Althearidge LLC v. Dell Inc., No. 7:26-cv-00450 (W.D. Tex., Midland-Odessa Division), is a patent complaint filed November 12, 2026. The complaint says Althearidge is a Texas limited liability company based in Plano, Texas. It alleges, on information and belief, that Dell Inc. is a corporation with a place of business in Round Rock, Texas. The complaint requests a jury trial under Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The patents and the accused products

U.S. Patent 7,154,961, Constellation Rearrangement for ARQ Transmit Diversity Schemes, issued December 26, 2006. U.S. Patent 7,567,622, of the same title, issued July 28, 2009. The complaint alleges that the '622 patent issued from an application that is a continuation of the application leading to the '961 patent. The complaint alleges that Althearidge is the assignee of all right, title, and interest in both patents, including the right to sue for infringement.

The complaint defines the Accused Instrumentalities as the Latitude 7220 Rugged Extreme Tablet, Latitude 7204 Rugged Extreme, Latitude 7404 Rugged Extreme, Latitude 7202 Rugged Tablet, Latitude 7414 Rugged Extreme, Latitude 7214 Rugged Extreme, Latitude 5414 Rugged, Latitude 7212 Rugged Extreme, Latitude 7424 Rugged Extreme, Latitude 5424 Rugged, Latitude 5420 Rugged, Latitude 7330 Rugged Extreme, Latitude 5430 Rugged, Latitude 7400, Latitude 7400 2-in-1, Latitude 7410 Chromebook Enterprise, Latitude 7420, Latitude 7320, Latitude 7320 Detachable, Latitude 5420, Latitude 5520, Latitude 7520, Latitude 9420, Latitude 9520, Venue 8 Pro 5855, Venue 11 Pro, and Venue 11 Pro 7000.

What the patents cover

U.S. Patent 7,154,961 covers an ARQ re-transmission method in a wireless communication system in which data packets are transmitted from a transmitter to a receiver using a first transmission and at least a second transmission based on a repeat request. Claim 1 covers modulating data packets at the transmitter using a first modulation scheme to obtain first data symbols and performing the first transmission by transmitting those symbols over a first diversity branch to the receiver; modulating the data packets using a second modulation scheme to obtain second data symbols and performing the second transmission by transmitting those symbols over a second diversity branch; demodulating the received first and second data symbols at the receiver using the first and second modulation schemes respectively; and diversity combining the demodulated data received over the first and second diversity branches, wherein the modulation schemes are 16 QAM and a number of log2 (M) modulation schemes are used.

U.S. Patent 7,567,622 covers an ARQ re-transmission method in a wireless communication system in which data packets are transmitted from a transmitter to a receiver using a higher order modulation scheme wherein more than two data bits are mapped onto one data symbol, to perform a first transmission and at least a second transmission based on a repeat request. Claim 1 covers modulating data packets at the transmitter using a first mapping of that higher order modulation scheme to obtain first data symbols and performing the first transmission by transmitting those symbols over a first diversity branch; receiving at the transmitter the repeat request issued by the receiver to retransmit the data packets if the first transmission has not been successfully decoded; modulating, in response to that request, the data packets using a second mapping of the higher order modulation scheme to obtain second data symbols and performing the second transmission by transmitting those symbols over a second diversity branch; demodulating the received first and second data symbols at the receiver using the first and second mappings respectively; and diversity combining the demodulated data received over the first and second diversity branches, wherein the first and second mappings of the higher order modulation schemes are pre-stored in a memory table.

The counts and the prayer

Count I alleges, upon information and belief, that Dell directly infringed claim 1 of the '961 patent in Texas, in this district, and elsewhere in the United States, at least through use and/or testing, by performing the claimed ARQ re-transmission method using the Accused Instrumentalities. The complaint alleges that the Accused Instrumentalities practiced an ARQ re-transmission method, for example a HARQ method, in a wireless communication system, for example an LTE network, in which data packets are transmitted from a transmitter to a receiver, for example an LTE base station, using a first transmission and at least a second transmission based on a repeat request. It alleges that they transmitted the first data symbols over a first diversity branch and, upon information and belief, that they practiced modulating those packets using first and second modulation schemes, for example one of 16QAM and 64 QAM, with the second scheme distinct from the first, and transmitting the second data symbols over a second diversity branch; that, at least in internal testing and usage, the Accused Instrumentalities utilized a base station that demodulated the received symbols using those schemes and diversity combined the demodulated data, for example by Hybrid ARQ soft-combining; and that the Accused Instrumentalities utilized modulation schemes in which 16 QAM and a number of log2 (M) modulation schemes are used.

Count II alleges, upon information and belief, that Dell has been directly infringing at least claim 1 of the '622 patent in Texas, in this district, and elsewhere in the United States, by performing the claimed ARQ re-transmission method using the same Accused Instrumentalities. The complaint alleges that the Accused Instrumentalities practiced an ARQ re-transmission method using a higher order modulation scheme, for example one of 16QAM and 64 QAM, in which more than two data bits are mapped onto one data symbol. It alleges, upon information and belief, that they used a first mapping for the first transmission and, after a repeat request, a second mapping for a second transmission over a second diversity branch, and that, at least in internal testing and usage, they utilized a base station receiver that demodulated and diversity combined those transmissions, with the first and second mappings pre-stored in a memory table.

The complaint alleges that Althearidge was damaged and that Dell is liable for damages in an amount that by law cannot be less than a reasonable royalty, together with interest and costs as fixed by the court under 35 U.S.C. § 284. It alleges, on information and belief, that Dell had at least constructive notice of both patents by operation of law, and it says it is asserting only method claims, so that the marking requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 287(a) do not apply. The prayer asks for judgment that claim 1 of each patent was infringed, literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents; that Dell account for and pay all damages and costs incurred because of the infringing activities; pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on those damages; and such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.

Jurisdiction and venue

The complaint alleges that the action arises under the patent laws of the United States, Title 35 of the United States Code, and that the court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). It alleges, on information and belief, that Dell is subject to specific and general personal jurisdiction, including because of business in the forum and because at least a portion of the alleged infringements occurred at a place of business in Round Rock, Texas, and that venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b).

Other suits on the same patents

Docket entries list U.S. Patents 7,154,961 and 7,567,622 as the exhibits to Althearidge complaints against other defendants in No. 7:26-cv-00154 (W.D. Tex.), filed April 17, 2026, and No. 2:26-cv-00308 (E.D. Tex.), filed in April 2026. In No. 7:26-cv-00154, Althearidge filed a notice of voluntary dismissal on April 21, 2026, and the court ordered the case closed the same day.

What to watch next

Watch for Dell's answer or other response, and for a scheduling order. The case can end at any time, including by settlement or voluntary dismissal.