MIMO Research, LLC v. Murata Electronics North America, Inc. et al.
Infringement action filed 15 Jun 2022 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas and closed 24 Mar 2023, with 4 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: consent judgment.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US7091854B1US7305057B1US7433382B1US7002470B1
- Case no.
- 5:22-cv-00074
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- E.D. Tex.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- Texas
- Chief judge
- None recorded
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 15 Jun 2022 – 24 Mar 2023
- Duration
- 282 days
- Basis of termination
- Consent Judgment
- Products & marks
- Multichannel filter-based handheld ultra wideband communications · Multiple-input multiple-output wireless sensor networks communications · Spread spectrum based multichannel modulation for ultra wideband communications · Wireless UWB-based space-time sensor networks communications
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
Multiple-input multiple-output wireless sensor networks communications
This invention presents a MIMO wireless sensor networks communication, which is expected to utilize a larger of size sensor nodes in commercial environments, potentially hostile and militarily sensitive environments. Every sensor node of the MIMO sensor networks communication is to support data collection, signal processing and analysis, and transmission fashion. The present invention also develops novel approaches of advanced space-time processing with the MIMO sensor-antenna architecture, spread spectrum, and adaptive communication signal processing that simultaneously exploit temporal and spatial diversity for seamless sensor networks communications, thereby converting spatially distributed sensor nodes into efficient, robust, reliable, and secure wireless sensor networks communications.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 15 Aug 2006
- Est. expiry
- 13 Oct 2024
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- MIAO, GEORGE J.
- Classification
- G08B1/08
- Examiner
- LA, ANH V.
Multichannel filter-based handheld ultra wideband communications
A multichannel filter-based handheld UWB communication transceiver is presented for outdoor operations. Using eleven multichannels with multicarrier modulations, the invented handheld UWB communication transceiver can transmit and receive UWB signals at a data rate up to 7.15 Gcps with scalability capabilities. In addition, the handheld UWB communication transceiver can be controlled in a programmable way to avoid interference with WLAN devices.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 4 Dec 2007
- Est. expiry
- 14 Jan 2026
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- MIAO, GEORGE J.
- Classification
- H04B1/10
- Examiner
- PAYNE, DAVID C.
Also asserted in this case
2 moreThe docket lists 4 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 2 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
Parties of record
MIMO Research, LLC
- Core tech
- G08B1/08H04B1/10
- Counsel
- Daniel P. Hipskind · Elizabeth L. DeRieux
- Firm
- Berger & Hipskind LLP (Beverly Hills), Capshaw DeRieux LLP
Murata Electronics North America, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- John Russell Emerson
- Firm
- Haynes & Boone, LLP
- Also named
- Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Daniel P. Hipskind | MIMO Research, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Elizabeth L. DeRieux | MIMO Research, LLC | Plaintiff |
| John Russell Emerson | Murata Electronics North America, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Before the Court is the Agreed Stipulation of Dismissal of Murata Electronics North America, Inc. and Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. With Prejudice (the “Stipulation”). (Dkt. No. 84.) In the Stipulation, Plaintiff MIMO Research LLC (“MIMO Research”) and Defendants Murata Electronics North America, Inc. and Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Murata”) stipulate and agree pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that all of MIMO Research’s claims in this action against LG 1 Case 5:22-cv-00074-JRG-JBB Document 13 Filed 03/24/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 152 shall be dismissed with prejudice and that all of Murata’s claims and defenses in this action against MIMO Research shall be dismissed without prejudice. Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS and ACKNOWLEDGES the parties’ Stipulation. It is ORDERED that all of MIMO Research’s claims against Murata in member case 5:22-cv-74 are DISMISSED with prejudice, and all of Murata’s claims and defenses against MIMO Research in member case 5:22-cv-74 are DISMISSED without prejudice. Each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees. All motions pending in member case 5:22-cv-74 not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT.”
Case 5:22-cv-00074 · E.D. Tex. · closed 24 March 2023
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 5:22-cv-00074?
5:22-cv-00074 is a patent infringement action brought by MIMO Research, LLC against Murata Electronics North America, Inc., filed on 15 Jun 2022 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The case closed on 24 March 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 5:22-cv-00074?
US7091854B1 (“Multiple-input multiple-output wireless sensor networks communications”), assigned to MIMO RESEARCH, LLC, currently inactive; US7305057B1 (“Multichannel filter-based handheld ultra wideband communications”), assigned to MIMO RESEARCH, LLC, currently inactive; US7433382B1 (“Spread spectrum based multichannel modulation for ultra wideband communications”), assigned to MIMO RESEARCH, LLC; US7002470B1 (“Wireless UWB-based space-time sensor networks communications”), assigned to MIMO RESEARCH, LLC. The record also lists Multichannel filter-based handheld ultra wideband communications, Multiple-input multiple-output wireless sensor networks communications, Spread spectrum based multichannel modulation for ultra wideband communications and Wireless UWB-based space-time sensor networks communications.
How was case 5:22-cv-00074 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is consent judgment. The termination text reads: “Before the Court is the Agreed Stipulation of Dismissal of Murata Electronics North America, Inc. and Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. With Prejudice (the “Stipulation”). (Dkt. No. 84.) In the Stipulation, Plaintiff MIMO Research LLC (“MIMO Research”) and Defendants Murata Electronics North America, Inc. and Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Murata”) stipulate and agree pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that all of MIMO Research’s claims in this action against LG 1 Case 5:22-cv-00074-JRG-JBB Document 13 Filed 03/24/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 152 shall be dis
What does dismissal with prejudice mean?
A dismissal with prejudice permanently ends the claims that were filed, so the same claims cannot be brought again against that defendant. It is the usual form when the parties have settled.
How long did case 5:22-cv-00074 take?
282 calendar days, from filing on 15 Jun 2022 to closure on 24 March 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 5:22-cv-00074?
Daniel P. Hipskind and Elizabeth L. DeRieux are recorded as counsel for plaintiff MIMO Research. John Russell Emerson appears for defendant Murata Electronics North America.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 5:22-cv-00074 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.