung. Co-counsel for Samsung included Andrew T. Gorham, Melissa Smith and Harry Lee Gilliam Jr. of Gilliam & Smith and Jesse Hindman of Edleson & Hindman.
The case number is 5:23-cv-00092.
Virginia Rymers et al. v. Right Choice Heating and Air Company LLC, et al. — Bexar County
$109.5M Verdict Following House Explosion
A San Antonio jury on Feb. 10 found CPS Energy responsible for a 2021 residential gas leak that caused an explosion and seriously injured a mother and son, awarding them $109.5 million in damages.
As a result of the blast, Robert Rymers was permanently disabled and suffered extensive burns. His mother, Virginia Rymers, was burned and also suffered an air embolism — where air bubbles get into the bloodstream and disrupt blood flow.
The mother and son lost two pet dogs and all their possessions inside the home they rented in the May 2021 explosion.
The plaintiffs filed their suit in September 2021.
The jury rendered its 10-2 verdict in favor of the Rymerses about three weeks after the trial began, but a cap on damages the parties agreed to in advance will limit the family’s recovery to $60 million.
The jury determined that CPS Energy was the only party whose negligence caused the incident, clearing all other parties of blame.
In awarding damages, the jury determined that Robert Rymers was entitled to $7 million for past pain and suffering, $17.5 million for future pain and suffering, $4.5 million for past mental anguish, $17.5 for future mental anguish, $3.5 million for past disfigurement, $17.5 million for future disfigurement, $3.5 million for past physical impairment and $32.5 million for future physical impairment.
Those damages totaled $103.5 million.
For Virginia Rymers, the jury awarded $501,202.10 for past pain and suffering, none for future pain and suffering, $3 million for past mental anguish, $2.5 million for future mental anguish and no damages for past or future disfigurement or impairment.
Those damages totaled just over $6 million.
An appeal has not been filed at this time.
Stephen Calhoun, Amanda Crouch, Matthew Swantner, Georgina Buckley-Graham and Jeff Harvey of Jackson Walker and Larry D. Warren and Evan Patterson of Naman Howell represented CPS Energy.
Michael Lyons, Chris Simmons, Chris Carr and Michael Wozniak of Lyons & Simmons and Omar G. Alvarez of The Law Office of O.G. Alvarez & Associates represented the Rymerses.
The case number is 2021-CI-18484.