Larry Golden vs. Google: AI Chip Patent Case Transferred to California
Was möchten Sie als Nächstes tun?
Wählen Sie Ihren Weg entsprechend Ihren aktuellen Bedürfnissen:
📋 Fallzusammenfassung
| Fallbezeichnung | Larry Golden v. Google, LLC |
| Fallnummer | 6:25-cv-00434 (W.D. Tex.) |
| Gericht | Western District of Texas (transferred to N.D. California) |
| Dauer | Sep 2025 – Jan 2026 4 months |
| Ergebnis | Venue Transferred — Procedural Win for Google |
| Streitige Patente | |
| Beschuldigte Produkte | Edge TPU, Google Tensor CPU Series (G1–G5), TPU Series (TPUv1 through TPUv7) |
Fallübersicht
Die Parteien
⚖️ Kläger
A pro se patent plaintiff and inventor with an extensive litigation history asserting patents related to multi-sensor detection systems and connected device technologies.
🛡️ Beklagter
Global technology leader and subsidiary of Alphabet Inc., with a significant proprietary AI hardware portfolio, including its TPU and Tensor chip families.
Die streitigen Patente
This case involved five U.S. patents asserted against Google’s AI processor portfolio, focusing on sensor-integrated detection and connected device technologies. These patents are registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
- • US8,334,761B2 — Sensor-integrated detection and communication technologies
- • US10,163,287B2 — Connected device monitoring systems
- • US11,645,898B2 — Advanced sensor integration and communication
- • US10,984,619B2 — Multi-sensor detection architecture
- • USRE043,891E — Reissued patent covering earlier sensor-communication inventions
Developing similar AI hardware?
Assess the patent landscape for AI chips and sensor integration to mitigate infringement risk.
Zeitplan des Rechtsstreits und rechtliche Analyse
Ergebnis
The Western District of Texas **transferred** Case No. 6:25-cv-00434 to the **Northern District of California** pursuant to the court’s ruling on Google’s motion to transfer venue. The Clerk was directed to transfer the matter and close the docket in Texas. No damages were awarded, and no injunctive relief was considered at this stage. The infringement claims remain live before the transferee court.
Venue Transfer Analysis: Legal Reasoning
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a district court may transfer a civil action to any district where it might have been brought when transfer serves “the convenience of parties and witnesses” and “the interest of justice.”
- • Location of Google’s principal place of business in the Northern District of California (Mountain View, CA)
- • Witness and evidence proximity: Google’s engineers, source code, and technical documentation concentrated in California
- • Court congestion and familiarity: N.D. California has extensive experience with semiconductor and AI patent cases
- • Plaintiff’s lack of meaningful Texas connections as a pro se litigant
Rechtliche Bedeutung
This transfer ruling contributes to a well-documented pattern: **Western District of Texas courts granting venue transfers in patent cases filed against Silicon Valley defendants**, particularly following the Federal Circuit’s guidance in In re Google LLC. The case also highlights the **evidentiary challenge facing patent holders asserting sensor-based communication patents against AI chip architectures**.
Freedom to Operate (FTO) Analysis for AI Chips
This case highlights critical IP risks in the rapidly evolving AI hardware sector. Choose your next step:
📋 Analyze AI Chip Patent Landscape
Explore the patent families asserted against Google’s AI processors.
- Identify key AI chip patent holders
- Examine claim construction for sensor-communication patents
- Monitor related reexamination activity
🔍 Das Risiko meines KI-Produkts überprüfen
Run a comprehensive FTO analysis for your AI processor or hardware product.
- Geben Sie Ihre Produktbeschreibung oder technischen Merkmale ein.
- KI identifiziert potenziell blockierende Patente
- Erhalten Sie einen umsetzbaren Risikobewertungsbericht
Hochrisikogebiet
Proprietary AI chip architectures
5 geltend gemachte Patente
Covering sensor-communication tech
FTO Essential
For new AI hardware designs
✅ Wichtigste Erkenntnisse
Venue transfer under § 1404(a) resolved this case procedurally within 126 days — demonstrating its power as a first-line defense.
Verwandte Rechtsprechung suchen →Pro se assertions against major technology defendants face compounding structural disadvantages in complex IP litigation.
Präzedenzfälle erkunden →Asserting broad sensor patents against specialized AI hardware demands robust claim charts and expert declarations.
View expert analysis tools →Häufig gestellte Fragen
Five U.S. patents: US8,334,761B2; US10,163,287B2; US11,645,898B2; US10,984,619B2; and USRE043,891E — covering sensor integration and connected device communication technologies.
The court granted Google’s motion under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), finding that the Northern District of California — where Google’s principal operations, witnesses, and evidence are located — was the more appropriate and convenient venue.
No. The transfer closes the Texas docket administratively. The infringement allegations remain pending before the Northern District of California.
Sind Sie bereit, Ihre Patentstrategie zu stärken?
Schließen Sie sich den über 18.000 Fachleuten aus dem Bereich des geistigen Eigentums an, die PatSnap Eureka nutzen, um mit KI-gestützter Präzision Recherchen zum Stand der Technik durchzuführen, Patentanmeldungen zu erstellen und Wettbewerbslandschaften zu analysieren.
Referenzen
- PACER-Fallsuche
- USPTO-Patent-Volltextdatenbank
- Cornell Legal Information Institute — 28 U.S.C. § 1404
- US-Patent- und Markenamt – Patentressourcen
- PatSnap – Lösungen für den Umgang mit geistigem Eigentum für Anwaltskanzleien
Dieser Artikel dient ausschließlich zu Informationszwecken und stellt keine Rechtsberatung dar. Alle Angaben zu den Fällen stammen aus öffentlich zugänglichen Gerichtsakten. Informationen zu den Funktionen der Plattform finden Sie auf PatSnap.