Defendant
5 cases as defendant.
Netflix Streaming Services, Inc. is a Delaware-registered, wholly owned subsidiary of Netflix, Inc. (NASDAQ: NFLX), the subscription streaming-entertainment company founded in 1997 and headquartered in Los Gatos, California. The subsidiary is listed in network registries (ARIN) at 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, Delaware, and is used as a Netflix real party in interest in streaming-service and network matters. Netflix, Inc. is public, has no parent, and reported roughly $39.0 billion in 2024 revenue, ~302 million subscriptions, and about 14,000 full-time employees (10-K, Dec. 31, 2024).
Netflix operates a subscription video-on-demand service offering licensed and original TV series, films, games, and live programming, streamed over the internet; it also runs the underlying content-delivery, encoding, and cloud infrastructure that its subsidiaries support. It is an operating company, not a patent-assertion entity; the subsidiary itself holds no asserted portfolio and produces no separate products.
Litigation posture: The tracked case, Netflix, Inc. et al. v. Broadcom Corporation (PTAB, filed Feb. 3, 2021), names Netflix as plaintiff/petitioner — Netflix's only tracked appearance, with zero appearances as defendant in this database. This reflects Netflix's defensive use of inter partes review to challenge patents Broadcom and Avago asserted against it, rather than offensive assertion. In the parallel district-court litigation, Broadcom/Avago sued Netflix for infringement in the Northern District of California (Broadcom Corp. v. Netflix, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-04677), so Netflix's PTAB petitions are counter-challenges to that suit, not NPE activity.
Context: The disputes concern video and networking technology — video-on-demand delivery, video encoding/compression (HEVC-related patents), load balancing, and virtual-machine management. Netflux's PTAB petitions followed Broadcom's infringement complaints; the '375 patent IPR (IPR2020-01423) resulted in a final written decision invalidating claims, which the Federal Circuit affirmed in 2023. Netflix has also litigated related Broadcom patents in the Netherlands. Netflix is best characterized as an operating company defending itself against infringement claims by a larger diversified technology company.
Magistrate R&R recommended claim 15 of the '535 patent ineligible under § 101. Realtime voluntarily dismissed the Delaware action on July 22, 2019, refiled in C.D. Cal., and later dismissed the California actions.
District court action asserting the '046 patent. Motion to dismiss granted-in-part and denied-in-part by R&R on 2018-12-12; later dismissed.
Realtime asserted U.S. Patent 9,578,298 (one of six patents; a non-Fallon patent with the '462 patent) against Netflix and Netflix Streaming Services. The magistrate judge recommended denying dismissal of the '298 claim while recommending the Fallon patents be held § 101-ineligible; Realtime voluntarily dismissed the Delaware action in July 2019 and refiled parts in C.D. Cal., later voluntarily dismissing those too.
Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC asserted the '462 patent against Netflix and Netflix Streaming Services. The court issued a report and recommendation on December 12, 2018, granting in part and denying in part a motion to dismiss; the '462 allegations were not part of the §101 Fallon ruling.
Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC sued Netflix, Inc. and Netflix Streaming Services, Inc. in the District of Delaware asserting the '907 patent. Realtime voluntarily dismissed the Delaware suit after about 20 months following a magistrate judge's recommendation to invalidate four patents, then refiled in C.D. Cal.