Samsung Faces $191 Million Verdict in OLED Patent Lawsuit

In a major legal setback, a U.S. federal jury in Texas has ordered Samsung Electronics to pay $191.4 million to Pictiva Displays International Ltd for infringing two OLED display technology patents.

The verdict came from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, a venue known for high-stakes patent trials. The jury found that Samsung violated two patents—known as the ‘547’ and ‘425’ patents—covering innovations that enhance the resolution, brightness, and energy efficiency of OLED screens.

Pictiva, which holds the rights to these patents originally developed by OSRAM GmbH, argued that Samsung used the protected technology across its smartphones, televisions, laptops, and wearable devices without authorization. The jury agreed, awarding damages totaling $191.4 million.

Samsung has denied the allegations and announced plans to appeal the verdict. The company also filed petitions with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to invalidate the two patents.

The lawsuit, filed in 2023, is part of a broader wave of patent enforcement actions targeting large tech firms over OLED and display technologies. Legal experts note that the Eastern District of Texas has long been a favorable forum for patent owners and licensing entities.

For Pictiva, the ruling marks a significant victory, strengthening its position as a major holder of OLED-related intellectual property. For Samsung, the decision adds to ongoing legal pressures in the U.S. market and could influence future OLED product designs.

Industry analysts believe the outcome underscores the rising value of OLED innovation patents in a competitive display technology landscape. Companies that rely heavily on OLED screens may now face higher licensing costs or renewed efforts to secure exclusive patent rights.

Despite the verdict, Samsung continues to dominate the global display market and remains one of the leading OLED manufacturers worldwide. The company said it remains confident in its legal stance and will “vigorously defend its technology” during the appeal process.