[WIPSTUDY #2] Taiwan- Patent Litigation case study #2

Following up #1,

This time we're going to review infringement patent analysis with the case between AU Optronics Corporation and Samsung Electronics Co. focusing on;

• Licensing Strategy
• Non-Self Reference
• CounterClaim
• IP Competitiveness

                                             < Search and analysis database : WIPS Global >

2-1. Infringement Patent Analysis

AU Optronics Corporation vs Samsung Electronics Co.,Ltd

wipsglobal.com> US litigation search

• Patent : US 7286192
• Title : Transflective liquid crystal display
• Case Type : Infringement
• Product : LCD television model LN46C630K1F of Samsung Electronics
• Status : Closed/ Likely settlement

wipsglobal> Citation analysis

The corresponding patent has the total 1,071 citations and among them 1,056 are forward citation references. Also, 1,012 cases are non-self citations. This means this technology is very influential so that a lot of following patents have cited. 

We can see the list of top applicants that cited the corresponding patent. Samsung Electronics is one of the top applicants in the 5th. BOE Technology is also positioned in 3rd of the list. AU Optronics might prepare licensing-out strategy to BOE. Also, BOE might analyze claims to prepare licensing-in strategy for AU Optronics.  

wipsglobal.com > Citation analysis visual mode

Backward/ forward citation relations between documents appear more clearly in visual mode with patent number by year, date, assignee...and other information together.

wipsglobal.com> Citation analysis text mode

A lot of forward references have been cited by examiner which means this patent have been evaluated very high. 

2-2. IP Power Analysis

Let's check IP competitive structure of the two parties by their counterclaim to see their IP power. 

         ∎ On LCD panel product;

     > AU Optronics vs Samsung Electronics : 10 cases

     > Samsung Electronics vs AU Optronics : 9 cases

wipsglobal.com> SmartAngle> IP Competitiveness

∎Technology and Marketability

This chart tells us the extreme difference on the IP power of the two parties.

AU Optronics has stronger technology impact as it's already proved in the citation analysis. However, they might need to prepare strategies for Non-US area considering that they don't have many family patents.

Samsung has stronger market power by overwhelming number of family documents. But they might need to prepare strategies for possibility that the invalidation turns out to be low.

wipsglobal.com> search 

◄All of the AU Optronics' patents are active.

◄3 patents of Samsung are inactive.
(1 expired, 2 terminated)

wipsglobal.com> SmartAngle> Patent Activity Index

This Patent Activity Index shows the patent activities by technology of the two parties. Based on 1.0 point as the average, we can learn that Samsung is focusing on H05 technology; electric techniques. And AU Optronics is working more on F21; lighting and G09; educating/cryptography/display/advertising/seals.

For the common technologies that the both parties have,
G02; Optics technology- Samsung shows more patent activities. On the contrary,
H01; Basic electric elements technology- AU Optronics shows more patent activities.

<Note - the Patent Activity Index is a relative comparable indicator of competitors' technology in the same field and can't be absolute index.>

                                                              Continued.....>>