Litigation funder Longford, law firm Susman sued over $32 million arbitration award

By Mike Scarcella

WASHINGTON, Jan 30 (Reuters) - U.S. litigation funding firm Longford Capital and law firm Susman Godfrey have been sued by a patent monetization company seeking to void a $32 million arbitration order and claw back $5.5 million in settlement funds.

Dublin, Ireland-based Arigna, which acquires semiconductor‑related patents and enforces them rights through licensing and litigation, filed the lawsuit in Texas state court on Thursday. It alleged that the arbitrators' award, which stemmed from a patent litigation settlement involving an unnamed defendant, was improper and tainted by misconduct.

Arigna also asked the court to require Susman Godfrey to return $5.5 million being held in escrow from the settlement.

Susman Godfrey did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Longford Capital had no immediate comment.

"Arigna should never have been in arbitration in the first place," Arigna said in a statement. It said Longford’s claim in the arbitration "was an overreaching attempt to take money from companies it had no contractual relationship with and from law firms, investors, and cases it never funded."

The dispute offers a glimpse at details about patent litigation funding that are typically hidden from public view. It traces back to Arigna’s 2020 hiring of Susman to enforce its patents, and a separate funding agreement Susman entered into with Longford to finance those efforts, according to the lawsuit.

Susman in 2021 represented Arigna as a plaintiff in patent lawsuits against Samsung and Apple in federal court in Texas. Samsung settled the claims against it, other court records show, and Arigna resolved its allegations against Apple.

Arigna, whose lawsuit does not name Samsung or Apple, said a disagreement erupted in 2023 over how to calculate Longford’s share of a multiparty settlement payment and what portion of that payment constituted “proceeds” under the parties’ agreements.

Arigna alleges Longford sought a share based on the full settlement amount even though the settlement involved other entities and patents outside the agreements.

Arigna in 2023 sued Longford in federal court in Delaware over Longford’s claims to a first-priority security interest in confidential settlement proceeds. A federal judge in 2024 ruled that the dispute must go through arbitration, siding with Longford.

Longford in the arbitration claimed breach of contract against Arigna. An arbitrator ruled last year for Longford, and an arbitration panel upheld the findings, court records show.

The case is Arigna Technology v. Longford Capital Fund III and Susman Godfrey, Harris County District Court, No. 2026-05917.

For plaintiff: Steve Callahan, Christopher Bovenkamp and Mitchell Sibley of Charhon Callahan Robson & Garza

For defendants: No appearances yet

Read more:

Burford's $35 million bet on antitrust claims hits snag in US bankruptcy court

Elite colleges target lawyers' funding in antitrust class certification fight

Litigation funder fires back at Tyson Foods over settlement interference claims