Directory
Patent lawsuits by court
Where a case is filed shapes how it runs. These are the venues that hear the most US patent infringement actions.
E.D. Tex.2422Fed. Cir.2099W.D. Tex.1540D. Del.1376N.D. Ill.761D.N.J.518C.D. Cal.452N.D. Cal.325Court of Justice of Sao Paulo313S.D.N.Y.304N.D. Tex.250S.D. Fla.197S.D. Tex.177E.D. Va.150D. Mass.137W.D. Wash.126N.D. Ga.117M.D. Fla.117D. Colo.100E.D.N.Y.97U.S. Supreme Court97S.D. Cal.77N.D. Ohio75United States International Trade Commission73
Directory
Patent lawsuits by company
The parties that appear most often in these records, as plaintiff or as defendant. Ordered by number of cases on file.
Patent Armory, Inc.259Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.218Google, LLC203Apple, Inc.201Torus Ventures, LLC164Cedar Lane Technologies, Inc.120Vdpp, LLC107Amazon.com, Inc.102Linfo IP, LLC88Aml IP, LLC87Bell Semiconductor, LLC76Microsoft, Co.75Fleet Connect Solutions, LLC66Dyson Technology Limited62Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd.61AT&T, Inc.59Katherine K. Vidal59LG Electronics, Inc.57InnoMemory, LLC56Cisco Systems, Inc.51Lupin Limited51WirelessWerx IP, LLC49Gamehancement, LLC49McOm IP, LLC49American Regent, Inc.48Meta Platforms, Inc.48Intercurrency Software, LLC48International Trade Commission47WebSock Global Strategies, LLC46Aurobindo Pharma, Ltd.46Asustek Computer, Inc.45S3G Technology, LLC45Mylan, NV45Novartis, AG45VoltStar Technologies, Inc.45Headwater Research, LLC44DataCloud Technologies, LLC44Communication Interface Technologies, LLC44Qualcomm, Inc.43T-Mobile43WSOU Investments, LLC43Secure Matrix LLC43Medtronic, Inc.42Verizon Communications, Inc.42Bayer AG42Pfizer, Inc.40Apotex, Inc.40Deckers Outdoor Corp.40RecepTrexx, LLC39Digital Doors, Inc.39Virtual Creative Artists, LLC39Intel, Corp.38Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc.38Authentixx, LLC38BTL Industries, Inc.38Sandoz, Inc.37Hyper Ice, Inc.37Masimo, Corp.37Push Data, LLC37Lenovo, Inc.36
Patsnap Eureka
A docket tells you what happened. Eureka tells you what it means for your product.
Take any patent asserted in this archive and test it against your own design: ranked prior art, claim-by-claim comparison, invalidity exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.
Start free with 10,000 creditsNo credit card. Cites every source.
- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked back to the published document.
- 02Claim-level comparisonElement by element, against your own product or design.
- 03Legal status across 174 jurisdictionsGrants, lapses, challenges and family members in one view.
Ask the corpus
Three questions this archive usually leads to
Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Who is suing in my technology field?
The dispute map for your field — plaintiffs, defendants, venues and how each case ended.
Could my product read on an asserted patent?
Claim-by-claim comparison against your own design, with the elements at risk flagged.
What is this plaintiff’s litigation pattern?
Every case they have brought, the patents behind them, and how the courts resolved each one.
Case records
Recently closed US patent cases
The ten most recent closures. Each links to the full record: parties, counsel, asserted patents and the docket text behind the termination.
Portus Singapore Pte v. Motorola Mobility
VitalGo Systems v. Kreg Therapeutics
Guangzhou Kaizichen Technology v. Toka
Schedule A Defendants v. Pom Group
Craig A. Breed v. Donald Trump
Lone Star Document Management v. Liberty Mutual Group
SmartOrder v. Papa John's International
Lone Star Document Management v. Micro Focus (US) Group
Juanren Wu v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule 'A'
Showing the 10 most recent filings on record. Start from a court, a company or a technology area above to reach the rest.
Monthly litigation briefing
Every US patent case that closed last month, in one email.
Court, outcome, asserted patents and the parties behind each closure — compiled from the same records as this archive and sent in the first week of the month. No commentary, no filler.
- Once a month
- Every closure, not a selection
- Unsubscribe in one click
You’re on the list.
The next issue goes out in the first week of the month. Check your inbox for a confirmation.
Directory
Patent lawsuits by technology
Disputes grouped by the subject matter of the asserted patents.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
What does each case record contain?
Every record sets out the same fields: the case number and court, the filing and closing dates, the parties and their counsel of record, each asserted patent with its assignee and legal status, any products or marks named in the docket, and the recorded basis of termination quoted from the docket text.
Where does the data come from?
Patsnap Litigation Data, compiled from public court docket records. Each page names its source and the date the snapshot was taken.
Is this legal advice?
No. These pages reproduce publicly available docket data for general information and reference only. Nothing here is legal advice, and nothing should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, or that any party prevailed.
How often is it updated?
The archive is refreshed monthly. This page was last updated on 4 October 2026.
Disclaimer. These pages reproduce publicly available court docket data and are provided for general information and reference only. They are not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.
Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, these pages mark it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.
No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. These pages report what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.
No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on these pages constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.