TOT Power Control, S.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc. et al

On September, 14, 2021, TOT Power Control, S.L. (“TOT” or “Plaintiff”), represented by Brian E. Farnan and Michael J. Farnan of Farnan LLP, filed an intellectual property lawsuit against LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. (collectively, “LG” or “Defendants”), seeking permanent injunctive relief, treble and supplemental damages and such other relief for patent infringement of United States Patent owned by the Plaintiff. This case was filed in the United States District Court in the District of Delaware.

The Plaintiff filed this complaint for the alleged infringement of United State Patents No. 7,532,865, entitled “Outer Loop Power Control Method and Device for Wireless Communications Systems” (the ’865 patent), United States Patent No. 7,496,376 entitled “Outer Loop Power Control Method and Apparatus for Wireless Communications Systems” (the ’376 patent) (collectively, referred to as the “Patents-in-suit”) owned by them.

In the complaint, the Plaintiffs alleged that, “LG has directly infringed, and continues to infringe, one or more claims of the ’865 patent by among other things, making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing into the United States without authorization certain mobile products (e.g., cellular phones, tablets and watches) that contain components which practice the invention claimed in the ‘865 patent (the “LG Accused Products”).”

The Plaintiffs also alleged that, “LG has directly infringed, and continues to infringe, one or more claims of the of the ‘376 patent by among other things, making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the LG Accused Products into the United States without authorization. The wireless baseband processors installed in the LG Accused Products include those manufactured and sold by Qualcomm (including that company’s Snapdragon X55 baseband processor).”

Further, the Plaintiffs alleged that, “LG’s infringement of the ‘376 patent has been knowing, deliberate and willful. TOT disclosed the invention claimed by the ‘376 patent to Qualcomm at different times between 2005 and 2014, and the invention has been so well publicized in the industry generally that LG knew that the wireless transceivers it incorporated into the LG Accused Products infringed or should have known that its use of the wireless transceivers constituted an unjustifiably high risk of infringement.”

There are two claims for relief laid down by the Plaintiff, one for the alleged infringement of each Patents-in-suit.

In the prayer for relief, the Plaintiff has requested the Court to pass a judgment that the Defendants have infringed, either literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents the Patents-in-suit and to pass an order for a permanent injunctive relief along with an award for damages including supplemental damages for any continuing post-verdict infringement up until entry of the final judgment, with an accounting, as needed, and enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, together with prejudgment and postjudgment interest. Further, the Plaintiff requested the Court for an award of attorneys’ fees pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285 costs and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 

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.