throbber
Albright Pushes Roku IP Trial To Late June Over Pandemic - Law360
`
`Page 1 of 2
`
`Portfolio Media. Inc. | 111 West 19th Street, 5th floor | New York, NY 10011 | www.law360.com
`Phone: +1 646 783 7100 | Fax: +1 646 783 7161 | customerservice@law360.com
`
`Albright Pushes Roku IP Trial To Late June Over
`Pandemic
`
`By Dani Kass
`
`Law360 (May 15, 2020, 6:03 PM EDT) -- U.S. District Judge Alan D. Albright on Friday
`postponed a jury trial over whether Roku infringed a media streaming technology patent to
`June 29, following an initial reluctance to move the June 1 start date despite complications
`raised by the COVID-19 pandemic.
`
`Judge Albright set the trial with an eight-member jury to begin in Texas federal court on
`June 29, with a pretrial conference on June 18. A docket entry from a court reporter cited
`the judge as saying "the date was unavoidable" on a phone conference.
`
`It wasn't immediately clear Friday how the June 29 start date relates to a May 8 order
`from the court's chief judge calling for all trials scheduled during May and June to be
`continued to later dates. The chief judge had said in-person hearings and conferences
`could still be held, but that "parties are encouraged" to request to participate by phone or
`video.
`
`The trial is over MV3 Partners LLC's allegations that Roku infringed its patent covering a
`system that streams media content from a mobile phone to larger displays such as
`television with the Roku TV, Roku Streaming Stick, Roku Ultra and Roku Express products.
`The suit was filed in October 2018, meaning Judge Albright is sticking by his reputation of
`getting patent cases to trial quickly.
`
`Judge Albright had denied Roku's request to move the trial in April, when Roku said its
`attorneys in Maryland and Virginia are under stay-at-home orders and might not be able to
`travel to Texas.
`
`While he'd refused to move the case for the time being, he'd acknowledged that patent
`trial preparation is "an arduous task in the best of times" but even more difficult amid the
`COVID-19 crisis.
`
`Counsel for MV3 had told Law360 in April that the request to move the trial was
`premature.
`
`Attorneys for the parties didn't immediately respond to requests for comment Friday.
`
`The patent-in-suit is U.S. Patent No. 8,863,223.
`
`MV3 is represented by J. Mark Mann, G. Blake Thompson and Andy Tindel of Mann Tindel &
`Thompson, Craig D. Cherry of Haley & Olson PC, and Jonathan K. Waldrop, Darcy L. Jones,
`Marcus A. Barber, John W. Downing, Heather S. Kim, Jack Shaw, ThucMinh Nguyen and
`Paul G. Williams of Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP.
`
`https://www.law360.com/articles/1274108/print?section=media
`
`5/18/2020
`
`Micron Ex. 1013, p. 1
`Micron v. Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1
`IPR2020-01008
`
`

`

`Albright Pushes Roku IP Trial To Late June Over Pandemic - Law360
`
`Page 2 of 2
`
`Roku is represented by Alexander J. Hadjis, Lisa M. Mandrusiak, Michael D. West, Tia D.
`Fenton and W. Todd Baker of Oblon McClelland Maier & Neustadt LLP, Richard D. Milvenan
`of McGinnis Lochridge LLP, David N. Deaconson of Pakis Giotes Page & Burleson PC and
`Darryl Adams of Slayden Grubert Beard PLLC.
`
`The case is MV3 Partners LLC v. Roku Inc., case number 6:18-cv-00308, in the U.S.
`District Court for the Western District of Texas.
`
`--Additional reporting by Jack Queen and Ryan Davis. Editing by Jack Karp.
`
`All Content © 2003-2020, Portfolio Media, Inc.
`
`https://www.law360.com/articles/1274108/print?section=media
`
`5/18/2020
`
`Micron Ex. 1013, p. 2
`Micron v. Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1
`IPR2020-01008
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket