Digital media streaming — US PTAB Patent Cases
18 decisions indexed
Page 1 of 1 · 18 total
Pinterest, Inc. v.--
Pinterest has filed an IPR petition challenging all 20 claims of OpenTV’s ’703 patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over prior art such as Orr, Hsu, Lim, and Hervey.
Amazon.com, Inc. et al. v.Audio Pod IP, LLC
Amazon has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 13 claims of Audio Pod IP’s ’266 patent, asserting that the claims are obvious over multiple prior‑art references and lack proper priority support.
Roku, Inc. v.VideoLabs, Inc.
Roku and VideoLabs settled their inter partes review dispute over U.S. Patent 7,440,559, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding before any claims were instituted.
TikTok Inc. et al. v.NTECH Properties, Inc.
TikTok has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate NTECH's U.S. Patent 9,923,947 covering custom media programming. The petition relies on three § 103 obviousness grounds using Whitehead, Marcus ’904, and Cristofalo references. The Board is asked to institute the review.
Genius Sports Ltd. v.SportsCastr Inc.
The PTAB institution decision was granted, finding sufficient rationale for the Petitioner to combine teachings from prior art references (Ellis and Spivey) under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board specifically found that combining Ellis's content source with Spivey’s live data server devices would improve latency in real-time event delivery.
Genius Sports Ltd. v.SportsCastr Inc.
The PTAB issued a Final Written Decision finding all 15 challenged claims unpatentable as obvious over combinations of prior art. Petitioner successfully demonstrated that combining Ellis and Spivey taught an 'event socket' to improve latency, while other grounds were also met by the combination of Ellis, Spivey, and Herzog.
Genius Sports Ltd. v.SportsCastr Inc.
Genius Sports Ltd. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute IPR proceedings against SportsCastr Inc. d/b/a PANDA Interactive regarding live event broadcasting claims. The Board accepted the Petitioner's arguments that the claimed technology is obvious over combinations of prior art references, including Ellis and Spivey. This sets the stage for a full trial on unpatentability grounds.
Genius Sports Ltd. v.SportsCastr Inc.
The PTAB institution decision found reasonable likelihood of unpatentability for Genius Sports Ltd.'s claims against SportsCastr Inc. The Board determined that the combination of prior art references (Ellis, Spivey, Herzog) taught or suggested all limitations of Claim 1 and its dependents based on the preliminary record. This sets a significant hurdle for SportsCastr's patent validity in digital media streaming technology.
Altice USA, Inc. et al. v.Touchstream Technologies, Inc.
Altice USA filed an unopposed motion to withdraw its IPR against Touchstream's streaming patent, arguing the case is still in the preliminary stage and withdrawal would save resources. The patent owner does not object, and the Board has yet to rule.
Roku, Inc. v.VideoLabs, Inc.
Roku and VideoLabs have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 7,233,790 and jointly request that the settlement be kept confidential, effectively moving to terminate the proceeding.
Hulu LLC et al. v.--
Hulu and Capital One settled their IPR dispute with patent owner Implicit, leading the PTAB to terminate the proceeding before trial. The Board granted motions to keep the settlement agreements confidential.
Roku, Inc. v.VideoLabs, Inc.
Roku and VideoLabs have settled their IPR dispute over U.S. Patent 8,291,236 and jointly request that the settlement be kept confidential. The motion asks the PTAB to treat the agreement as business‑confidential information under statutory provisions.
fuboTV Media Inc. et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
A joint notice was filed by DISH Technologies and the petitioners confirming that the Final Written Decision in IPR2024-00918 contains no confidential information, allowing it to be publicly released.
fuboTV Media Inc. et al. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
fuboTV Media Inc. successfully convinced the PTAB to institute an IPR against DISH Technologies L.L.C.'s adaptive bitrate streaming patent (10757156). The Board found that the petitioner showed a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on obviousness grounds over prior art references Leaning and Ala-Honkola. This sets up a high-stakes challenge to core technology in digital media streaming.
fuboTV Media Inc. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
The PTAB denied fuboTV Media’s request for rehearing of the final written decision in IPR2024-00046, finding no error in the Board’s claim construction or consideration of prior art. The petition’s arguments on claim 7 were deemed untimely and unsupported.
fuboTV Media Inc. v.DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al.
The PTAB denied fuboTV's request for rehearing of its IPR decision on patent 11,677,798. The Board held that the petitioner failed to show any misapprehension of prior‑art mappings or erroneous claim construction, leaving the earlier mixed result unchanged.
Roku, Inc. v.Intent IQ, LLC
The PTAB granted Roku’s motion to join its inter partes review with Meta’s pending IPR, instituting review of claims 1‑4 and 6‑23 of the ’878 patent on the same 103 grounds used in the earlier proceeding.
Capital One, National Association et al. v.--
Capital One and Hulu filed an unopposed motion to keep their settlement with Implicit confidential and to end the IPR over patent 8,056,075. The motion cites 35 U.S.C. §317 and related regulations.
Dealing with a patent challenge?
Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.