Litigation

Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC v. Haivision Network Video Inc.

unknown

1:17-cv-01520-CFC-SRF

Court
D. Del.
Filed
2017-10-26

Patents at issue (2)

8934535
8929442

Summary

Related Delaware 'Fallon patents' case (plus the '442 patent). Outcome not separately confirmed.

Case overview & background

Plain-language overview of the case: parties, accused product, patents at issue, and why the suit matters.

I'll research this case thoroughly before drafting.

Good baseline. Now let me nail down the accused products, the docket's final resolution, and any IPR/PTAB linkage.

Key finding: a successor W.D. Tex. suit exists. Let me confirm the Delaware case's terminal docket entries and the IPR outcomes.

Case Overview — Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC v. Haivision Network Video Inc., No. 1:17-cv-1520-CFC-SRF (D. Del.)

Parties and what they do. Plaintiff Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC is a patent-assertion entity, not an operating video company: it is the assignee by written assignment of the asserted patents from Realtime Data LLC (d/b/a IXO), the Armonk, NY compression portfolio associated with inventor James J. Fallon (R&R, D.I. 41, at 1–2; ARRIS v. Realtime, IPR2019-01586, Paper 7, at 4–5). Its business is licensing and litigation—by 2021 a Colorado court noted defendants' characterization of Realtime as a "serial litigant" with roughly 145 filed cases, a characterization the court noted "does not bear on the merits" but that informed its view of Realtime's litigation sophistication (Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC v. Sling TV L.L.C., No. 17-cv-02097-RBJ, D.I. 326 (D. Colo. Jan. 20, 2022), at 3–4). Defendant Haivision (sued as Haivision Network Video Inc., Haivision Network Video Corp., and Haivision KB Inc.) is a Montreal-headquartered live-video technology company that sells hardware and software encoders, decoders, transcoders, and cloud/management platforms for low-latency IP video—its "KB" subsidiary name tracks its KulaByte-derived Internet encoder/transcoder line (inference from the entity name and product lineup; not independently confirmed in the record I reviewed).

The accused technology. The operative (second amended) complaint targeted Haivision's video-encoding and streaming stack—the Haivision Media Platform, Makito X series, KB series encoders/transcoders, Kraken transcoder, Haivision Video Cloud, and Connect DVR—with the infringement theory built on two features: (i) H.264 encoding, where the selection among CABAC vs. CAVLC coding tools is alleged to be the claimed "selection among a plurality of asymmetric compressors," and (ii) Haivision's SRT (Secure Reliable Transport) protocol, which "detects real-time network performance between the encode/decode/transcode endpoints" and lets those endpoints be "dynamically adjusted

Key legal developments & outcome

Major rulings, motions, claim construction, settlements, and the present posture or final disposition.

I'll research this case across court records, PTAB proceedings, and legal press.

Good foundation. Let me dig into the docket's later entries, the '442 patent IPRs, and the apparent refiling in W.D. Tex.

Plaintiff representatives

Counsel of record for the plaintiff(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).

I'll research this docket and the plaintiff's counsel.

Good leads. Now let me confirm the specific counsel and their firms.

Plaintiff's counsel of record — Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC v. Haivision Network Video Inc., No. 1:17-cv-01520-CFC-SRF (D. Del.)

Sourcing note: I could not query PACER directly in this session. The roster below is reconstructed from the docket text mirrored on Justia Dockets and Unified Patents' litigation portal for this case number, from plaintiff's own filings (which carry the signature blocks), and from the related Realtime Delaware/Colorado/C.D. Cal. dockets and Federal Circuit briefs. Where a firm could not be confirmed from a primary filing, I say so. No counsel are inferred or invented.

Delaware counsel of record (signature block on plaintiff's filings)

Attorney Role Firm / office Notes
Stephen B. Brauerman (Del. Bar No. 4952) Delaware counsel of record — filed every plaintiff-side paper on this docket (e.g., D.I. 20 joint stipulation to amend, D.I. 44 motion for leave to amend, D.I. 47 opening brief, the § 1407 MDL motion, and the Nov. 2018 notice of supplemental authority) Bayard, P.A., 600 N. King St., Suite 400, Wilmington, DE Director and head of Bayard's IP litigation group; Chambers USA Band 2 (IP–Delaware) and IAM Patent 1000. He was Realtime's Delaware counsel across the companion Fallon-patent suits (e.g., Realtime Adaptive Streaming v. Sony Elecs., 1:17-cv-01693, D.I. 19) and in the parallel Realtime Data/IXO Delaware campaign.
Sara E. Bussiere (Del. Bar No. 5725) Bayard colleague; signed as co-Delaware counsel in the related Realtime Delaware cases Bayard, P.A., Wilmington, DE ⚠️ Confirmed as Realtime's Delaware counsel in Realtime Adaptive Streaming v. Sony, 1:17-cv-01693 (D.I. 19, Mar. 6, 2018), but I did not locate a filing bearing her name on the 1520 docket itself. Treat as probable, not confirmed, for this case.

Pro hac vice counsel (Russ August & Kabat, Los Angeles) — substantive/lead trial team

The Dec. 6, 2017 docket entry records PHV counsel Philip X. Wang, Reza Mirzaie, Brian D. Ledahl, Marc A. Fenster, and C. Jay Chung as added for electronic noticing on behalf of Realtime; the Dec. 26, 2017 motion (D.I. 17) sought PHV admission of Timothy T. Hsieh, and the Oct. 5, 2018 motion sought PHV admission of Paul A. Kroeger.

Attorney Role Firm / office Notes
Marc A. Fenster (CA SBN 181067) Lead counsel (substantive) — designated "Lead Attorney" in Realtime's RAK filings; listed first on the Federal Circuit appearances Russ, August & Kabat, 12424 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Fl., Los Angeles, CA 90025 RA&K name partner; longtime lead for the Realtime Data/IXO and Realtime Adaptive Streaming patent campaigns.
Reza Mirzaie (CA SBN 246953) Of counsel / trial team Russ, August & Kabat, Los Angeles Principal author of Realtime's Federal Circuit principal brief in the Realtime Adaptive Streaming v. Netflix appeal (Mar. 26, 2021); also appeared for Realtime Data/IXO on appeal (Nos. 2021-2251, -2291).
Brian D. Ledahl (CA SBN 186579) Of counsel / trial team Russ, August & Kabat, Los Angeles Realtime's core IPR-and-litigation team (e.g., Realtime Data v. Riverbed, N.D. Cal. 3:17-cv-03182).
Paul A. Kroeger (CA SBN 229074) Of counsel (added Oct. 2018, mid-case) Russ, August & Kabat, Los Angeles Frequent signatory for Realtime in the parallel § 101 appeals and IPRs.
C. Jay Chung (CA SBN 252794) Of counsel / trial team Russ, August & Kabat, Los Angeles Listed on Realtime's Delaware, Colorado (D. Colo. 1:17-cv-02869) and C.D. Cal. appearances.
Philip X. Wang (CA SBN 262239) Of counsel / trial team Russ, August & Kabat, Los Angeles Co-author of Realtime's Federal Circuit principal brief; appeared in the Google/YouTube and Netflix C.D. Cal. actions.
Timothy T. Hsieh Pro hac vice (moved 12/26/2017, D.I. 17) ⚠️ Firm not confirmed — no filing I located states his affiliation; he does not appear in the RAK signature blocks used across Realtime's other suits Appears to have had a narrow appearance role; his name does not recur in later Realtime filings. Flagged as unresolved rather than attributed to a firm.

Notable non-appearances worth flagging

  • Noroozi PC (Joel P.N. Stonedale, lead; Kayvan B. Noroozi, first back-up) plus Russ August & Kabat (Neil A. Rubin, Kent Shum) took over as Realtime's PTAB counsel by the Aug. 23, 2019 updated mandatory notices in Hulu/Amazon/Netflix v. Realtime, IPR2018-01187. That substitution is an IPR designation; I found no corresponding notice of appearance or withdrawal on the 1520 district court docket.
  • No in-house counsel for Realtime appears on this docket; Realtime is a licensing/NPE entity and litigated entirely through outside counsel.

Procedural context affecting the roster

The case was reassigned to Judge Joseph F. Bataillon (D. Neb., sitting by designation) on Jan. 31, 2018 and referred to Magistrate Judge Sherry R. Fallon. Magistrate Judge Fallon's R&R (D.I. 41, reported Dec. 12, 2018 on the D. Del. opinions page) recommended that the Fallon patents be held invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as directed to the abstract idea of encoding/decoding data, and recommended denying further leave to amend. Haivision's July 10, 2019 response (D.I. 46) opposed Realtime's motion for leave to file a third amended complaint on that basis. The Delaware docket is now closed on the mirroring services, and Realtime re-filed against Haivision in W.D. Tex. No. 6:19-cv-00441 (filed July 23, 2019) — consistent with the Delaware action terminating, though I did not locate the specific dismissal/transfer order, so I cannot state its precise terms.

Confidence: High on Brauerman (Bayard) and the six RAK attorneys as the plaintiff's team — all are grounded in docket entries and signed filings. Lower on Bussiere (probable) and on Hsieh's firm (unresolved).

Defendant representatives

Counsel of record for the defendant(s): attorneys, firms, and roles (lead counsel, of counsel, local counsel).

I'll research the docket and counsel of record for this case.

Counsel of Record for Defendant Haivision Network Video Inc.

Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC v. Haivision Network Video Inc., C.A. No. 1:17-cv-01520-CFC-SRF (D. Del.)

A single Greenberg Traurig, LLP team — Chicago IP litigators as trial counsel plus the firm's Wilmington office as Delaware counsel — represented Haivision throughout. All of the appearances below are documented on the docket and in filed signature blocks; there is no record of in-house counsel appearing, and nothing I found indicates any filing was sealed as to counsel identity.

Lead / trial counsel (pro hac vice, Greenberg Traurig – Chicago)

Attorney Role Firm / office Note
Herbert H. Finn (Reg. No. 38,139) Lead counsel; listed first in every Haivision signature block; moved to dismiss (D.I. 23–24), opposed amendment (D.I. 46) Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 77 W. Wacker Dr., Suite 3100, Chicago, IL 30+ year IP litigator; lead trial counsel for LG Electronics in ITC Inv. Nos. 337-TA-836 and 337-TA-726, and for Google/Open Handset Alliance in Specht v. Google (N.D. Ill.); also served as Haivision's PTAB lead counsel in IPR petitions.
Howard E. Silverman Of counsel (PHV granted 1/8/2018) Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Chicago Appears in the signature blocks of Haivision's D.I. 24 opening brief and D.I. 43 and 46 briefs.
Sara M. Skulman Of counsel (PHV granted 1/8/2018) Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Chicago Same signature blocks as Finn and Silverman.

Pro hac vice admission of Finn, Silverman and Skulman was granted Jan. 8, 2018, on Haivision's motion at D.I. 18. (Note: the simultaneous PHV grant to Timothy T. Hsieh — D.I. 17 — was plaintiff-side; Hsieh is Russ August & Kabat, Realtime's counsel, not Haivision's.)

Delaware / local counsel (Greenberg Traurig – Wilmington)

Attorney Role Firm / office Note
Steven T. Margolin (Del. Bar #3110) Local counsel; Notice of Appearance 12/8/2017 (D.I. 13) Greenberg Traurig, LLP, The Nemours Building, 1007 N. Orange St., Suite 1200, Wilmington, DE Shareholder and head of GT's Delaware litigation practice (joined from Ashby & Geddes); Delaware counsel/signatory on the D.I. 24, 43 and 46 briefs.
Benjamin J. Schladweiler (Del. Bar #4601) Local counsel of record on the 2019 filings Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington GT Delaware litigator and frequent local counsel in D. Del. patent cases; listed in the signature blocks of D.I. 43 (Jan. 9, 2019) and D.I. 46 (July 10, 2019).
Samuel L. Moultrie (Del. Bar #5979) Local counsel of record on the 2019 filings Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington Listed alongside Margolin and Schladweiler on D.I. 43 and D.I. 46.
Gregory E. Stuhlman (Del. Bar #4765) Local counsel (initial appearance only) Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington Notice of Appearance 12/8/2017 (D.I. 14); withdrew 3/13/2018.
Brittany M. Giusini Local counsel (initial appearance only) Greenberg Traurig, LLP, Wilmington Notice of Appearance 12/8/2017 (D.I. 15); filed the early extension stipulation (D.I. 16); withdrew 1/19/2018 (D.I. 19).

Caveats and things I could not verify

  • No in-house counsel appeared on the docket. Appearances were entered "on behalf of Haivision Network Video Inc." only, even though the Second Amended Complaint (Feb. 6, 2018) named three Haivision entities (Network Video Inc., Network Video Corp., and Haivision KB Inc.). The GT team's signature blocks read "Counsel for Defendant Haivision Network Video Inc." throughout — no separate Delaware counsel appeared for the affiliate entities.
  • Case outcome is not fully confirmed from the sources I could reach. The December 12, 2018 Report and Recommendation (D.I. 41, Judge Fallon) recommended dismissal of the five Fallon patents under § 101, and D.I. 46 (July 10, 2019) shows Haivision opposing Realtime's late bid to amend. Third-party trackers list the case as closed, and Realtime refiled against Haivision in W.D. Tex. (No. 6:19-cv-00441) on July 23, 2019 — consistent with the Delaware case ending — but I have not located the specific dismissal order, so I can't state the disposition with certainty.
  • Caveat on one signature block: the Jan. 9, 2019 brief (D.I. 43) shows Schladweiler's email as schladweilerb@ramllp.com while the July 2019 brief shows schladweilerb@gtlaw.com; this appears to be an OCR artifact in the Docket Alarm copy. His GT Wilmington affiliation is independently confirmed.
  • Uncertain: whether additional GT Chicago associates or a Texas/California team appeared in the parallel W.D. Tex. action — a web search on that case returned nothing before I stopped. If you need Haivision's later-case roster, that would require a separate PACER pull of No. 6:19-cv-00441.

Primary sources: D.I. 13–19 (appearances, PHV and withdrawals, Dec. 2017–Jan. 2018); D.I. 24 (opening brief in support of motion to dismiss); D.I. 43 (Jan. 9, 2019 response to objections to R&R); D.I. 46 (July 10, 2019 response to motion for leave to amend); D. Del. opinion page for No. 17-1520 (12/12/2018); GT firm bio pages for Finn and Margolin; Legal 500 and Martindale profiles.