Outdoor Wireless Networks Sues JMA Wireless Over Laser-Welded Coaxial Jumper Patents.

The complaint

The case is Outdoor Wireless Networks LLC d/b/a Andrew v. John Mezzalingua Associates, LLC d/b/a JMA Wireless, No. 2:26-cv-00971 (E.D. Tex.). Outdoor Wireless Networks filed the complaint on October 29, 2026, and demands a jury trial. The docket assigns the case to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap and Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. The complaint describes Outdoor Wireless Networks as a Delaware company headquartered in Richardson, Texas, that does business as Andrew and designs, makes, and sells telecommunications equipment, including coaxial cable-connector assemblies used at cell sites. It alleges, on information and belief, that JMA is organized under Delaware law.

The complaint pleads jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a) and venue under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400(b). For venue it alleges that JMA has a regular and established place of business at an office in Plano, Texas, that JMA's website lists, and it alleges, on information and belief, that JMA has committed acts of infringement in the district, including selling, offering for sale, using, or making the accused products there.

The patents and exemplary claims

The complaint asserts six patents: U.S. Patent 10,355,436, Method and Apparatus for Radial Ultrasonic Welding Interconnected Coaxial Connector (issued July 16, 2019); U.S. Patents 11,437,766 and 11,437,767, each titled Connector and Coaxial Cable with Molecular Bond Interconnection (both issued September 6, 2022); U.S. Patent 11,462,843, Ultrasonic Weld Interconnection Coaxial Connector and Interconnection with Coaxial Cable (issued October 4, 2022); and U.S. Patents 11,735,874 (issued August 22, 2023) and 12,113,317 (issued October 8, 2024), both also titled Connector and Coaxial Cable with Molecular Bond Interconnection. It alleges Outdoor Wireless Networks owns the entire right, title, and interest in each patent.

As non-limiting examples, the complaint charts claim 8 of the '436 patent, claim 1 of the '766 patent, claim 1 of the '767 patent, claim 9 of the '843 patent, claim 1 of the '874 patent, and claim 1 of the '317 patent. Those claims recite coaxial cable-connector assemblies (and, for the '767 patent, a method of forming one) with a laser weld, circumferential welded seam, or circumferential welded bond connecting the cable's outer conductor to the connector or lying along the electrical path between them, in most of the claims within a bore of a conductive member.

Claim 8 of the '436 patent recites a coaxial cable-connector assembly with a coaxial cable having an inner conductor, outer conductor, and dielectric layer, and a coaxial connector with an inner contact electrically connected to the inner conductor, an intermediate body positioned radially outwardly of the inner contact and electrically connected to the outer conductor via a laser weld, and an outer connector interface electrically connected to the intermediate body and configured to mate with a mating connector.

Claim 1 of the '766 patent recites a coaxial cable-connector assembly with a cable whose outer conductor has a leading end, an inner contact, a conductive sleeve member defining a circumferential bore, and an interface member that circumferentially overlies the sleeve member, where an electrical path is formed between the leading end and the cylindrical distal end of the interface member and a circumferential welded seam lies along that path within the bore.

Claim 1 of the '767 patent recites a method of forming a coaxial connector-cable assembly by providing a coaxial cable, an inner contact, and a conductive intermediate circular member with a bore, welding a seam between the outer conductor and the inner surface of that bore, and positioning a conductive interface member to form an electrical path while circumferentially overlying at least a portion of the intermediate member.

Claim 9 of the '843 patent recites a coaxial cable-connector assembly with a sleeve member positioned radially outwardly of the inner contact and electrically connected to the outer conductor via a circumferential welded bond that occurs in the sleeve member's internal bore. Claim 1 of the '874 patent and claim 1 of the '317 patent each recite an assembly in which a circumferential welded seam is located within a circumferential bore of a conductive member and along an electrical path between the outer conductor's leading end and the interface member's cylindrical distal end.

The accused products

The complaint defines the accused products as JMA's factory-made jumpers (also called factory-fit jumpers) that include coaxial cable-connector assemblies with laser welding. It points to JMA's factory-made jumpers webpage, a video on that page showing laser welding, and data sheets for 1/2 inch Factory Fit and Certified Jumpers, 1/2 inch Superflex, 1/4 inch, and 3/8 inch jumpers, Cluster jumpers, 2.2-5 Low Loss and NEX10 Low Loss outdoor cabling configurations, and jumpers for a third-party radio line. Its element-by-element illustrations use the 1/2 inch Factory Fit and Certified Jumper, and it alleges, on information and belief and based on JMA's website, that each of the factory-made jumpers meets the same claim elements.

Each count also alleges indirect infringement. For the '436, '766, '843, '874 and '317 patents, the complaint alleges that JMA contributes to and induces direct infringement by partners, users, installers, customers, and testers, and alleges, on information and belief, that JMA encourages them to install and use the jumpers in an infringing way and provides training and materials for that use. For the '767 patent, it alleges, on information and belief, that JMA induces or contributes to any manufacture or importation of the jumpers by others through its participation in their sale.

Knowledge and willfulness

The complaint alleges, on information and belief, that JMA knew of the patents before suit or was willfully blind to them. It alleges that JMA cited at least five patents and publications from the same patent family in its own patent filings and received a search report identifying the family's disclosure as relevant to every claim JMA was seeking, and it alleges, on information and belief, that JMA monitored the family and assessed new products against known patent families. It alleges, on information and belief, that the infringement was and is willful, deliberate, and intentional. It also alleges that Outdoor Wireless Networks has satisfied the notice or marking provisions of 35 U.S.C. 287.

The relief sought

Outdoor Wireless Networks asks for a judgment of infringement, an injunction against infringement of the patents to the extent they have not expired, damages under 35 U.S.C. 284 with interest and increased damages for willful infringement, costs and attorneys' fees if the case is found exceptional under 35 U.S.C. 285, and other relief.

What to watch next

The clerk issued a summons to JMA on October 29, 2026. Watch for service, JMA's answer or a motion under Rule 12, and the court's first scheduling orders. The case can end at any time, including by settlement or voluntary dismissal.