GOOGLE LLC v. Sandpiper Cdn LLC

Google LLC, a global technology operating company renowned for its search engine, cloud services, and other digital offerings, is the petitioner in this Inter Partes Review (IPR). The IPR challenges U.S. Patent 10,057,322, owned by Sandpiper Cdn LLC. Sandpiper Cdn LLC is a Delaware limited liability company that appears to operate as a patent assertion entity (PAE) or non-practicing entity (NPE). It was recently formed in March 2024 and subsequently acquired a significant portfolio of patents related to content delivery networks (CDNs) from Level 3 Communications, which had previously obtained them from Sandpiper Networks. Sandpiper Networks was a pioneer in developing the world's first commercial CDN in the 1990s.

The patent at issue, US Patent 10,057,322, broadly pertains to content delivery network (CDN) technology, which optimizes the delivery of online content to users by distributing it across a network of servers. While a precise one-line technical sketch for patent 10,057,322 was not readily available in the search results, the broader litigation initiated by Sandpiper CDN against Google asserts patents related to content delivery systems that utilize shared "repeater servers" to replicate and deliver resources from multiple content providers' origin servers to client machines. Google's alleged infringement stems from its Cloud CDN and Media CDN offerings, including services for YouTube and YouTube TV.

This IPR (IPR2025-01010) is currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and has been instituted, meaning the PTAB has agreed to review the patent's validity. This IPR is directly linked to a patent infringement lawsuit filed by Sandpiper CDN LLC against Google LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Case No. 2:24-cv-03951). The district court case has been stayed until Google's related IPRs, including IPR2025-01010, are finally resolved. The PTAB venue is critical for Google as it frequently employs IPRs as a defensive strategy to challenge the validity of patents asserted against it, thereby aiming to mitigate potential infringement risks and strengthen its negotiating position. The case is notable as it exemplifies an NPE (Sandpiper Cdn LLC) asserting a portfolio of foundational CDN patents, originally developed by a pioneer in the field, against a major technology company's core services, with Google utilizing IPRs as a primary defense.

Sandpiper Cdn LLC initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against Google LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Case No. 2:24-cv-03951, on May 9, 2024. Concurrently, Google LLC has filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding, IPR2025-01010, challenging a different patent owned by Sandpiper Cdn LLC, which was instituted and is currently pending before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

I. District Court Patent Infringement Litigation: Sandpiper Cdn, LLC v. Google LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-03951 (C.D. Cal.)

• Filing & Initial Pleadings (2024-05-09): Sandpiper Cdn LLC filed a complaint for patent infringement against Google LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Sandpiper alleged that Google's content delivery network (CDN) services, including Google Cloud CDN, Google Media CDN, YouTube, and YouTube TV, infringe six U.S. patents: 8,478,903; 8,595,778; 8,645,517; 8,719,886; 9,021,112; and 10,924,573. Sandpiper Cdn LLC had acquired these patents from Level 3 Communications in March 2024.

• Pre-Trial Motions of Substance: Google filed an Alice motion challenging the eligibility of some of the asserted patents under 35 U.S.C. § 101. This motion was successful, leading to two of the asserted patents being "knocked out of the case". The specific patents invalidated by the Alice motion are not detailed in the available information.

• Claim Construction (Markman) Outcomes: No information is publicly available regarding a Markman hearing or claim construction outcomes in this case as of May 17, 2026.

• Discovery Milestones: No specific strategic discovery milestones have been publicly reported.

• Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-Trial Motions: Given the recent filing date and ongoing pre-trial proceedings, no trial events, verdicts, or post-trial motions have occurred.

• Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal – Present Posture: The patent infringement litigation remains active and pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

II. Parallel PTAB IPR Proceeding: GOOGLE LLC v. Sandpiper Cdn LLC, IPR2025-01010 (PTAB)

• Filing & Institution (2025-05-23): Google LLC initiated an Inter Partes Review (IPR) against Sandpiper Cdn LLC, challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 10,057,322 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The IPR was filed on May 23, 2025, and has since been instituted.

• Relationship to District Court Litigation: It is important to note that U.S. Patent No. 10,057,322, the subject of IPR2025-01010, is not among the six patents initially asserted by Sandpiper Cdn LLC in the district court patent infringement complaint (2:24-cv-03951). Therefore, the direct effect of this IPR on the active district court litigation is currently limited, as the challenged patent is not presently at issue in that case. Google's IPR appears to be a separate action against Sandpiper Cdn LLC's patent portfolio.

Identifying the specific counsel of record for Google LLC in IPR2025-01010 through publicly accessible web searches proved challenging, as direct access to the PTAB docket filings (such as the Petition for Inter Partes Review or a Power of Attorney for this specific IPR) is generally restricted without a PTAB-E2E or P-TACTS login. Therefore, the definitive list of attorneys for this precise proceeding cannot be provided from the available public search results.

However, based on Google LLC's representation in other related IPRs and its consistent legal strategies in patent litigation, the following firms and attorneys are frequently seen representing Google in similar PTAB proceedings:

External Counsel (Likely based on other Google IPRs):

• Firm: Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, L.L.P.
  • Attorney: Safiya Aguilar
    • Role: Likely lead or backup counsel.
    • Office Location: Washington, D.C.
    • Experience Note: Ms. Aguilar is a registered patent attorney at Finnegan, a firm frequently representing Google in PTAB proceedings.
• Firm: Paul Hastings LLP
  • Attorney: Naveen Modi
    • Role: Likely lead or backup counsel.
    • Office Location: Washington, D.C. (based on typical firm structure and prior appearances).
    • Experience Note: Mr. Modi is noted as having argued for Google LLC in appeals from PTAB decisions to the Federal Circuit, indicating significant experience in patent litigation and PTAB practice. His name also appears as petitioner counsel for Google in another IPR against CardWare Inc.

In-House Counsel:

• Attorney: Laura Sheridan
  • Role: Senior Patent Counsel / Head of Patent Policy, Google.
  • Firm: Google LLC (in-house).
  • Experience Note: Ms. Sheridan leads a team focused on Google's global patent portfolio strategy, works on patent policy issues, and speaks regularly on patent-related topics, including post-grant challenges under the AIA. She has prior private practice experience in patent prosecution, litigation, IP due diligence, and post-grant practice before the Patent Office. She has also testified before Congress on the intersection of AI and patents.

It is important to note that without direct access to the official filings for IPR2025-01010, the above information about external counsel is based on their representation of Google in other IPRs and general practice knowledge, rather than a confirmed appearance in this specific IPR. Google does utilize various law firms for its IPR proceedings.

Counsel Identified for Sandpiper Cdn LLC in IPR2025-01010

In the ongoing Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding IPR2025-01010, challenging U.S. Patent 10,057,322, Sandpiper Cdn LLC is represented by:

• Name: Jason D. Eisenberg
• Role: Counsel for Patent Owner (likely lead counsel, given his firm's specialization in PTAB defense)
• Firm: Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C., Washington, D.C. office.
• Experience Note: Mr. Eisenberg is a director in Sterne Kessler's Electronics Practice Group and a Practice Leader for the Reexamination and Reissue Practice, with extensive experience as patent owner counsel in over 200 inter partes and post-grant review cases at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). He was ranked in the top 50 of the "100 Best Performing Attorneys Overall" before the PTAB in the 2023 Patexia PTAB Intelligence Report. He has also been involved in numerous complex reissues, reexaminations, Federal Circuit cases, and Supreme Court appeals.

While specific filings directly naming Sandpiper Cdn LLC's counsel in IPR2025-01010 were not immediately and explicitly available in the search results, Jason D. Eisenberg is consistently identified as counsel for Sandpiper CDN, LLC in related PTAB proceedings, such as IPR2025-00029 and IPR2025-00806, involving similar patent challenges by Google LLC. This consistent representation across parallel IPRs for the same patent owner strongly indicates his role in IPR2025-01010.