WinView IP Holdings, LLC v. FanDuel, Inc. et al.

WinView IP Holdings, LLC, identified as a patent assertion entity (PAE) or non-practicing entity (NPE), has initiated a patent infringement lawsuit against FanDuel, Inc., FanDuel Group, Inc., and FanDuel Group Parent LLC. WinView IP Holdings, LLC is a Delaware-based company that specializes in real-time sports gaming technologies and manages an extensive patent portfolio, which it acquired in September 2023 as part of a settlement related to a prior dispute. The defendants, FanDuel, Inc., FanDuel Group, Inc., and FanDuel Group Parent LLC, are prominent players in the online gaming industry, operating platforms for daily fantasy sports (DFS) and sports betting, where users can place wagers on various sports events and engage in fantasy contests.

The lawsuit alleges that FanDuel's mobile and online sports betting platforms, including their offerings for live, in-play wagering, micro-betting, online casino gaming, and Daily Fantasy Sports, unlawfully incorporate WinView's patented technologies. The specific patent at issue in this case is US Patent 11451883, which is one of nine patents WinView is asserting in its broader campaign against FanDuel. This patent broadly covers methods and systems designed to enhance real-time user engagement in online sports gaming, including innovations related to low-latency streaming, real-time betting synchronization, and fairness-enhancing mechanisms in sports wagering.

The case, assigned number 3:25-cv-01146, was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on February 10, 2025. Magistrate Judge Justin T. Quinn has signed orders in the case. The District of New Jersey is a pertinent venue for this litigation as FanDuel maintains a physical business presence and regular places of business, including retail sportsbook locations, within the state, which establishes personal jurisdiction. This litigation is notable as it represents a "reboot" of earlier patent infringement cases filed by WinView against FanDuel (and DraftKings) in 2021, which were administratively terminated pending inter partes review (IPR) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The current campaign, backed by litigation funding, highlights a strategic NPE assertion pattern targeting major players in the rapidly growing online gaming and sports betting market. The outcome could have significant industry impact, potentially leading to substantial damages or requiring FanDuel to modify its core betting platforms.

The patent infringement litigation WinView IP Holdings, LLC v. FanDuel, Inc. et al. (Case No. 3:25-cv-01146) was filed in the New Jersey District Court on February 10, 2025, and is currently active.

Here is a chronological overview of the key legal developments and outcomes:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings:

  • 2025-02-10: WinView IP Holdings, LLC filed a patent infringement complaint against FanDuel, Inc., FanDuel Group, Inc., FanDuel Group Parent LLC, Flutter Entertainment PLC, and Betfair Interactive US LLC in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The lawsuit alleges infringement of nine U.S. patents: 11,185,770, 11,235,237, 11,338,189, 11,451,883, 11,678,020, 11,736,771, 11,918,880, 11,951,402, and 12,005,349. WinView claims FanDuel unlawfully incorporated its patented technologies into their sports betting platforms, including live, in-play wagering, micro-betting, online casino gaming, and Daily Fantasy Sports.
  • 2025-03-31: Defendant Flutter Entertainment PLC was dismissed from the case without prejudice. [cite: 16 in original reference]
  • Specific details regarding FanDuel's answer or any counterclaims filed in this particular case (3:25-cv-01146) were not found in the publicly available search results.

• Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

  • No information on substantive pre-trial motions, such as motions to dismiss, transfer, or stay pending IPR, specific to the 3:25-cv-01146 case, was identified in the available search results.

• Claim Construction (Markman):

  • Given the recent filing date of February 2025, the case has not yet reached the claim construction (Markman) stage.

• Discovery Milestones:

  • No specific discovery milestones with strategic significance for this case were found.

• Trial Events, Verdict, and Post-Trial Motions:

  • The case is still in its early stages and has not reached trial.

• Settlement, Dismissal, Judgment, or Appeal – Current Posture:

  • The case remains active in the New Jersey District Court.
  • It is important to note that a separate Federal Circuit appeal (Case No. 24-1652) between WinView IP Holdings, LLC and FanDuel, Inc., concerning U.S. Patent No. 10,721,543 B2, was voluntarily dismissed on August 19, 2024. This earlier appeal pertained to prior litigation and not the currently active 3:25-cv-01146 case. [cite: 5 in original reference]

• Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

  • FanDuel has a history of challenging WinView's patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in previous litigations. For example, FanDuel petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of U.S. Patent No. 8,771,058, owned by Interactive Games LLC (a related entity to WinView), with the PTAB invalidating several claims but upholding one. This decision was affirmed by the Federal Circuit on July 29, 2020.
  • However, dedicated searches for IPRs or PGRs specifically targeting the nine patents asserted in the current 2025 lawsuit (including 11451883, 11185770, etc.) by FanDuel or related entities did not yield any publicly reported petitions or proceedings at the USPTO PTAB in the available search results. This suggests that as of May 2026, no such parallel proceedings on these specific patents have been publicly instituted or widely reported.

The initial search for "WinView IP Holdings, LLC v. FanDuel, Inc. et al. 3:25-cv-01146 D.N.J. docket counsel for plaintiff" did not directly yield a list of counsel for the plaintiff from a PACER-like source. PacerMonitor indicates the case was filed on February 10, 2025, but doesn't list attorneys.

Since direct docket information for counsel isn't immediately available from the initial search, I will refine my approach. I need to find the actual complaint or a notice of appearance. Without direct access to PACER, I'll try to find legal news articles or firm press releases related to this specific case that might name the plaintiff's counsel. If that fails, I'll broaden my search for WinView's general patent litigation counsel, as they often use the same firms across different cases.

However, the current search results provided several individuals named "Michael R. Smith", "Timothy Kelly", "Kenneth Rubenstein", and "Ryan C. Santomauro" with various firms and practice areas. None of these immediately connect to patent litigation for WinView IP Holdings. It's crucial not to assume these individuals are the counsel without a direct link to this case or WinView's representation. The search results for Michael R. Smith, for example, show a litigator focusing on Native American law, business, and criminal matters, real estate and commercial litigation, and general liability. Similarly, the Timothy Kelly results include real estate litigation, personal injury and workers' compensation, tax litigation, and complex environmental and antitrust litigation. Kenneth Rubenstein results involve bankruptcy, criminal defense, and probate, as well as asset protection and estate planning. Ryan Santomauro appears to be a finance executive, not an attorney. This indicates these are not the correct attorneys for this patent case.

Therefore, I need to execute new searches specifically targeting the counsel for WinView IP Holdings, LLC in patent litigation, or for this specific case.

Updated plan:

1. Search for court filings or news related to WinView IP Holdings, LLC v. FanDuel, Inc. et al. (3:25-cv-01146, D.N.J.) that explicitly name the plaintiff's attorneys.
2. If direct information for this specific case is still elusive, I will search for WinView IP Holdings, LLC's counsel in other patent infringement cases to identify firms they commonly use, and then check those firms for attorneys admitted to the D.N.J. and specializing in patent litigation.The search results provide direct information from the complaint filed in the case WinView IP Holdings, LLC v. FanDuel, Inc. et al. (3:25-cv-01146, D.N.J.).

The complaint, filed on February 10, 2025, identifies the attorneys for Plaintiff WinView IP Holdings, LLC. Additionally, news articles confirm the representation by the identified firm and lead counsel.

Here is the counsel of record representing the plaintiff(s):

• Name: Jonathan S. Caplan

  • Role: Attorney for Plaintiff (likely lead counsel, as listed first on the complaint).
  • Firm: Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
  • Office Location: New York, NY
  • Relevant patent litigation experience: Caplan is listed on the complaint for a patent infringement case, indicating experience in this area. Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP is explicitly stated as representing WinView Technology in these matters, with Paul Andre, Co-Chair of the firm's patent litigation practice, leading the legal team. While Caplan is the attorney listed on the complaint, Paul Andre is mentioned as leading the broader legal team, suggesting Caplan is a key member.

• Name: Paul Andre

  • Role: Co-Chair of Patent Litigation Practice, leading the legal team for WinView.
  • Firm: Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
  • Office Location: Not explicitly stated for Andre in the search results, but the firm's main contact for the complaint is New York, NY.
  • Relevant patent litigation experience: Paul Andre is Co-Chair of Kramer Levin's patent litigation practice and is noted as leading the legal team for WinView Technology in these patent infringement lawsuits against DraftKings and FanDuel. He is a prominent patent litigator.

It is important to note that Jonathan S. Caplan is explicitly listed on the complaint document as an attorney for the plaintiff, along with his firm and contact information. Paul Andre is identified in news articles as leading the legal team from Kramer Levin for WinView in these suits. It is common for a firm's chair of a practice group to oversee significant cases, even if another partner is the primary signatory on initial filings.

No other attorneys were explicitly named in the provided search results as counsel of record for the plaintiff in this specific case. Given the firm, it is likely there are other attorneys involved, but they are not identified as counsel of record in the provided snippets. The query asked for counsel of record, and these are the most directly identified.

As of the current date, May 29, 2026, the counsel of record representing FanDuel, Inc., FanDuel Group, Inc., and FanDuel Group Parent LLC in WinView IP Holdings, LLC v. FanDuel, Inc. et al. (3:25-cv-01146) is not explicitly detailed in the provided search results for this specific case.

However, historical patent litigation involving FanDuel provides insight into firms that have represented them in similar matters. In previous patent infringement cases, FanDuel has been represented by:

• Erise IP

  • Lead Counsel: Eric Buresh (not explicitly stated as lead counsel in this specific case, but argued for FanDuel in a past Federal Circuit appeal)
  • Firm: Erise IP (office location not specified in the provided results, but firm is known for intellectual property litigation)
  • Experience Note: Eric Buresh of Erise IP argued for FanDuel in a Federal Circuit appeal concerning a remote gambling patent.

• Morris James LLP

  • Firm: Morris James (office location not specified in the provided results, but firm is based in Delaware)
  • Experience Note: Morris James represented FanDuel in a Delaware District Court patent case where FanDuel successfully obtained a judgment on the pleadings.

It is important to note that these are based on past litigation and may not reflect the current counsel in the 3:25-cv-01146 case. A direct PACER search for counsel appearances in this specific, active case would provide the most up-to-date and authoritative information. The available Justia Dockets entry for the case primarily lists the plaintiff's counsel and pro hac vice admissions as of March 27, 2025.