On September 3, 2026, trinamiX Sensing LLC and trinamiX GmbH sued Apple Inc. in the Western District of Texas, Midland/Odessa Division, No. 7:26-cv-00348-DC, before Judge Walter David Counts III. The complaint is on RECAP. trinamiX GmbH is pleaded as a German wholly owned subsidiary of BASF SE and the legal owner of the asserted patents. trinamiX Sensing LLC is its Delaware/Texas subsidiary. A jury is demanded.

The seven patents

Counts I through VII assert one patent each: U.S. Patents 12,530,925 (issued January 20, 2026); 12,288,421 (April 29, 2025); 12,456,334 (October 28, 2025); and 12,361,760 (July 15, 2025), each titled "Optical skin detection for face unlock"; and 12,298,394 (May 13, 2025); 12,332,352 (June 17, 2025); and 12,461,238 (November 4, 2025), each titled "Detector for identifying at least one material property."

What is accused

Each count alleges direct infringement of at least claim 1, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, and induced infringement. The accused products are iPhones and iPads that use Face ID, including the iPhone 15, 16, and 17 lines (and listed variants such as Air and e) and listed iPad Pro models. The complaint says original iPhone X Face ID lacked material and skin detection, and that later Face ID incorporated the patented classification between real skin and other materials. Knowledge and willful-blindness allegations appear inside each count. The prayer seeks damages under 35 U.S.C. 284, an injunction under section 283, and exceptional-case fees under section 285. Counsel of record is Quinn Emanuel (Todd Briggs signing).

The parallel ITC complaint

On September 4, 2026, the Commission issued a notice of receipt of complaint in Docket No. 3934, Certain Mobile Electronic Devices and Components Thereof. Complainants are the same trinamiX entities. The sole named respondent is Apple, Inc. of Cupertino, California. The notice seeks a limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders, and a bond during the 60-day Presidential review period. It does not list patent numbers. It is a receipt and public-interest solicitation, not an institution notice. No 337-TA number has been assigned yet.

What it means in practice

This is a classic dual-track phones campaign: Midland damages/injunction plus an ITC import ban request against the same respondent. The district patents are all 2025-2026 issues on skin/material detection layered onto Face ID. Institution of DN 3934, if it comes, will set the ITC clock; until then the public ITC record is only the receipt notice.

What to watch next

Whether the Commission institutes DN 3934 and which patents appear in the institution notice; Apple's district-court response in Midland; and any early stay or first-to-file fight between the two tracks.