CommWorks Solutions, LLC v. Marvell Technology, Inc.
Infringement action filed 18 Aug 2025 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas and closed 5 May 2026, with 3 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US7027465B2USRE44904E1US6832249B2
- Case no.
- 7:25-cv-00354
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- W.D. Tex.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Texas
- Chief judge
- Alan D Albright
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 18 Aug 2025 – 5 May 2026
- Duration
- 260 days
- Basis of termination
- Voluntary dismissal
- Products & marks
- Link Street (88E6096 (e.g., the 88E6096-TAH1)); 88E6097 (e.g., the 88E6097-A2-TAH1), 88E6097F (e.g., the 88E6097F-LG01); 88E6092 (e.g., the 88E6092-A2- TAH1C000); 88E6095 (e.g., the 88E6095-A0-TAH-1000); 88F6601 · Marvell Avanta Family 88E6095F (e.g., the 88E6095F-A3-LG01) · Marvell equipment, including, as a non-limiting example, Marvell’s chips with IEEE 802.3ah support such as the exemplary Marvell Alaska (e.g., the 88E3015, 88E3016, 88E3018, 88E1510, 88E1518, 88E1512, and 88E1514) · Marvell equipment, including, as a non-limiting example, Marvell’s chips with Wi-Fi Multimedia (WMM) and/or 802.11-2007+ wireless QoS functionality such as the exemplary Marvell 88W8686 (e.g., the 88W8686-B13CBB1-B115-T, 88W8686-B2-NAP1C000); 88DE3100 (e.g., the 88DE3100-Z2); MC-85 (e.g., the UAY-MMC85M); and MC8687P
Check this patent against your own product
Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.
Get an FTO claim chart- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Method for contention free traffic detection
The invention discloses a method for detecting priority of data frames comprising the steps of extracting (S1) a bit pattern from a predetermined position in a frame, comparing (S2, S3) the extracted bit pattern with a search pattern, and identifying (S4) the received frame as a priority frame in case the extracted bit pattern (BP) matches with the first search pattern (SP). By this method, the priority of a data frame can easily be detected. The invention also proposes a corresponding device for detecting priority of data frames.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 11 Apr 2006
- Est. expiry
- 22 Feb 2021
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- HAUTALA, PETRI
- Classification
- H04J3/07H04L12/28
- Prosecution counsel
- Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt
- Examiner
- TON, DANG
Method for contention free traffic detection
The invention discloses a method for detecting priority of data frames comprising the steps of extracting (S1) a bit pattern from a predetermined position in a frame, comparing (S2, S3) said extracted bit pattern with a search pattern, and identifying (S4) said received frame as a priority frame in case said extracted bit pattern (BP) matches with said first search pattern (SP). By this method, the priority of a data frame can easily be detected. The invention also proposes a corresponding device for detecting priority of data frames.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 20 May 2014
- Est. expiry
- 15 Mar 2020
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- KARHULA, PETRI
- Classification
- H04J3/07H04L12/28
- Prosecution counsel
- Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt
- Examiner
- TRAN, PHUC
Also asserted in this case
1 moreThe docket lists 3 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining asserted patent are one query away in Eureka.
Parties of record
CommWorks Solutions, LLC
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- James F. McDonough · Jonathan L. Hardt
- Firm
- Rozier Hardt McDonough PLLC
Marvell Technology, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Christopher S. Ponder · Harper S. Batts · Jeffrey Liang
- Firm
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| James F. McDonough | CommWorks Solutions, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Jonathan L. Hardt | CommWorks Solutions, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Christopher S. Ponder | Marvell Technology, Inc. | Defendant |
| Harper S. Batts | Marvell Technology, Inc. | Defendant |
| Jeffrey Liang | Marvell Technology, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“On October 31, 2025, Plaintiff CommWorks Solutions, LLC, submitted a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Dkt. 14. Plaintiff dismissed the action voluntarily, citing Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), explaining that Defendant had not filed an answer or motion by the date of the filing. Id. This unilateral dismissal requires no judicial action and is effective automatically upon filing. See Yesh Music v. Lakewood Church, 727 F.3d 356, 362 (5th Cir. 2013). Plaintiff’s action is therefore DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Accordingly, as nothing remains to resolve, this case is now CLOSED. Therefore, the Clerk’s Office is directed to CLOSE this case.”
Case 7:25-cv-00354 · W.D. Tex. · closed 5 May 2026
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 7:25-cv-00354?
7:25-cv-00354 is a patent infringement action brought by CommWorks Solutions, LLC against Marvell Technology, Inc., filed on 18 Aug 2025 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The case closed on 5 May 2026.
Which patents were asserted in 7:25-cv-00354?
US7027465B2 (“Method for contention free traffic detection”), assigned to UNWIRED BROADBAND, INC., currently inactive; USRE44904E1 (“Method for contention free traffic detection”), assigned to UNWIRED BROADBAND, INC., currently inactive; US6832249B2 (“Globally accessible computer network-based broadband communication system with user-controllable quality of information delivery and flow priority”), assigned to UNWIRED BROADBAND, INC.. The record also lists Link Street (88E6096 (e.g., the 88E6096-TAH1)); 88E6097 (e.g., the 88E6097-A2-TAH1), 88E6097F (e.g., the 88E6097F-LG01); 88E6092 (e.g., the 88E6092-A2- TAH1C000); 88E6095 (e.g., the 88E6095-A0-TAH-1000); 88F6601, Marvell Avanta Family 88E6095F (e.g., the 88E6095F-A3-LG01), Marvell equipment, including, as a non-limiting example, Marvell’s chips with IEEE 802.3ah support such as the exemplary Marvell Alaska (e.g., the 88E3015, 88E3016, 88E3018, 88E1510, 88E1518, 88E1512, and 88E1514) and Marvell equipment, including, as a non-limiting example, Marvell’s chips with Wi-Fi Multimedia (WMM) and/or 802.11-2007+ wireless QoS functionality such as the exemplary Marvell 88W8686 (e.g., the 88W8686-B13CBB1-B115-T, 88W8686-B2-NAP1C000); 88DE3100 (e.g., the 88DE3100-Z2); MC-85 (e.g., the UAY-MMC85M); and MC8687P.
How was case 7:25-cv-00354 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: “On October 31, 2025, Plaintiff CommWorks Solutions, LLC, submitted a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Dkt. 14. Plaintiff dismissed the action voluntarily, citing Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), explaining that Defendant had not filed an answer or motion by the date of the filing. Id. This unilateral dismissal requires no judicial action and is effective automatically upon filing. See Yesh Music v. Lakewood Church, 727 F.3d 356, 362 (5th Cir. 2013). Plaintiff’s action is therefore DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Accordingly, as nothing remains to reso
What does dismissal without prejudice mean?
A dismissal without prejudice ends this action but leaves the claims alive — the plaintiff may file them again later, subject to the limitation period.
How long did case 7:25-cv-00354 take?
260 calendar days, from filing on 18 Aug 2025 to closure on 5 May 2026.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 7:25-cv-00354?
Chief Judge Alan D Albright presided. James F. McDonough and Jonathan L. Hardt are recorded as counsel for plaintiff CommWorks Solutions. Christopher S. Ponder, Harper S. Batts and Jeffrey Liang appear for defendant Marvell Technology.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 7:25-cv-00354 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is 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, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.
No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports 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 this page 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.