OmniVision Sues SmartSens in Northern California on Four CMOS Image Sensor Patents.

The parties

The case is OmniVision Technologies, Inc. v. SmartSens Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., No. 3:26-cv-11809 (N.D. Cal.). The docket lists Magistrate Judge Nathanael M. Cousins as the assigned judge. The complaint says OmniVision is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Santa Clara, California. It names four defendants: SmartSens Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. of Shanghai, China; SmartSens Technology (HK) Co., Ltd. of Kowloon, Hong Kong, which the complaint describes as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Shanghai company; Chipplus Technology (US) Inc., a California corporation in Santa Clara that the complaint says was formerly SmartSens Technology (US) Inc. and filed a name-change amendment with the California Secretary of State on August 22, 2021; and SmartSens Inc., a California corporation in Santa Clara. The complaint says Chipplus and SmartSens Inc. are subsidiaries of the Shanghai company.

On information and belief, the complaint says SmartSens was founded in 2011 by Dr. Richard Xu (also known as Chen Xu), Dr. Yaowu Mo, and Weijian Ma, and that Xu and Mo previously worked at OmniVision. It describes SmartSens as a company engaged in the research, development, design, and sales of CMOS image sensors, headquartered in Shanghai.

The patents

The complaint says OmniVision is the assignee of record of each patent. Count I is U.S. Patent 8,507,964, titled Image sensor having waveguides formed in color filters, issued August 13, 2013. The complaint says it expires November 9, 2029. Claim 1 covers an image sensor comprising a semiconductor substrate having first and second sides, an array of pixels, photosensitive elements responsive to light incident through the first side, a stack of metal layers disposed over the second side, color filters disposed over the first side, waveguide walls disposed in the color filters surrounding the color filters forming waveguides, each of the waveguides associated with a corresponding one of the photosensitive elements on a one-to-one basis, and a passivation layer disposed between the photosensitive elements and the waveguide walls.

Count II is U.S. Patent 10,224,364, titled CMOS image sensor having enhanced near infrared quantum efficiency and modulation transfer function, issued March 5, 2019. The complaint says it expires October 12, 2037. Claim 1 covers an image sensor comprising a semiconductor material having an illuminated surface and a non-illuminated surface; a photodiode formed in the semiconductor material extending from the illuminated surface to receive incident light through the illuminated surface, the received light generating charges in the photodiode; a transfer gate electrically coupled to the photodiode to transfer the generated charges in response to a transfer signal; a floating diffusion electrically coupled to the transfer gate to receive the transferred charges; and a near infrared (NIR) quantum efficiency (QE) and modulation transfer function (MTF) enhancement structure. That structure comprises a NIR QE enhancement sub-structure with at least one NIR QE enhancement element within a photosensitive region of the photodiode, configured to modify the incident light at the illuminated surface by at least one of diffraction, deflection, and reflection to redistribute the light within the photodiode and improve optical sensitivity, including NIR light sensitivity; and an MTF enhancement sub-structure disposed on the non-illuminated surface, facing toward the NIR QE enhancement sub-structure, with a geometry corresponding to the NIR QE enhancement sub-structure to ensure the incident light is still within the photodiode after redistribution.

Count III is U.S. Patent 10,411,063, titled Single-exposure high dynamic range sensor, issued September 10, 2019. The complaint says it expires September 23, 2037. Claim 1 covers a single-exposure high dynamic range HDR image sensor comprising a first photodiode disposed in a semiconductor material, a second photodiode with a smaller full-well capacity than the first photodiode, a first floating diffusion proximate to the first photodiode, a second floating diffusion proximate to the second photodiode, a first transfer gate coupled to the first photodiode to transfer first image charge, a second transfer gate coupled to the second photodiode to transfer second image charge, and an attenuation layer disposed between the second photodiode and image light directed towards the single-exposure HDR image sensor to block a portion of the image light.

Count IV is U.S. Patent 9,966,396, titled High dynamic range image sensor with reduced sensitivity to high intensity light, issued May 8, 2018, according to the patent itself; the complaint gives the issue date as March 8, 2018. The complaint says it expires January 25, 2036. Claim 1 covers an image sensor comprising a first plurality and a second plurality of photodiodes arranged in, and interspersed among each other in, a semiconductor substrate, with incident light to be directed through a surface of the substrate into both pluralities and the first plurality having greater sensitivity to the incident light than the second; a metal film layer disposed over the surface over the second plurality of photodiodes, and not over the first plurality, to further reduce the light sensitivity of the second plurality; and a metal grid disposed over the surface that includes a first plurality of openings through which incident light is directed through the grid and then through the surface into the first plurality of photodiodes, and a second plurality of openings through which incident light is directed through the grid and then through the metal film layer and the surface into the second plurality of photodiodes.

What the complaint alleges

Each count alleges direct infringement of at least claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 271(a), literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. The complaint names the SC485SL, which it says is branded Smart Clarity-3 and Star Light and is used in security and surveillance camera systems, and the SC220AT, which it says is branded Smart Clarity and AT and is used in automotive sensing and in-cabin applications. The complaint quotes a SmartSens advertisement saying the SC220AT "can better empower automotive viewing and sensing applications, such as 360-degree surround view camera system, Automatic Parking System (APS), and Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS)." For the '964 and '364 patents, the complaint points to the SC485SL and attaches claim charts as Exhibits E and F. For the '063 patent, paragraph 76 names the SC220AT as an accused product, and paragraph 77 says Exhibit G charts the SC485SL. For the '396 patent, the complaint names the SC485SL and the SC220AT. Paragraph 46 also names the SC485US. The complaint says SmartSens offered automotive models, including the SC220AT, at AutoSens USA 2026 in Detroit, and, on information and belief, sells at least the SC120AT to Leopard Imaging in the United States.

Jurisdiction is pleaded under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a). Venue is pleaded under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400(b), and for the Shanghai and Hong Kong defendants under 28 U.S.C. 1391(c)(3). The complaint says those two defendants stipulated to transfer in this district in No. 26-cv-11526, and it cites allegations from that case and from No. 5:25-cv-07857.

Relief requested

The prayer asks for a judgment of infringement, damages with interest and costs under 35 U.S.C. 284, a permanent injunction under 35 U.S.C. 283, increased damages under 35 U.S.C. 284, and a declaration that the case is exceptional under 35 U.S.C. 285. The prayer does not use the word willful. OmniVision demands a jury.

What to watch next

Watch for answers and for any early motion on venue or on the related Northern District of California cases the complaint cites.