Sensor Electronic Technology, Inc. v. Lite-On Technology, Corp. et al.
Infringement action filed 2 Apr 2021 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas and closed 17 Jul 2023, with 10 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: dismissed with prejudice.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US10411156B2US6841809B2US10460952B2US9923117B2US9042420B2US10147848B2US10854785B2US9966496B2US9330906B2US8552562B2
- Case no.
- 6:21-cv-00322
- 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
- 2 Apr 2021 – 17 Jul 2023
- Duration
- 836 days
- Basis of termination
- Dismissed with Prejudice
- Products & marks
- Contact configuration for optoelectronic device · Device with transparent and higher conductive regions in lateral cross section of semiconductor layer · Heterostructure semiconductor device · Light emitting heterostructure with partially relaxed semiconductor layer · Profiled contact for semiconductor device · Semiconductor structure with inhomogeneous regions · Stress relieving semiconductor layer
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
Device with transparent and higher conductive regions in lateral cross section of semiconductor layer
A device including one or more layers with lateral regions configured to facilitate the transmission of radiation through the layer and lateral regions configured to facilitate current flow through the layer is provided. The layer can comprise a short period superlattice, which includes barriers alternating with wells. In this case, the barriers can include both transparent regions, which are configured to reduce an amount of radiation that is absorbed in the layer, and higher conductive regions, which are configured to keep the voltage drop across the layer within a desired range.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 10 Sep 2019
- Earliest priority
- 31 Mar 2017
- Est. expiry
- 10 Aug 2032
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- SHUR, MICHAEL · SHATALOV, MAXIM S. · DOBRINSKY, ALEXANDER
- Classification
- H01L33/06H01L33/32H01S5/343H01S5/125H01L33/22B82Y10/00H01S5/30H01L33/00H01L29/15H01L33/10H01L29/16H01S5/34H01L21/02H01L29/778H01L29/20B82Y20/00H10D30/47H10D62/815H10D62/83H10D62/85
- Prosecution counsel
- LaBatt, LLC
- Examiner
- RODRIGUEZ, ARMANDO
Heterostructure semiconductor device
A heterostructure semiconductor device that includes a composite layer between an active layer and a gate. The composite layer includes a strain matching layer and a barrier layer. The strain matching layer reduces the strain between the barrier layer and the active layer. The device can incorporate various additional layers as well as gate and/or contact configurations to obtain desired device performance characteristics.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 11 Jan 2005
- Est. expiry
- 10 Sep 2023
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- FAREED, QHALID · GASKA, REMIGIJUS · SHUR, MICHAEL
- Classification
- H01L31/0264H01L31/0328H01L21/335H01L29/20
- Prosecution counsel
- LaBatt, LLC
- Examiner
- FLYNN, NATHAN J.
Also asserted in this case
8 moreThe docket lists 10 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 8 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
- US10460952B2Stress relieving semiconductor layer
- US9923117B2Semiconductor structure with inhomogeneous regions
- US9042420B2Device with transparent and higher conductive regions in lateral cross section of semiconductor layer
- US10147848B2Contact configuration for optoelectronic device
- US10854785B2Contact configuration for optoelectronic device
- US9966496B2Light emitting heterostructure with partially relaxed semiconductor layer
- US9330906B2Stress relieving semiconductor layer
- US8552562B2Profiled contact for semiconductor device
Parties of record
Sensor Electronic Technology, Inc.
- Core tech
- H01L33/06H01L33/32H01S5/343H01S5/125
- Counsel
- David C. Radulescu · Etai Lahav · Jonathan Auerbach · Kevin S. Kudlac · Michael Sadowitz
- Firm
- Radulescu LLP
Lite-On Technology, Corp.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Brian Christopher Nash · Brock S. Weber · Christopher Kao · David J. Tsai · Steven P. Tepera
- Firm
- Morrison & Foerster LLP, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
- Also named
- Lite-On Technology USA, Inc. · Lite-on, Inc. · Lite-On Trading USA, Inc.
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| David C. Radulescu | Sensor Electronic Technology, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Etai Lahav | Sensor Electronic Technology, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Jonathan Auerbach | Sensor Electronic Technology, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Kevin S. Kudlac | Sensor Electronic Technology, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Michael Sadowitz | Sensor Electronic Technology, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Brian Christopher Nash | Lite-On Technology, Corp. | Defendant |
| Brock S. Weber | Lite-On Technology, Corp. | Defendant |
| Christopher Kao | Lite-On Technology, Corp. | Defendant |
| David J. Tsai | Lite-On Technology, Corp. | Defendant |
| Steven P. Tepera | Lite-On Technology, Corp. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“Before the court is the Parties’ Joint Motion and Stipulation of Dismissal. Having considered the Parties’ Motion, the Court finds that the Motion should be granted. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Parties’ Motion and Stipulation of Dismissal s hereby GRANTED and that all claims and counterclaims be, and hereby are, dismissed with prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.”
Case 6:21-cv-00322 · W.D. Tex. · closed 17 July 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 6:21-cv-00322?
6:21-cv-00322 is a patent infringement action brought by Sensor Electronic Technology, Inc. against Lite-On Technology, Corp., filed on 2 Apr 2021 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. The case closed on 17 July 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 6:21-cv-00322?
US10411156B2 (“Device with transparent and higher conductive regions in lateral cross section of semiconductor layer”), assigned to SENSOR ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY, INC., currently active; US6841809B2 (“Heterostructure semiconductor device”), assigned to NITEK, INC., currently inactive; US10460952B2 (“Stress relieving semiconductor layer”), assigned to SENSOR ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.; US9923117B2 (“Semiconductor structure with inhomogeneous regions”), assigned to SENSOR ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.; US9042420B2 (“Device with transparent and higher conductive regions in lateral cross section of semiconductor layer”), assigned to NITEK, INC.; US10147848B2 (“Contact configuration for optoelectronic device”), assigned to NITEK, INC.; US10854785B2 (“Contact configuration for optoelectronic device”), assigned to SENSOR ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.; US9966496B2 (“Light emitting heterostructure with partially relaxed semiconductor layer”), assigned to SENSOR ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.; US9330906B2 (“Stress relieving semiconductor layer”), assigned to SENSOR ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.; US8552562B2 (“Profiled contact for semiconductor device”), assigned to SENSOR ELECTRONIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.. The record also lists Contact configuration for optoelectronic device, Device with transparent and higher conductive regions in lateral cross section of semiconductor layer, Heterostructure semiconductor device, Light emitting heterostructure with partially relaxed semiconductor layer, Profiled contact for semiconductor device, Semiconductor structure with inhomogeneous regions and Stress relieving semiconductor layer.
How was case 6:21-cv-00322 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is dismissed with prejudice. The termination text reads: “Before the court is the Parties’ Joint Motion and Stipulation of Dismissal. Having considered the Parties’ Motion, the Court finds that the Motion should be granted. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Parties’ Motion and Stipulation of Dismissal s hereby GRANTED and that all claims and counterclaims be, and hereby are, dismissed with prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.”
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 6:21-cv-00322 take?
836 calendar days, from filing on 2 Apr 2021 to closure on 17 July 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 6:21-cv-00322?
Chief Judge Alan D Albright presided. David C. Radulescu, Etai Lahav, Jonathan Auerbach, Kevin S. Kudlac and Michael Sadowitz are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Sensor Electronic Technology. Brian Christopher Nash, Brock S. Weber, Christopher Kao, David J. Tsai and Steven P. Tepera appear for defendant Lite-On Technology.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 6:21-cv-00322 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.