Svv Technology Innovations Inc. V. Acer Inc.

  • Court: United States District Court, Texas Western (Waco)
  • Case number: 6:22cv640
  • Filed: June 21, 2022
  • Judge: Judge Alan D Albright
  • Case type: Patent (830)
  • Cause: Patent Infringement

Parties Involved

  • Plaintiff: SVV Technology Innovations Inc.
    • Counsel for Plaintiff: Aisha Mahmood Haley | Bjorn A. Blomquist | Bradley W. Caldwell | Daniel R. Pearson | John Franklin Summers | Robert Seth Reich , Jr. | Warren J. McCarty , III | Robert D. Katz
    • Expert Witnesses for Plaintiff: Thomas Credelle
  • Defendant: Acer Inc.
    • Counsel for Defendant: Craig Kaufman | Jerry Chen | Kaiwen Tseng | Brian Craft | Eric H. Findlay
    • Expert Witnesses for Defendant: Dr. Zane Coleman 

Verdict Information

  • Verdict date: June 6, 2024
  • Total damages awarded to the Plaintiff: $10,306,900

About the Case


Plaintiff SVV Technology Innovations Inc. (SVVTI) was founded in 2000 by Dr. Sergiy Vasylyev, a scientist and inventor. Since then, SVVTI developed and commercialized Dr. Vasylyev’s inventions, focusing on energy efficiency, renewable energy, and consumer products. The company emphasized optical advancements to enhance solar energy harvesting and improve illumination systems.

SVVTI invented and validated several groundbreaking technology solutions. It accumulated extensive knowledge and built a diverse IP portfolio in optics, photonics, solar energy, daylighting, and solid-state lighting fields. The company received innovation awards from TechConnect, Cleantech Open, and the Illuminating Engineering Society. It developed and demonstrated novel optical collectors for solar energy applications, significantly improving traditional technologies in material intensity, concentration ratio, beam uniformity, and solar-to-electric conversion efficiency. Additionally, SVVTI created a unique daylight-redirecting film material, Daylighting Fabric®, which redirected natural daylight deep into interior spaces, improving illumination and reducing energy consumption.

SVVTI also developed various innovative wide-area illumination panels and backlights using light guides and LEDs. These panels were tailored for specific applications and improved characteristics such as light beam diffusion, emission directionality, material efficiency, luminous efficacy, glare control, design options, and aesthetics.

On January 29, 2021, SVVTI sent a letter to Defendant Acer Inc., introducing itself, notifying Acer of its patents, and identifying Acer products using SVVTI’s intellectual property. Acer became aware of these patents upon receiving the letter. The accused products included displays using LED-illuminated LCD technology.

SVVTI held several U.S. patents, including Patent Nos. 8,740,397, 9,678,321, 10,797,191, 10,838,135, and 10,868,205, which covered various optical and light-trapping technologies. SVVTI claimed Acer infringed these patents by importing, making, using, and selling products with LED-illuminated LCD displays in the U.S., including monitors, tablets, and handheld devices. SVVTI sought to enforce these patents and recover damages for past and ongoing infringements.


Defendant deliberately infringed the Asserted Patents by making, having made, using, importing, and offering for sale infringing products. Additionally, Defendant acted recklessly and disregarded the Asserted Patents. Despite knowing about the infringement, Defendant did not develop any non-infringement theories. Furthermore, they made no attempts to change their designs or sourcing. Defendant’s behavior went beyond typical infringement. They continued their actions without ceasing their infringement.


SVTTI demanded a jury trial for all triable issues. Plaintiff also sought judgment declaring that Defendant had infringed and continued to infringe one or more claims of the Asserted Patents. It was also requested that Defendant be ordered to pay damages caused by the unlawful acts of infringement. Plaintiff asserted that Defendant’s infringement was willful. SVTTI sought to recover actual damages under 35 U.S.C. Section 284.

Additionally, Plaintiff asked for supplemental damages for any continuing post-verdict infringement until final judgment. Moreover, SVTTI also requested a compulsory ongoing royalty and an accounting of damages. Further, Plaintiff sought enhanced damages for willful infringement as permitted by law. Plaintiff requested a judgment and order requiring Defendant to pay pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on the awarded damages. This included pre-judgment interest from the date of each act of infringement to the day a damages judgment was entered and post-judgment interest until the judgment was paid, at the maximum rate allowed by law.

Plaintiff also sought an award for the costs of this action and reasonable attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. Section 285 and requested any other relief the Court deemed just and equitable.

Jury Verdict

On June 6, 2024, a Texas jury found that SVVTI had sufficiently proved that Acer Inc. had infringed all of the Asserted patents. The jury held that such infringement was willful and intentional. Thus, a one-time lumpsum of amount $10,306,900 was awarded as damages to Plaintiff SVVTI.

Court Documents:

Available upon request