Scheme by former Samsung lawyers was 'dishonest, unfair, deceitful and repugnant,' judge says
A federal judge in Texas has tossed a patent infringement lawsuit against Samsung Electronics because of evidence that the claims were “infected” by the theft of information protected by attorney-client privilege. (Photo from Shutterstock)
A federal judge in Texas has tossed a patent infringement lawsuit against Samsung Electronics because of evidence that the claims were “infected” by the theft of information protected by attorney-client privilege.
Chief U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas tossed the case filed by Staton Techiya in a May 9 opinion unsealed May 23, Law360 reports. Law.com also has coverage.
Two former lawyers for Samsung obtained confidential and privileged Samsung documents for use in Staton Techiya’s suit against their former employer, Gilstrap concluded, citing evidence uncovered in a Korean criminal investigation.
The lawyers are Seungho Ahn, who formerly headed Samsung’s intellectual property center, and Sungil Cho, a former in-house patent attorney for Samsung.
After leaving Samsung, Ahn and Cho founded Synergy IP, a litigation agent. Staton Techiya assigned its rights to enforce its patents to Synergy IP, and together, the two entities sued Samsung.
A subsequent internal Samsung investigation focused on an employee thought to have given Ahn and Cho a confidential assessment of Staton Techiya’s patents along with other privileged documents.
The employee has been indicted in South Korea, according to remarks by a lawyer for Ahn and Cho at a February hearing, Law360 reports. There was no indictment of Ahn and Cho, the lawyer said.
Gilstrap cited the unclean hands doctrine in tossing Techiha’s suit alleging infringement of 14 patents, which was filed jointly with Synergy IP in 2021.
The judge said the former Samsung lawyers “executed a scheme that, by any metric, is dishonest, unfair, deceitful and repugnant to the rule of law.”
Ahn and Cho breached ethical duties owed to Samsung “by switching sides on matters substantially related to ones for which they previously represented Samsung and by using and/or disclosing Samsung confidential information to gain an unfair advantage,” Gilstrap wrote.
That wasn’t the only misconduct, according to Gilstrap. Ahn and Cho used thumb drives and external storage devices with their laptops that “disappeared” before they could be forensically examined, Gilstrap said.
The two lawyers also “recorded themselves discussing ways to subvert the discovery process,” according to Gilstrap. Korean prosecutors had seized the recordings from memory cards attached to Cho’s mobile phone.
“The stain upon Synergy, Ahn and Cho is a stain upon Techiya” that bars enforcement of the patents at issue, Gilstrap said.
Gilstrap said his opinion should be provided to disciplinary authorities in New York, where Cho is licensed, and in California, where Ahn is licensed. They live in South Korea.
Staton Techiya said in a statement provided to Law360 and Law.com it is “surprised and disappointed by the court’s order.” The company said it “does not believe that the order accurately reflects the evidence presented at the bench trial or the procedural history of the case.”
Staton Techiya disputes that it had any knowledge of bad acts by Synergy.
“Techiya further does not believe that any such misconduct of its former licensee can, or should, excuse Samsung’s infringement of Techiya’s patents related to Samsung’s earbuds and smartphones,” the statement said.
An appeal is planned. The company said it has another pending patent suit against Samsung that does not involve Synergy, Ahn or Cho.
