TurboCode v. National Instruments: Patent Infringement Dismissed Without Prejudice
TurboCode, LLC filed suit against National Instruments, Corp. in the Western District of Texas alleging infringement of US6813742, targeting NI’s PXIe RF vector signal transceivers and LTE-U/LAA testbed products. The parties jointly stipulated to dismiss all claims without prejudice after 185 days, leaving the door open for future litigation.
LTE Testbed Patent Suit Against NI Ends in Joint Dismissal
TurboCode, LLC filed this patent infringement action against National Instruments, Corp. on February 24, 2025 in the Western District of Texas, asserting US6813742. The accused products span NI’s PXIe-5644, PXIe-5644R, PXIe-5645R, and PXIe-5646R vector signal transceivers, the LTE-U/LAA Testbed, RFmx LTE/LTE-Advanced and NB-IoT/eMTC software suites, and the USRP-2974 — a broad portfolio of RF test and measurement instruments widely used in wireless communications R&D.
On August 27, 2025, the parties filed a Joint Stipulation of Dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), agreeing to dismiss all claims against National Instruments without prejudice. The court entered its order closing the case on August 28, 2025, with each side bearing its own fees and costs. Critically, a dismissal without prejudice means TurboCode retains the legal right to re-file the same infringement claims against NI in the future.
The 185-day resolution is consistent with early-stage settlements or strategic retreats that occur before significant discovery or claim construction investment. The fee-split arrangement — each party bearing its own costs — suggests no financial concession was extracted by either side in the public record. Whether the parties reached a confidential licensing arrangement or TurboCode simply chose to regroup cannot be determined from the available filings.
Filing to Dismissed without Prejudice in 185 days
185-day lifespan — resolved before claim construction or discovery close
Dismissed without prejudice: what the joint stipulation means for both parties
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) — automatic dismissal on joint stipulation
Under FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), a plaintiff may dismiss an action by filing a stipulation signed by all appearing parties. No court approval is required — the dismissal is effective automatically upon filing. The court’s order here confirms this procedural posture, citing Yesh Music v. Lakewood Church. This mechanism is typically used when parties resolve or pause a dispute without requiring judicial adjudication of the merits.
No merits ruling issuedWithout prejudice: TurboCode can re-file the same claims
A dismissal without prejudice does not extinguish the underlying cause of action. TurboCode retains the right to re-assert US6813742 against National Instruments or other defendants in a future action, subject to applicable statutes of limitations and any tolling. This contrasts sharply with a with-prejudice dismissal, which would bar re-filing. The public record does not disclose whether any settlement agreement or licensing deal accompanies this dismissal.
Re-filing right preservedNI avoids merits ruling but gains no immunity from future suit
National Instruments obtains closure of this specific action without any finding of infringement or invalidity. However, because the dismissal is without prejudice, NI receives no preclusive protection against TurboCode re-asserting US6813742. NI’s PXIe and USRP product lines remain potentially exposed if TurboCode refiles. The mutual fee-bearing arrangement signals neither party conceded financial liability at this stage.
No infringement findingRF test equipment sector faces continued LTE patent assertion risk
The breadth of accused NI products — covering PXIe vector signal transceivers, USRP platforms, and RFmx software for LTE-Advanced and NB-IoT — suggests US6813742 may be interpreted broadly by TurboCode. Vendors of comparable RF testbed and wireless protocol testing equipment should evaluate their exposure to this patent. A without-prejudice exit typically signals unresolved licensing discussions or an intent to re-engage, making ongoing FTO monitoring advisable.
Monitor for re-filing riskFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | TurboCode, LLC | Company | Patent assertion entity — holder of US6813742 covering RF/LTE wireless testbed technologySearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | National Instruments, Corp. | Company | National Instruments, Corp. — test and measurement instrumentation and RF software vendorSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | David R. Bennett, Esq., | Attorney | Counsel for TurboCode, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Direction IP law | Law Firm | Representing TurboCode, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Daniel W. Richards | Attorney | Counsel for National Instruments, Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | James L. Davis | Attorney | Counsel for National Instruments, Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Steven J. Wingard | Attorney | Counsel for National Instruments, Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Ropes & Gray LLP | Law Firm | Representing National Instruments, Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Scott, Douglass & McConnico LLP | Law Firm | Representing National Instruments, Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | Texas Western District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The court’s order confirms the procedural posture precisely: all claims dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), effective automatically upon the joint filing. Critically, the order contains no merits analysis — no finding on infringement, validity, or claim construction. The fee-splitting provision (‘each party shall bear and pay their respective attorney fees and costs’) confirms no fee-shifting motion succeeded, and neither party extracted a cost concession, leaving the commercial resolution — if any — entirely off the public record.
US6813742B2 — RF signal processing for wireless testbed systems
US6813742B2, filed under application number US09/681093, covers RF signal processing technology in the context of wireless communications testbed systems. The patent’s assertion against NI’s PXIe vector signal transceivers, LTE-U/LAA testbed, RFmx software stacks, and USRP-2974 software-defined radio platform suggests it addresses foundational signal generation, capture, or processing methods applicable across a range of 4G/LTE and adjacent wireless protocol testing workflows.
The commercial significance of US6813742 is amplified by the scope of NI’s accused product line — instruments used extensively in academic, government, and commercial wireless R&D environments. If TurboCode’s claim interpretation holds in a future proceeding, exposure could extend to any vendor shipping comparable LTE testbed or vector signal transceiver platforms. Competitors of NI in the RF test and measurement space — including Keysight Technologies, Rohde & Schwarz, and Anritsu — should treat this patent as an active enforcement risk warranting landscape analysis.
Should you run an FTO analysis against US6813742B2?
Any organisation developing or selling RF vector signal transceivers, software-defined radio platforms, or LTE/NB-IoT protocol testing instrumentation should assess their exposure to US6813742B2. The breadth of NI’s accused product range — spanning PXIe benchtop instruments, USRP SDR hardware, and RFmx software — suggests TurboCode reads this patent across both hardware and software implementations of LTE signal processing. R&D teams shipping next-generation 5G NR testbed products should also consider whether 5G signal processing methods fall within the patent’s claim scope.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can rapidly map the independent and dependent claims of US6813742B2 against your product architecture, surfacing relevant prior art and claim differentiation opportunities. Eureka’s patent landscape tools also identify continuation risk — whether TurboCode holds related applications that could cover design-arounds — and flag litigation history across the assertion entity’s full portfolio, giving your IP and product teams actionable clearance intelligence before product launch.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US6813742B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar LTE and RF testbed patent cases in W.D. Texas
Cases involving LTE, NB-IoT, and RF signal processing patents asserted in the Western District of Texas against test and measurement vendors.
What this case signals for the RF test and wireless IP landscape
A joint early dismissal over LTE testbed patents in West Texas carries specific signals for wireless test equipment makers and IP teams.
Without-prejudice exit keeps litigation leverage alive for TurboCode
TurboCode filed and withdrew without a merits ruling, preserving its ability to re-assert US6813742. This pattern is consistent with patent assertion entities using initial filings to pressure licensing discussions. NI’s RF instrument and LTE software portfolio remains nominally exposed until a license or with-prejudice resolution is confirmed.
Western District of Texas remains a preferred venue for wireless patent suits
Filing in W.D. Tex. — despite NI’s Texas connections — reflects the district’s continued attractiveness for patent plaintiffs. IP teams monitoring wireless and RF testing patent assertions should maintain docket coverage in this court, as similar PAE-driven actions targeting test equipment makers are likely to continue.
TurboCode v National — key questions answered
The case was dismissed without prejudice on August 28, 2025, pursuant to a joint stipulation under FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). No merits ruling was issued. Each party was ordered to bear its own attorney fees and costs. TurboCode retains the right to re-file its infringement claims based on US6813742B2 against National Instruments in a future action.
TurboCode asserted US6813742B2 (application US09/681093) against National Instruments. Accused products included the LTE-U/LAA Testbed, PXIe-5644, PXIe-5644R, PXIe-5645R, PXIe-5646R vector signal transceivers, RFmx LTE/LTE-Advanced software, RFmx NB-IoT/eMTC software, and the USRP-2974 software-defined radio platform.
A dismissal without prejudice means the court closed the case without adjudicating any merits. National Instruments receives no finding of non-infringement or invalidity, and gains no preclusive protection. TurboCode can re-assert the same US6813742B2 claims against NI in a future action. NI’s PXIe and USRP product lines remain exposed to potential re-filing.
The public record does not disclose the commercial reason for the joint dismissal. A 185-day resolution — before typical claim construction proceedings — is consistent with early licensing discussions, a confidential settlement, or a strategic decision by TurboCode to regroup. The mutual fee-bearing order suggests no financial concession was formally awarded to either party in the court record.
TurboCode, LLC was represented by David R. Bennett, Esq. of Direction IP Law. National Instruments was represented by Daniel W. Richards, James L. Davis, and Steven J. Wingard of Ropes & Gray LLP and Scott, Douglass & McConnico LLP.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.