`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`C.A. No. 1:17-cv-01692-JFB-SRF
`
`REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING
`LLC,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`NETFLIX, INC. AND NETFLIX
`STREAMING SERVICES, INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING
`LLC,
`
`C.A. No. 1:17-cv-01519-JFB-SRF
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`BRIGHTCOVE INC., AND
`BRIGHTCOVE HOLDINGS, INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`PLAINTIFF REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING LLC’S NOTICE OF
`SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
`
`Plaintiff Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC (“Realtime”) hereby provides notice that, on
`
`March 7, 2018, a court in Colorado denied a motion to dismiss and a motion for judgment on the
`
`pleadings under §101 of the asserted and related patent at issue here. (Ex. 1 (“[47] Motion to
`
`Dismiss is DENIED”; “[48] Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is DENIED.”).) The
`
`Colorado case involved the ‘535 patent asserted against Defendants Netflix and Brightcove here,
`
`as well as U.S. Pat. No. 8,867,610 (“’610 patent”), which is related to the ‘535 patent. The ‘535
`
`patent (asserted against Netflix and Brightcove) is related to (and shares the same specification
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-01692-JFB-SRF Document 18 Filed 03/13/18 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 566
`
`as) the other Fallon patents1 asserted against Netflix and Brightcove. The sole basis for the
`
`Colorado defendants’ motion to dismiss and motion for judgment on the pleadings was their
`
`argument that the ‘535 and the ‘610 patents were patent ineligible under §101.
`
`(See Ex. 2-4.)
`
`After briefing and a hearing, the Colorado court denied both motions. (Ex. 1.) In denying the
`
`motions, the Colorado court considered and rejected some of the same arguments advanced by
`
`Netflix and Brightcove here, e.g., that the ‘535 patent and the other related Fallon patents are
`
`patent ineligible under §101. Like the Colorado court has done, this Court should deny Netflix’s
`
`and Brightcove’s motions to dismiss. (D.I. 11 of Case No. 1:17-cv-01692-JFB-SRF; and D.I. 15
`
`of Case No. 1:17-cv-01519-JFB-SRF.)
`
`March 13, 2018
`
`OF COUNSEL:
`
`Marc A. Fenster
`Brian D. Ledahl
`Reza Mirzaie
`C. Jay Chung
`RUSS, AUGUST & KABAT
`12424 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor
`(310) 826-7474
`Los Angeles, CA 90025-1031
`mfenster@raklaw.com
`bledahl@raklaw.com
`rmirzaie@raklaw.com
`jchung@raklaw.com
`
`BAYARD, P.A.
`
`/s/ Stephen B. Brauerman
`Stephen B. Brauerman (No. 4952)
`Sara E. Bussiere (No. 5725)
`600 N. King Street, Suite 400
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`(302) 655-5000
`sbrauerman@bayardlaw.com
`sbussiere@bayardlaw.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff Realtime Adaptive
`Streaming LLC
`
`1 The four Fallon patents asserted against Netflix are: U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,934,535; 9,769,477;
`9,762,907; and 7,386,046. The patents asserted against Brightcove include the four Fallon
`patents asserted against Netflix, as well as the following additional Fallon patent: U.S. Pat. No.
`8,929,442. Neither Netflix nor Brightcove has argued that the remaining two asserted patents,
`U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,634,462 and 9,578,298 are patent ineligible.
`
`
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
