Sonrai Memory Limited v. Lenovo Group Ltd. et al

On January 7, 2022, Sonrai Memory Limited (“Plaintiff” or “Sonrai”), represented by Amy Hayden, Brian D. Ledahl, Christian W. Conkle, James Milkey, Jonathan Ma, Marc A. Fenster and Reza Mirzaie of Russ August & Kabat, filed an intellectual property lawsuit against Lenovo Group Ltd. and Motorola Mobility LLC (“Defendants”), seeking damages, costs and expenses along with pre- and post-judgement interest for the Defendants’ alleged infringement of the United States Patent owned by the Plaintiff. This case was filed in U.S. District Court in the Western District of Texas with Judge Alan D. Albright presiding.

The Plaintiff filed this complaint for the alleged infringement of United States Patent No. 6,874,014 (“’014 Patent” or the “Asserted Patent”) entitled “Chip Multiprocessor with Multiple Operating Systems.” owned by the Plaintiff.

In the complaint the Plaintiff alleged that, “Plaintiff Sonrai Memory Limited is a limited liability company organized and existing under the law of Ireland, with its principal place of business at The Hyde Building, Suite 23, The Park, Carrickmines, Dublin 18, Ireland. Sonrai is the sole owner by assignment of all right, title, and interest in the Asserted Patent. On information and belief, Defendant Lenovo Group Ltd. is organized under the laws of the People’s Republic of China, with its principal place of business at 6 Chuang ye Road, Haidan District, Beijing 100085, China. On information and belief, Defendant Motorola Mobility LLC is a limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal office at 222 W. Merchandise Mart Plaza, Suite 1800, Chicago, Illinois 60654. This complaint arises from Defendants’ unlawful infringement of the following United States patent owned by Plaintiff, which relates to improvements in computer chip architecture having multiple processors on a single die: United States Patent No. 6,874,014.”

The Plaintiff also alleged that, “On information and belief, Defendants make, use, offer for sale, sell, and/or import certain products and services, including without limitation mobile phones with Qualcomm Snapdragon SoCs containing at least one Hexagon DSP, including without limitation the Motorola Edge (“Accused Products”), that directly infringe, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, one or more claims of the ’014 Patent. The Accused Products satisfy all claim limitations of one or more claims of the ’014 Patent. By making, using, offering for sale, selling and/or importing into the United States the Accused Products, Defendants have injured Plaintiff and is liable for infringement of the ’014 Patent pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271.”

The only claim for relief laid down by the Plaintiff deals with the alleged infringement of United States Patent No. 6,874,014, owned by the Plaintiff.

In their prayer for relief, the Plaintiff requested the Court for a judgment in favor of Plaintiff that each Defendant has infringed, either literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, the ’014 Patent; an order requiring each Defendant, jointly and severally, to pay Plaintiff its damages, costs, expenses, and pre- and post-judgment interest for Defendants’ infringement of the ’014 Patent; and an order finding that this is an exceptional case within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 285 and award to Plaintiff its reasonable attorneys’ fees against Defendants, jointly and severally, along with any and all other relief as the Court may deem appropriate and just under the circumstances.

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.