Pacific Research Group Pte Ltd v. STMicroelectronics NV

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Pacific Research Group, Pte. Ltd. (Singapore)
  • Defendant: STMicroelectronics N.V. (The Netherlands) and STMicroelectronics, Inc. (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff's Counsel: Cozen O'Connor
• Case Identification: 7:26-cv-00134, W.D. Tex., 04/07/2026
• Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper for Defendant STMicroelectronics, Inc. because it maintains an established place of business in the district and has committed acts of infringement there. For STMicroelectronics N.V., a foreign entity, venue is alleged as proper in any judicial district.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems (MEMS) devices and integrated circuits infringe five U.S. patents related to semiconductor device fabrication, packaging, and structure.
• Technical Context: The dispute concerns the integration of MEMS sensors with standard CMOS integrated circuits, a foundational technology for creating compact, power-efficient sensors used in consumer electronics, automotive systems, and other applications.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that Defendant STMicroelectronics, Inc. has previously not contested the propriety of venue in the Western District of Texas for other patent infringement actions and has admitted to having facilities and employees in the district.

Case Timeline

Date	Event
2009-11-13	'252 Patent Priority Date
2009-11-30	'666 Patent Priority Date
2010-01-15	'577 Patent Priority Date
2010-07-23	'560 Patent Priority Date
2010-08-19	'312 Patent Priority Date
2012-08-07	'577 Patent Issued
2013-03-12	'252 Patent Issued
2013-03-26	'666 Patent Issued
2015-03-17	'560 Patent Issued
2016-06-28	'312 Patent Issued
2026-04-07	Complaint Filing Date

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 8,402,666 - "Magneto Meter Using Lorentz Force For Integrated Systems"

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent background describes a general desire for techniques to improve the operation, performance, and integration of MEMS and integrated circuit (IC) devices, which face ongoing challenges related to reducing size and cost U.S. Patent 8,402,666, col. 2:5-18
• The Patented Solution: The invention is an "integrated electronic compass and circuit system" that combines the MEMS sensor (the compass) and the CMOS control circuitry (the "brains") on a common semiconductor substrate U.S. Patent 8,402,666, abstract This integration is intended to create a more compact and efficient device by operably coupling the compass directly to the CMOS circuits on the same substrate U.S. Patent 8,402,666, col. 4:32-41
• Technical Importance: This integrated approach enables the mass production of smaller, thinner, and more accurate sensor units by minimizing parasitic resistances and capacitances that can occur with off-chip connections U.S. Patent 8,236,577, col. 5:31-37

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 Compl. ¶48
• Claim 1 elements include:
  • An integrated electronic compass and circuit system comprising:
  • a semiconductor substrate;
  • one or more CMOS integrated circuits formed on one or more portions of the semiconductor substrate; and
  • an electronic compass device operably coupled to the one or more CMOS integrated circuits.

U.S. Patent No. 8,981,560 - "Method And Structure of Sensors and MEMs Devices Using Vertical Mounting with Interconnections"

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent identifies challenges in integrating different types of sensors, such as creating multi-axis magnetic sensors. Traditional packaging methods can make it difficult to combine sensors that detect forces on different axes (e.g., X/Y-axis vs. Z-axis) into a single, compact package U.S. Patent 8,981,560, col. 3:3-6
• The Patented Solution: The patent discloses a structure where a "singulated" (i.e., individually cut) sensor die is mounted vertically onto a substrate U.S. Patent 8,981,560, abstract Electrical connections are made using layers of conductive materials and solder, which replace traditional wire bonds and allow for a smaller, more robust vertical integration of components U.S. Patent 8,981,560, col. 2:62-67
• Technical Importance: This vertical mounting technique facilitates the integration of sensors with different orientations (e.g., a Z-axis sensor) onto a substrate that may contain other components (e.g., X-Y axis sensors), enabling more capable multi-axis sensor systems in a single package U.S. Patent 8,981,560, col. 3:4-6

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 Compl. ¶66
• Claim 1 elements include:
  • An integrated sensor device or electronic device, the device comprising:
  • a substrate member having a first surface region, the substrate member having at least one contact region;
  • at least one singulated integrated sensor or electronic device each coupled to a die member, each die member having a singulated surface region and at least one contact region, the singulated surface region(s) being coupled to the first surface region;
  • at least one first conductive material formed overlying at least the contact region(s) of the singulated integrated sensor or electronic device; and
  • at least one second conductive material formed overlying at least a portion of the first conductive material(s).

U.S. Patent No. 8,236,577 - "Foundry Compatible Process For Manufacturing a Magneto Meter Using Lorentz Force For Integrated Systems"

Technology Synopsis

The '577 Patent claims a method for fabricating an integrated electronic compass. The method involves forming CMOS circuits on a semiconductor substrate, covering them with a dielectric layer, joining a second substrate on top, thinning the second substrate to a specific thickness, and then forming the electronic compass device within the thinned substrate region U.S. Patent 8,236,577, abstract

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 Compl. ¶85

Accused Features

The complaint alleges that the manufacturing process for products such as the LSM303AGR family infringes by performing the claimed steps of providing, forming, joining, thinning, and forming the respective layers and devices Compl. ¶¶88-92

U.S. Patent No. 9,376,312 - "Method For Fabricating a Transducer Apparatus"

Technology Synopsis

The '312 Patent claims a method for fabricating the specific micro-mechanical structure of a transducer. The process involves forming a movable base, removing a portion to create a central cavity, and then forming an anchor, spring, and capacitor elements within and around this cavity U.S. Patent 9,376,312, abstract

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 Compl. ¶104

Accused Features

Plaintiff alleges that the manufacturing process for the LSM303AGR product infringes by implementing the claimed method, including the steps of providing a substrate, forming a movable base structure, creating a center cavity, and forming the spring and capacitor elements Compl. ¶¶107-112

U.S. Patent No. 8,395,252 - "Integrated MEMS and CMOS package and Method"

Technology Synopsis

The '252 Patent claims an apparatus for packaging MEMS and ICs with a specific space-saving layout. The claims define an "inner region" for the MEMS device, a "first outer region" for an enclosure, and a "second outer region" for bonding structures, with the outer regions defined by specific width limitations of "about 200 microns and less" and "about 100 microns and less," respectively U.S. Patent 8,395,252, abstract U.S. Patent 8,395,252, cl. 1

Asserted Claims

The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 Compl. ¶125

Accused Features

The complaint accuses the LSM6DSOX product line of infringing, alleging it embodies the claimed structure including a substrate, a MEMS device in an inner region, an enclosure over a first outer region, and bonding structures in a second outer region that meet the claimed dimensional constraints Compl. ¶¶128-132

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The accused instrumentalities are various MEMS devices and sensors sold by Defendants, including but not limited to the IIS2MDC, LIS2MDL, LSM303AGR, ISM303IS, and LSM6DSOX product lines Compl. ¶42 Compl. ¶47 Compl. ¶65 Compl. ¶84 Compl. ¶103 Compl. ¶124

Functionality and Market Context

The accused products are described as integrated sensor systems, such as magnetometers and inertial measurement units (IMUs), that combine multiple sensors (e.g., accelerometers, gyroscopes, magnetic sensors) into a single package Compl. ¶50 Compl. ¶68 Compl. ¶127 The complaint alleges these products are made available for purchase in the United States through Defendants' website and authorized distributors Compl. ¶42 Compl. ¶43 Compl. ¶44 The complaint provides a screenshot from Defendant's datasheet for the IIS2MDC, describing it as a "High-accuracy, ultra-low-power, 3-axis digital output magnetometer" Compl. ¶50

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

U.S. Patent 8,402,666 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1)	Alleged Infringing Functionality	Complaint Citation	Patent Citation
An integrated electronic compass and circuit system comprising: a semiconductor substrate;	The accused products, such as the IISMDC, are alleged to be integrated compass and circuit systems that include a semiconductor substrate. An optical image of a decapsulated accused product is provided with an arrow pointing to the substrate. Compl. ¶51	¶51	col. 4:33-35
one or more CMOS integrated circuits formed on one or more portions of the semiconductor substrate;	The accused products allegedly include CMOS integrated circuits formed on the substrate. The complaint includes X-ray and SEM images of a decapsulated product with callouts identifying "CMOS Integrated circuits." Compl. ¶52	¶52	col. 4:36-38
and an electronic compass device operably coupled to the one or more CMOS integrated circuits.	The accused products allegedly include an electronic compass device that is operably coupled to the CMOS circuits. The complaint provides images with callouts identifying "an electronic compass device" and its "operabl[e] coupl[ing]" to the CMOS circuits. Compl. ¶53	¶53	col. 4:39-41

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Scope Questions: The analysis may focus on whether the structure identified as an "electronic compass device" in the complaint's images meets the functional and structural definition of that term as used in the '666 Patent. A dispute could arise over the meaning of "operably coupled," and whether the physical proximity shown in the complaint's images is sufficient to meet this limitation.
  • Technical Questions: The complaint's allegations are based on "information and belief" supported by reverse-engineering images Compl. ¶51 Compl. ¶52 Compl. ¶53 A central evidentiary question will be whether discovery confirms that the components identified in the images perform the functions required by the claims.

U.S. Patent 8,981,560 Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1)	Alleged Infringing Functionality	Complaint Citation	Patent Citation
a substrate member having a first surface region, the substrate member having at least one contact region;	The accused products allegedly include a substrate member with a first surface and contact region. The complaint provides an angled SEM image of a decapsulated LSM303AGR with callouts for "substrate member," "first surface region," and "contact region." Compl. ¶69	¶69	col. 3:5-7
at least one singulated integrated sensor or electronic device each coupled to a die member...the singulated surface region(s) being coupled to the first surface region;	The accused products allegedly incorporate a singulated sensor on a die member, with its singulated surface coupled to the substrate's first surface. The complaint provides an image with callouts identifying the "singulated integrated sensor," "die member," and "singulated surface region." Compl. ¶70	¶70	col. 3:8-13
at least one first conductive material formed overlying at least the contact region(s) of the singulated integrated sensor or electronic device;	The accused products allegedly include a first conductive material over the contact region of the singulated sensor. An SEM image is presented with a callout for "first conductive material." Compl. ¶71	¶71	col. 3:14-17
and at least one second conductive material formed overlying at least a portion of the first conductive material(s).	The accused products allegedly include a second conductive material over a portion of the first. An SEM image is presented with a callout for "second conductive material." Compl. ¶72	¶72	col. 3:18-20

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Scope Questions: A primary issue for construction may be the term "singulated." The dispute could turn on whether the accused devices are manufactured using a process that involves cutting or separating a die before mounting it, as the term implies.
  • Technical Questions: The complaint identifies two distinct layers as "first conductive material" and "second conductive material" Compl. ¶71 Compl. ¶72 A key factual question will be whether these are structurally and functionally separate materials as required by the claim, or if they are parts of a single, undifferentiated interconnect structure formed in one process.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

For the '666 Patent:

• The Term: "electronic compass device"
• Context and Importance: This term defines the core MEMS component of the claimed system. Its construction is critical because the infringement analysis depends on whether the accused magnetometer component qualifies as an "electronic compass device" as understood in the context of the patent, or if it is a more generic sensor that falls outside the claim's scope.
• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the device in functional terms and notes it can be integrated with other MEMS devices like accelerometers and gyroscopes, suggesting the term could encompass various magnetic sensor types that perform a compass function U.S. Patent 8,402,666, col. 4:32-52
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent discloses specific embodiments based on Lorentz force principles, with detailed figures showing movable plates and electrodes U.S. Patent 8,402,666, FIG. 2A U.S. Patent 8,402,666, col. 5:13-19 A defendant may argue the term should be limited to such specific structures.

For the '560 Patent:

• The Term: "singulated"
• Context and Importance: This term appears in the phrase "singulated integrated sensor" and implies a specific manufacturing sequence where a device is cut from a wafer into an individual die before being mounted. Whether the accused products are made using such a "cut-then-mount" process will be central to the infringement analysis for this patent.
• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The abstract states the "resulting device can then be singulated...to form one or more singulated dies," which can then be coupled to a substrate U.S. Patent 8,981,560, abstract This could be interpreted to cover any process that results in a distinct, pre-formed die being attached.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description and flow chart (FIG. 7) explicitly show "Singulate Die Member" as a distinct step (Step 712) that precedes "Couple Die to Substrate" (Step 718) U.S. Patent 8,981,560, FIG. 7 This sequential depiction may support an argument that the term requires a process where a device is fully separated before the mounting process begins.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: For each asserted patent, the complaint alleges induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). The allegations state that Defendants had knowledge of the patents as of the service date of the complaint and intentionally induced infringement by third parties (such as semiconductor foundries, distributors, and end-users) by contracting for the manufacture of and providing the accused products (e.g.,Compl. ¶56; Compl. ¶57; Compl. ¶58).
• Willful Infringement: The complaint seeks a determination of willful infringement Compl., Prayer for Relief ¶d The factual basis for this allegation appears to be knowledge of the patents and the alleged infringement obtained upon service of the complaint, suggesting an allegation of post-suit willfulness (e.g., Compl. ¶56; Compl. ¶75).

VII. Analyst's Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

• Definitional Scope: A core issue will be one of claim construction. Can terms rooted in the patent's specific embodiments, such as "electronic compass device" and "singulated," be construed broadly enough to read on the accused products, or will Defendants succeed in limiting these terms to the precise structures and manufacturing sequences disclosed in the patents?
• Structural and Methodological Equivalence: The lawsuit asserts both apparatus and method patents. A key evidentiary question will be one of functional and structural correspondence: do the physical layouts of the accused packages, including the dimensions of their various regions, and the specific steps of their manufacturing processes, map onto the detailed limitations recited in the claims of the '252, '577, and '312 patents?
• Evidentiary Sufficiency: The infringement allegations rely heavily on analysis of decapsulated products presented in images. A central question for the court will be whether the factual evidence developed during discovery confirms that the structures identified in the complaint's annotated images actually perform the functions and possess the characteristics required by the claims.