• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
35 results

VideoLabs, Inc. et al v. Roku, Inc.

Docket 1:23-cv-01136, Delaware District Court (Oct. 11, 2023)
Judge Joel H Slomsky, presiding
Patent
DivisionWilmington
FlagsSTAYED, CLOSED, PATENT
Cause35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Patent
7233790; 7440559; 7769238; 7970059; 8291236; 8605794; 8667304
7233790
7440559
77692387970059829123686057948667304
Plaintiff VideoLabs, Inc.
Plaintiff VL Collective IP LLC
Defendant Roku, Inc.
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Roku, Inc. v. VideoLabs, Inc.

Docket IPR2025-00071, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Nov. 11, 2024)
Case TypeInter Partes Review
Patent
7440559
Patent Owner VideoLabs, Inc.
Petitioner Roku, Inc.
Assignee PRAETOR FUND I, A SUB-FUND OF PRAETORIUM FUND I ICAV
cite Cite Docket

No. 41 ORDER STAYING CASE: Defendant's Motion to Stay (Doc No. 36 ) is GRANTED

Document VideoLabs, Inc. et al v. Roku, Inc., 1:23-cv-01136, No. 41 (D.Del. Jul. 26, 2024)
Motion to StayGranted
VIDEOLABS, INC. and VL COLLECTIVE
AND NOW, this 26th day of July 2024, upon consideration of Defendant’s Motion to Stay (Doc. No. 36) and the statements of the parties made at the July 25, 2024 telephone conference, it is ORDERED that: 1.
Defendant’s Motion to Stay (Doc. No. 36) is GRANTED.
All proceedings in this case are stayed until January 12, 2025.
The parties shall provide a joint status report to the Court within seven (7) business days of when the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issues final written decisions in the following inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings: IPR2023-00628,
cite Cite Document
Analyze

5 Notice Notice filing date accorded: Notice Notice filing date accorded

Document IPR2025-00071, No. 5 Notice Notice filing date accorded - Notice Notice filing date accorded (P.T.A.B. Dec. 6, 2024)
Such motion must: a. Contain a statement of facts showing there is good cause for the Board to recognize counsel pro hac vice during the proceeding; and b.
A notice of intent to designate a provisionally recognized PTAB attorney as back-up counsel filed pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)(2) must: (a) Identify the registered practitioner who will serve as lead counsel; (b) Identify the most recent prior proceeding in which the person seeking to appear was recognized pro hac vice by order of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board pursuant to a motion of the type described in 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)(1); and (c) Be accompanied by Certification in the form of an affidavit or declaration in which the individual seeking pro hac vice recognition attests to the following: i.
If the affiant or declarant is unable to provide the information requested above or make the required statements or representations under oath, or if the affiant or declarant does not qualify as a provisionally recognized PTAB attorney pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)(2), the procedure set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)(2) is not available, and pro hac vice recognition may only be obtained via the process set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)(1).
Pro hac vice recognition will not be effective until the party files an updated mandatory notice after the expiration of the applicable time period (5 or 10 days) set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.10(c)(2)(iii).
The parties are also reminded that unless otherwise permitted by 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(b)(2), all filings in this proceeding must be made electronically in the Patent Trial Appeal Case Tracking System (P-TACTS), accessible from the Board Web site at http://www.uspto.gov/PTAB.
cite Cite Document

No. 36 MOTION to Stay - filed by Roku, Inc

Document VideoLabs, Inc. et al v. Roku, Inc., 1:23-cv-01136, No. 36 (D.Del. Jul. 18, 2024)
Motion to Stay
Defendant Roku, Inc. (“Roku”) respectfully moves to stay this action pending the conclusion of: (1) the following inter partes review proceedings (and any subsequent appellate proceedings) currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board: IPR2023-00628, IPR2023-00630, IPR2023-00891, IPR2024-01023, IPR2024-01024, IPR2024-01025, and IPR2024-01026, which relate to five of the seven asserted patents1; and (2) the conclusion of the appeal from IPR2022-01086 relating to the ’794 patent that is currently pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Docket No. 2024-1890 (Fed. Cir.).2 The grounds for this motion are set forth more fully in the accompanying Opening Brief and the materials and information cited therein.
2 On the same day Roku filed this motion, the Court issued stay orders in the co-pending Meta and Netflix cases, and set a teleconference for July 25, 2024 to discuss a stay in this case.
Roku was in the process of finalizing its motion to stay papers when the Court issued its July 18 Orders.
Upon consideration of Defendant Roku, Inc.’s Motion to Stay (“Motion”) and any opposition thereto, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
The case is stayed pending the conclusion (including any appeals) of the following inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings: IPR2023-00628, IPR2023-00630, IPR2023-00891, IPR2024-01023, IPR2024-01024, IPR2024-01025, and IPR2024-01026, which relate to five of the seven asserted patents3; and (2) the conclusion of the appeal from IPR2022-01086 relating to the ’794 patent that is currently pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Docket No. 2024-1890 (Fed. Cir.).
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 18

Document VideoLabs, Inc. et al v. Roku, Inc., 1:23-cv-01136, No. 18 (D.Del. Mar. 8, 2024)

cite Cite Document

No. 9

Document VideoLabs, Inc. et al v. Roku, Inc., 1:23-cv-01136, No. 9 (D.Del. Feb. 16, 2024)

cite Cite Document

No. 1

Document VideoLabs, Inc. et al v. Roku, Inc., 1:23-cv-01136, No. 1 (D.Del. Oct. 11, 2023)

cite Cite Document
1 2 3 >>