Litigation funder Longford Capital has secured a favorable arbitration ruling in its dispute with Arigna Technology Ltd. over the distribution of settlement proceeds from a patent enforcement campaign. The arbitration panel awarded Longford over $37 million, a decision that Arigna is now contesting in Texas state court.
Arigna, an Irish patent monetization firm affiliated with Atlantic IP Services Ltd., had engaged the law firm Susman Godfrey LLP in August 2020 to enforce its semiconductor-related patents. To finance these efforts, Susman Godfrey entered into a funding agreement with Longford Capital. The collaboration led to patent lawsuits against major technology companies, including Samsung and Apple, resulting in substantial settlements.
The core of the dispute centers on the allocation of settlement funds. Arigna alleges that Longford’s claim to a significant portion of the settlement proceeds is unwarranted, asserting that the arbitration award was tainted by corruption and fraud. In its complaint filed in the District Court of Harris County, Arigna seeks to have the arbitration award set aside and to recover approximately $5.5 million held in escrow from the settlement. ([news.bloomberglaw.com](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation-finance/susman-godfrey-longford-sued-over-37-million-arbitration-award?utm_source=openai))
Longford Capital, based in Chicago, has defended the arbitration outcome, emphasizing the validity and enforceability of the award. The funder contends that its entitlement to a share of the settlement proceeds is consistent with the terms of the funding agreement established with Susman Godfrey. ([sahmcapital.com](https://www.sahmcapital.com/news/content/litigation-funder-longford-law-firm-susman-sued-over-32-million-arbitration-award-2026-01-31?utm_source=openai))
This case underscores the complexities inherent in litigation funding arrangements, particularly concerning the distribution of proceeds from settlements. The outcome of Arigna’s challenge to the arbitration award may have significant implications for the litigation finance industry, potentially influencing how funding agreements are structured and enforced in future patent enforcement campaigns.