Case 1:17-cv-02097-RBJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 1:17-cv-02097-RBJ
`
`
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING
`
`LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
` v.
`
`SLING TV L.L.C., SLING MEDIA INC.,
`
`SLING MEDIA L.L.C., ECHOSTAR
`
`TECHNOLOGIES L.L.C., DISH
`
`NETWORK L.L.C., and ARRIS GROUP,
`
`INC.
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING LLC’S ANSWER IN
`RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS SLING TV L.L.C., AND SLING MEDIA L.L.C.’S
`COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`Plaintiff Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC d/b/a IXO (“Realtime”) responds to
`
`
`
`Defendants Sling TV L.L.C. and Sling Media L.L.C.’s (collectively, “Sling”) Counterclaims as
`
`follows:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`SLING’S COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`PARTIES
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted that Realtime has places of business at 1828 E.S.E. Loop 323, Tyler,
`
`Texas 75701. Otherwise denied.
`
`Admitted that Richard Tashjian is a member of the board of directors of Realtime
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 1:17-cv-02097-RBJ
`
`
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING
`
`LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
` v.
`
`SLING TV L.L.C., SLING MEDIA INC.,
`
`SLING MEDIA L.L.C., ECHOSTAR
`
`TECHNOLOGIES L.L.C., DISH
`
`NETWORK L.L.C., and ARRIS GROUP,
`
`INC.
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`PLAINTIFF REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING LLC’S ANSWER IN
`RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS SLING TV L.L.C., AND SLING MEDIA L.L.C.’S
`COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`Plaintiff Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC d/b/a IXO (“Realtime”) responds to
`
`
`
`Defendants Sling TV L.L.C. and Sling Media L.L.C.’s (collectively, “Sling”) Counterclaims as
`
`follows:
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`SLING’S COUNTERCLAIMS
`
`PARTIES
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted that Realtime has places of business at 1828 E.S.E. Loop 323, Tyler,
`
`Texas 75701. Otherwise denied.
`
`Admitted that Richard Tashjian is a member of the board of directors of Realtime
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-02097-RBJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 6
`
`Data LLC. Otherwise denied.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted that Sling purport to allege counterclaims under the Federal Declaratory
`
`Judgment Act and the Patent Act of the United States. Denied that Sling is
`
`entitled to any relief.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Admitted that venue is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391 and/or 1400(b).
`
`FIRST COUNTERCLAIM
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGEMENT OF THE ‘610 PATENT
`
`9.
`
`Realtime incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1-8 of this Answer
`
`to Sling’s Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
`
`10.
`
`11.
`
`12.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Denied.
`
`Realtime admits that a valid and justiciable controversy has arisen and exists
`
`between Realtime and Sling as to whether the ‘610 Patent is infringed. Otherwise
`
`denied.
`
`13.
`
`Realtime admits that Sling seeks a declaration of non-infringement as to the ‘610
`
`Patent, but denies that Sling is entitled to such a declaration and otherwise denied.
`
`SECOND COUNTERCLAIM
`
`DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY OF THE ‘610 PATENT
`
`14.
`
`Realtime incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1-13 of this
`
`Answer to Sling’s Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-02097-RBJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 6
`
`15.
`
`16.
`
`Denied.
`
`Realtime admits
`
`that Sling seeks a declaration of
`
`invalidity and/or
`
`unenforceability as to the ‘610 Patent, but denies that Sling is entitled to such a
`
`declaration and otherwise denied.
`
`THIRD COUNTERCLAIM
`
`DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF NON-INFRINGMENT OF THE ‘535 PATENT
`
`17.
`
`Realtime incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1-16 of this
`
`Answer to Sling’s Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
`
`18.
`
`19.
`
`20.
`
`Admitted.
`
`Denied.
`
`Realtime admits that a valid and justiciable controversy has arisen and exists
`
`between Realtime and Sling as to whether the ‘535 Patent is infringed. Otherwise
`
`denied.
`
`21.
`
`Realtime admits that Sling seeks a declaration of non-infringement as to the ‘535
`
`Patent, but denies that Sling is entitled to such a declaration and otherwise denied.
`
`FOURTH COUNTERCLAIM
`
`DECLARATORY JUDGMENT OF INVALIDITY OF THE ‘535 PATENT
`
`22.
`
`Realtime incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1-21 of this
`
`23.
`
`24.
`
`Answer to Sling’s Counterclaims as if fully set forth herein.
`
`Denied.
`
`Realtime admits
`
`that Sling seeks a declaration of
`
`invalidity and/or
`
`unenforceability as to the ‘535 Patent, but denies that Sling is entitled to such a
`
`declaration and otherwise denied.
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-02097-RBJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 6
`
`Realtime denies all allegations of the Counterclaims not specifically admitted above.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`In response to Sling’s Prayer for Relief, Realtime denies that Sling is entitled to any
`
`
`
`relief, and in particular to any of the relief requested in paragraphs (a)-(h) of Sling’s Prayer for
`
`Relief, and further requests that the Court enter such preliminary and final orders and judgments
`
`as are necessary to provide Realtime with the following requested relief:
`
`a. A Judgment in favor of Realtime on Sling’s Counterclaims that the Asserted Patents
`
`are not invalid and are enforceable, and that Sling infringes the ‘610 Patent and the ‘535 Patent;
`
`b. An Order dismissing Sling’s Counterclaims in their entirety and with prejudice;
`
`c. A judgment in favor of Plaintiff that Sling has infringed, literally and/or under the
`
`doctrine of equivalents, ‘the ‘610 Patent and the ‘535 Patent;
`
`d. A judgment and order requiring Sling to pay Plaintiff its damages, costs, expenses,
`
`and prejudgment and post-judgment interest for its infringement of ‘the ‘610 Patent and the ‘535
`
`Patent, as provided under 35 U.S.C. § 284;
`
`e. A judgment and order requiring Sling to provide an accounting and to pay
`
`supplemental damages to Realtime, including without limitation, prejudgment and post-judgment
`
`interest;
`
`f. A judgment and order finding that this is an exceptional case within the meaning of
`
`35 U.S.C. § 285 and awarding to Plaintiff its reasonable attorneys’ fees against Sling; and
`
`g. Any and all other relief as the Court may deem appropriate and just under the
`
`circumstances.
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`Plaintiff demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable.
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-02097-RBJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 6
`
`Dated: November 14, 2017
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`By: /s/ C. Jay Chung
`
`Marc A. Fenster (CA SBN 181067)
`Reza Mirzaie (CA SBN 246953)
`Brian D. Ledahl (CA SBN 186579)
`C. Jay Chung (CA SBN 252794)
`Philip X. Wang (CA SBN 262239)
`RUSS AUGUST & KABAT
`12424 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90025
`(310) 826-7474
`mfenster@raklaw.com
`rmirzaie@raklaw.com
`bledahl@raklaw.com
`jchung@raklaw.com
`pwang@raklaw.com
`
`Eric B. Fenster (CO Atty Reg # 33264)
`ERIC B. FENSTER, LLC
`1522 Blake Street, Suite 200
`Denver, CO 80202
`(303) 921-3530
`eric@fensterlaw.net
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-02097-RBJ Document 38 Filed 11/14/17 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 6
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
` hereby certify that a copy of this document is being served electronically.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ C. Jay Chung
`
`
`
`
`
` I
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
