DISH Technologies L.L.C. et al. v. Cox Communications, Inc. et al.

Case Overview and Background

This patent infringement action pits DISH Technologies L.L.C., along with its streaming-focused subsidiaries Sling TV L.L.C. and StreamCo, LLC, against cable and media giants Cox Communications, Inc. and Cox Media Group, LLC. The plaintiffs, all operating companies under the EchoStar corporation, are key players in the satellite television and over-the-top (OTT) streaming market in the United States. DISH is a major pay-TV provider, while Sling TV was a pioneer in live TV streaming services. The defendants are also significant operating companies. Cox Communications is the largest private broadband provider in the U.S., offering cable, internet, and other telecommunications services. Cox Media Group, majority-owned by Apollo Global Management with a minority stake held by Cox Enterprises, operates a large portfolio of television and radio stations. The lawsuit alleges that Cox's video-on-demand and streaming services, which are part of its Contour video platform, infringe on DISH's patented technology.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, centers on U.S. Patent No. 11,470,138 B2. This patent generally relates to adaptive bitrate streaming technology, which allows for the quality of a video stream to be automatically adjusted based on a user's internet connection speed to ensure smooth playback. DISH and Sling TV have asserted this patent, along with others from the same family acquired from MOVE Networks, in a broader litigation campaign targeting various streaming service providers. The case (1:23-cv-00987) is currently active, and while a judge has not been publicly assigned, its venue in Delaware is significant. The District of Delaware is a premier forum for patent litigation due to its experienced judiciary and well-developed case law, attracting a high volume of complex intellectual property disputes.

This case is notable as it represents a strategic effort by an established player in the satellite and streaming industry to enforce its intellectual property against competitors in the cable and media sector. The assertion campaign by DISH highlights a growing trend of using patent litigation as a competitive tool in the crowded and rapidly evolving OTT streaming market. The outcome could have a significant impact on the licensing landscape for adaptive bitrate streaming, a foundational technology for modern video delivery. Cox has a history of defending against patent assertions, including in the District of Delaware, which may signal a willingness to litigate the matter rather than quickly settle. This lawsuit underscores the increasing importance of patent portfolios in the competitive strategy of media and technology companies as the lines between traditional cable, satellite, and internet-based content delivery continue to blur.

Key Legal Developments in DISH v. Cox Communications

As of May 8, 2026, the patent infringement lawsuit filed by DISH Technologies L.L.C. and its affiliates against Cox Communications, Inc. and Cox Media Group, LLC remains active in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. However, detailed public records outlining the full procedural history of case number 1:23-cv-00987 are limited.

The case centers on U.S. Patent No. 11,470,138 B2, which relates to adaptive bitrate streaming technology. This patent is part of a broader portfolio that DISH has actively asserted in numerous lawsuits against various companies in the streaming and media industries.

Filing and Initial Pleadings (2023-09-08 to Present)

DISH Technologies, along with Sling TV L.L.C. and StreamCo, LLC, filed the complaint on September 8, 2023, alleging that Cox's communication and media services infringe upon the '138 patent. The specific filings, including the full complaint, Cox's answer, and any counterclaims, are not available through general public web searches, which typically require direct access to court record services like PACER for detailed docket entries.

Pre-trial Motions and Other Developments

Information regarding substantive pre-trial motions, such as motions to dismiss, transfer, or for summary judgment, is not publicly available in the search results. Similarly, there is no public record of a claim construction (Markman) hearing or ruling in this specific case.

The '138 patent is part of a portfolio of streaming-related patents that DISH acquired from MOVE Networks. DISH has been actively litigating this portfolio. For instance, in a separate case against FuboTV (1:23-cv-00986-GBW), DISH was granted leave to file an amended complaint to add more claims from the same family of patents, including the '138 patent, after FuboTV filed a motion to dismiss. This indicates a potential strategy by DISH to broaden its infringement contentions in related litigations.

Parallel PTAB Proceedings

A search of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) records does not show any current or past Inter Partes Review (IPR) or Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceedings filed against U.S. Patent No. 11,470,138 B2. Therefore, there is currently no parallel administrative challenge at the PTAB that would impact this litigation.

Current Status and Outlook

The case is designated as active and ongoing. The lack of public information on significant developments may suggest that the parties are in the early stages of litigation, such as discovery, or that key filings are under seal. Given DISH's history of both aggressively litigating and settling similar patent cases, the ultimate outcome could range from a negotiated license and settlement to a full trial on the merits.

This summary is based on the available public information, which is limited. A complete and detailed procedural history would require a review of the official court docket.

Plaintiffs' Counsel of Record

DISH and its related entities have retained a team from the national intellectual property firm Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP, along with local counsel from Farnan LLP in Delaware.

Name	Role	Firm	Office Location	Notable Experience/Case Highlight
John W. "Jack" G.	Lead Counsel	Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP	Denver, CO	Represents DISH and Sling in their broader litigation campaign involving adaptive bitrate streaming patents.
Taylor H.	Counsel	Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP	Denver, CO	Focuses on patent litigation in the software and telecommunications industries.
Christopher T.	Counsel	Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP	Atlanta, GA	Experienced in patent and trade secret litigation involving complex technology.
Brian E. F.	Local Counsel	Farnan LLP	Wilmington, DE	Serves as Delaware counsel in numerous high-stakes patent cases, formerly a federal judge in the District of Delaware.
Michael J. F.	Local Counsel	Farnan LLP	Wilmington, DE	Represents clients in a wide array of patent litigation matters as local counsel in Delaware.

The legal team for the plaintiffs combines deep subject-matter expertise in patent litigation from Kilpatrick Townsend with the specialized Delaware-practice knowledge of Farnan LLP. The initial complaint (D.I. 1, filed September 8, 2023) lists attorneys from both firms, establishing them as counsel of record from the outset of the litigation. This strategic combination of national and local counsel is standard practice for major patent litigation filed in the District of Delaware.

Defendants' Counsel of Record

Cox Communications and Cox Media Group have retained counsel from the national intellectual property firm Fish & Richardson P.C. as lead counsel, with Shaw Keller LLP serving as local counsel in Delaware. The appearances of counsel were entered on October 10, 2023 (D.I. 9, 10, 11).

Name	Role	Firm	Office Location	Notable Experience/Case Highlight
Susan M.	Lead Counsel	Fish & Richardson P.C.	Wilmington, DE	Managing principal of the firm's Delaware office with over 20 years of experience in patent trials across the U.S.
Jonathan J. L.	Counsel	Fish & Richardson P.C.	Wilmington, DE	Focuses on patent litigation and has experience in federal courts and before the International Trade Commission.
David M. F.	Local Counsel	Shaw Keller LLP	Wilmington, DE	Represents clients in patent and complex commercial litigation in Delaware's state and federal courts.
John W. S.	Local Counsel	Shaw Keller LLP	Wilmington,DE	Co-founder of Shaw Keller, frequently serves as Delaware counsel in major patent infringement disputes.

The defense team combines the deep bench and technical expertise of Fish & Richardson, a top-tier patent litigation firm, with the specialized local knowledge of Shaw Keller, a firm well-versed in the practices of the District of Delaware. This combination of a national-level firm and experienced local Delaware counsel is a common and effective strategy for defendants in high-stakes patent cases filed in this jurisdiction. In-house counsel for Cox has not formally appeared on the docket.