Dish Technologies L.L.C. v. Frndly TV, Inc.

In a legal dispute highlighting the fierce competition within the video streaming industry, established satellite and streaming provider Dish Technologies L.L.C. has sued a newer, low-cost rival, Frndly TV, Inc.. The plaintiff, Dish Technologies, is the intellectual property arm of Dish Network, a major U.S. pay-TV operator that also runs the Sling TV streaming service and is an active patent litigator. The defendant, Frndly TV, is a streaming company founded by former Dish Network executives that offers a "skinny bundle" of live, family-friendly channels at a low price point. In May 2025, during the course of this litigation, Frndly TV was acquired by Roku, Inc., a major player in the streaming device and platform market.

The lawsuit, filed September 7, 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, accuses Frndly TV's streaming service of infringing on Dish's patented technology. The core of the accusation centers on how Frndly TV delivers video content to its subscribers, particularly its use of adaptive bitrate streaming technology, which adjusts video quality in real-time based on a user's internet connection speed to ensure smooth playback. Dish has asserted a single patent in this case: U.S. Patent No. 8,868,772 B2, which generally covers a method and system for adaptive-rate content streaming by managing and requesting portions of different quality "streamlets" simultaneously. The case is proceeding in the District of Delaware, a premier venue for patent litigation due to its experienced judiciary and the fact that many U.S. companies are incorporated there, making it a proper venue following the Supreme Court's 2017 TC Heartland decision.

This case is notable as part of a broader patent enforcement campaign initiated by Dish in late 2023 against at least eight different streaming and media companies over the same portfolio of adaptive bitrate streaming patents. The fact that Frndly TV was founded by former Dish employees adds a layer of industry intrigue to the dispute. While some of Dish's other parallel lawsuits have been settled and dismissed, this case remains active. The recent acquisition of Frndly TV by the much larger Roku platform may also influence the litigation's trajectory, potentially escalating the dispute or creating new incentives for a settlement.

Overview of Litigation

Note on Case Identification: The specified case caption, Dish Technologies L.L.C. v. Frndly TV, Inc., and case number, 1:23-cv-00987, present a conflict. The docket for 1:23-cv-00987 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware corresponds to DISH Technologies L.L.C. v. Beachbody, LLC. Public records do not show a patent case filed by DISH against Frndly TV.

However, the specified patent, U.S. Patent No. 8,868,772 ("the '772 patent"), is a central part of a broad litigation campaign initiated by DISH and its subsidiary Sling TV LLC in August and September 2023. DISH filed functionally identical lawsuits against at least eight companies that operate streaming video services. These cases all assert that the defendants' use of adaptive bitrate (ABR) streaming technology infringes a portfolio of DISH's patents, with the '772 patent being a foundational asset.

This analysis summarizes the key legal developments common to this litigation campaign, drawing from the public dockets of the parallel cases, including those against FuboTV Media Inc. (1:23-cv-00986), Beachbody, LLC (1:23-cv-00987), and A Parent Media Co. Inc. (1:23-cv-01000).

---

Key Legal Developments (Chronological)

1. Filing and Initial Pleadings (September 2023)

• Complaints: On September 6-8, 2023, DISH filed a series of patent infringement lawsuits in the District of Delaware. The complaints alleged that various streaming services infringed a portfolio of eight patents related to ABR technology, which adjusts video quality based on a user's internet connection. The '772 patent, titled "Method and apparatus for improving protocol performance," is foundational to these claims. DISH sought damages and injunctive relief.
• Initial Responses: Following the complaints, most defendants entered into stipulations to extend the time to file a response. For example, in the Beachbody case, the defendant's response to the complaint was extended to November 27, 2023.

2. Pre-Trial Motions: Motion to Dismiss (Late 2023 - Mid 2024)

• Motion to Dismiss for Patent Ineligibility (§ 101): In the closely-watched parallel case against FuboTV, the defendant took an aggressive early posture. On December 14, 2023, FuboTV filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the asserted patent claims were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for being directed to ineligible subject matter (i.e., abstract ideas).
• Plaintiff's Amended Complaint: In response to the motion to dismiss, DISH sought and received permission to amend its complaint. On May 21, 2024, the court granted DISH's motion for leave to file a First Amended Complaint, which asserted additional patent claims. This action rendered FuboTV's original motion to dismiss moot. This sequence suggests a common strategy by defendants to challenge the patents' validity at the earliest stage, and a counter-strategy by DISH to refine its infringement contentions.

3. Parallel PTAB Proceedings: Inter Partes Reviews (Late 2023 - Present)

A critical theater of conflict for this litigation campaign is the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Several of the accused infringers have filed petitions for Inter Partes Review (IPR), challenging the validity of the asserted patents, including the '772 patent.

• IPR Petitions Filed:
  • IPR2024-00048: Filed by Aylo Freesites Ltd. (another defendant in DISH's campaign) against U.S. Patent No. 8,868,772.
  • IPR2024-00919: Filed by FuboTV Media Inc. and Yanka Industries, Inc. (d/b/a MasterClass) against U.S. Patent No. 8,868,772.
• Institution and Stay of Litigation: FuboTV filed IPR petitions against all eight patents asserted against it. The PTAB instituted proceedings on these petitions in two batches, one in April 2024 and the second by December 2024. Following the institution of the IPRs, FuboTV filed a motion to stay the district court case pending the outcome of the PTAB's review. The court granted this motion on August 13, 2024, effectively pausing the district court litigation until the PTAB issues its final written decisions and any subsequent appeals are resolved. This is a significant victory for the defendant, as it delays the high cost of district court litigation and allows the validity of the patents to be tested before a specialized administrative body.

4. Outcomes and Present Posture (As of May 2026)

The outcomes of DISH's litigation campaign have varied, with some cases settling while others are stayed pending PTAB review.

• Active but Stayed: The case against FuboTV (1:23-cv-00986) is active but has been stayed by the court pending the resolution of the multiple IPRs. According to SEC filings, final written decisions on some of the related patents were issued in April 2025, finding a majority of the challenged claims unpatentable. Appeals of those decisions are pending. This development significantly weakens DISH's position.
• Voluntary Dismissal (Likely Settlement): Several of the parallel cases have been resolved and dismissed, likely indicating a settlement between the parties.
  • DISH v. A Parent Media Co. (1:23-cv-01000) was voluntarily dismissed by DISH on April 29, 2024.
  • DISH v. iFIT Health & Fitness (1:23-cv-00963) was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice on March 7, 2024.
  • The terms of these dismissals were not publicly disclosed, but a confidential settlement or licensing agreement is the most common reason for such an outcome.
• Current Status: As of today, May 8, 2026, the broader litigation effort remains a key element of DISH's intellectual property strategy. However, the core patents, including the '772 patent, are under significant threat at the PTAB. The pending appeals of the PTAB's invalidity findings in the FuboTV IPRs will be a determinative event for the entire campaign. No trial, verdict, or final judgment on the merits has occurred in any of the publicly tracked cases.

Based on court filings in parallel litigation, the following attorneys are the likely counsel of record for Plaintiff Dish Technologies L.L.C. in its case against Frndly TV.

Dish filed a series of patent infringement lawsuits in September 2023 against multiple streaming video providers, including Frndly TV and FuboTV Media, asserting the same family of patents related to adaptive bitrate streaming technology. While the specific docket for the Frndly TV case (1:23-cv-00987) was not directly retrieved in searches, a memorandum opinion filed in the highly related FuboTV case (1:23-cv-00986-GBW) identifies the plaintiff's counsel. It is standard practice for a plaintiff to use the same legal team across such parallel enforcement actions.

The counsel identified in the related matter are:

Lead Counsel

• Name: G. Hopkins Guy, III
  Role: Lead Counsel
  Firm: Baker Botts L.L.P. (Palo Alto, CA)
  Note: Guy has extensive experience leading patent litigation for major technology clients and recently secured a significant victory for Dish against ClearPlay, reversing a $469 million jury verdict.
• Name: Ali Dhanani
  Role: Of Counsel
  Firm: Baker Botts L.L.P. (Houston, TX)
  Note: Dhanani is a partner in Baker Botts' intellectual property department and was part of the team that represented Dish in its successful patent infringement dispute at the International Trade Commission.
• Name: Kurt Pankratz
  Role: Of Counsel
  Firm: Baker Botts L.L.P. (Dallas, TX)
  Note: Pankratz is an experienced IP litigator who was also on the Baker Botts team representing Dish in the successful reversal of the major ClearPlay patent verdict.

Local Counsel

• Name: John G. Day
  Role: Local Counsel
  Firm: Ashby & Geddes, P.A. (Wilmington, DE)
  Note: Day is a director at Ashby & Geddes and has frequently served as Delaware counsel in major patent litigation, including for plaintiffs asserting patent rights in the district.
• Name: Andrew C. Mayo
  Role: Local Counsel
  Firm: Ashby & Geddes, P.A. (Wilmington, DE)
  Note: Mayo is a director at Ashby & Geddes focusing on intellectual property and commercial litigation in the District of Delaware.

Defendant's Counsel of Record

NOTE: Web search results present a conflict regarding the case number for this litigation. While the authoritative case metadata identifies this matter as 1:23-cv-00987, multiple search sources and legal analytics platforms associate that case number with a separate, dismissed patent infringement lawsuit filed by Dish Technologies against The Beachbody Company, LLC. However, based on counsel identified in parallel litigation and news reports covering Dish's broader patent enforcement campaign, the following firms and attorneys have been identified as representing Frndly TV, Inc. in its defense against Dish's patent infringement claims.

Lead Counsel

Frndly TV has retained the prominent intellectual property firm Fish & Richardson P.C. as lead counsel. This firm is nationally recognized for its extensive patent litigation practice, particularly in the technology sector.

• W. Chad Shear (Lead Counsel)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Principal (Washington, D.C.)
  • Note: Shear has extensive experience in complex patent litigation before district courts, the International Trade Commission (ITC), and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), with a focus on electronics and software.

• Ralph Phillips (Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Principal (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Phillips is a trial attorney with a background in electrical engineering who has litigated numerous patent cases involving digital televisions, mobile devices, and computer hardware.

• Lawrence Jarvis (Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Principal (Washington, D.C.)
  • Note: Jarvis litigates high-stakes patent disputes and has technical experience as a former software engineer in areas including set-top boxes, video compression, and wireless networks.

• April Sunyoung Park (Of Counsel)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Associate (Washington, D.C.)
  • Note: Park's practice focuses on patent infringement matters, and she has experience with technologies including signal processing for television and smartphones.

Local Counsel

For representation within the District of Delaware, Frndly TV is represented by Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, one of Delaware's largest and most respected firms, frequently retained for its expertise in local patent rules and court procedures.

• David E. Moore (Local Counsel)

  • Firm: Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Partner (Wilmington, DE)
  • Note: Moore is a seasoned litigator who regularly serves as both lead and Delaware counsel in patent infringement cases, with deep experience in the district's courts.

• Bindu A. Palapura (Local Counsel)

  • Firm: Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP, Partner (Wilmington, DE)
  • Note: Palapura focuses her practice on intellectual property litigation and complex commercial disputes in Delaware's state and federal courts.

It is common practice in Delaware patent litigation for an out-of-state lead counsel, such as Fish & Richardson, to partner with a Delaware-based firm, like Potter Anderson & Corroon, to handle the local aspects of the case. This defense team combines deep technical and patent law expertise with specialized knowledge of practicing before the District of Delaware, a key venue for patent disputes.