Free Speech, Due Process and Trial by Jury
A federal jury in Marshall returned a unanimous verdict Wednesday in favor of AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, Ericsson and Nokia, finding they did not infringe on three patents, denying the plaintiffs' $436 million request. The three disputed patents directed quality of service flow, control resource set configuration and small cell enhancements.
A 12-member Texarkana jury returned a defense verdict in favor of DoorDash Thursday after a four-day trial before U.S. District Judge Robert Schroeder, finding Fall Line Patents failed to prove the delivery company infringed its patent.
For infringing one patent held by Viasat that covers technology used in flash memory, jurors Thursday afternoon determined Kioxia owes $229 million in damages in the form of a running royalty.
An Eastern District of Texas jury in Marshall swatted Verizon Wireless with a $190 million verdict for infringement of a patent owned by Aspen Networks, a California technology company. The case is one of three such cases alleging the unauthorized use of Aspen's system to connect cellular phone calls in-progress between cell and Wi-Fi systems. The other two cases involving AT&T Mobility and T-Mobile USA are still pending.
In this edition of Litigation Roundup, Texas follows up on its state court lawsuit against proxy advisory firm Institutional Shareholder Services with a lawsuit against Glass, Lewis & Co. in Collin County, and Gray Reed secures a complete defense win for a homebuilder client in a Tarrant County jury trial.
U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap has determined Collision Communications, a patent holder that secured a $445.5 million infringement verdict against Samsung Electronics last year, failed to show it was also entitled to a permanent injunction to prohibit ongoing infringement.
MARSHALL — A lawyer for Samsung argued during the hearing that the injunction Collision Communications seeks in the patent infringement case would prevent his client from importing “well above 75 percent of products” the electronics giant produces, including all phones and tablets. U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap took the motion under advisement and told the parties he would issue his decision as soon as practicable.
In this edition of Litigation Roundup, Google gears up to defend against patent infringement claims in Midland, the battle between the Dallas Mavericks and the Dallas Stars won't be going to a jury trial, a $17 million Ponzi scheme architect from Houston goes to prison, and the Texas Supreme Court sides with a lawyer fending off claims from a dissatisfied client.
In this edition of Litigation Roundup, a lawsuit Mercuria Energy American filed against a former trader won’t be going to trial after all, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission gets a $7 million final judgment in a case against a forex trader from Houston it alleged was operating a Ponzi scheme.
Brett Johnson, co-managing partner of Winston & Strawn’s Dallas office, was approached in February by a corporate client and the opposing counsel in a litigation matter with the same message.
“You have got to talk to Aimee Fagan,” the client told Johnson. “She’s your kind of lawyer — excellent courtroom skills and an even better person.”
That same weekend, three friends — none of them related to each other — contacted Fagan, a prominent Dallas intellectual property lawyer at Sidley Austin, to encourage her to talk to leaders at Winston because they thought the Chicago-founded firm “was a natural fit for my practice.”
On April 24, Fagan joined the Dallas office of Winston.
In this edition of Litigation Roundup, Winston & Strawn is representing the NFL Players Association in a federal lawsuit in Houston over the handling of a grievance and AZA and Beck Redden prevail on appeal in a California trade secrets dispute over a penile implant.
In this edition of Litigation Roundup, a distributor of energy drink Alani is sued by the family of a 17-year-old girl who died after consuming the beverages, and Samsung tells a Texas judge the invalidation of a patent by a California judge means it's entitled to a new trial in a dispute that had ended with a $78 million verdict against it.
© Copyright 2026 The Texas Lawbook
The content on this website is protected under federal Copyright laws. Any use without the consent of The Texas Lawbook is prohibited.
