Netflix, Inc. v. Rovi Corp.

Good Law
114 F. Supp. 3d 927·2015 WL 4345069·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92778
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 15, 2015Case No. 11-cv-6591 PJHCalifornia10,847 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hamilton, J.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment came on for hearing before this court on March 25, 2015. Plaintiff (and counter-defendants) Netflix, Inc. (“plaintiff’ or “Netflix”) appeared through its counsel, Ashok Ramani, Tina Sessions, Ed Bayley, Michael Kwun, and Sharif Jacob. Defen-' dants (and counter-claimants) Rovi Corporation, Rovi Technologies Corporation, Rovi Guides, Inc., United Video Properties, Aptiv Digital Inc., and Starsight Telecast, Inc. (referred to collectively as “defendants” or “Rovi”) appeared through théir counsel, Yar Chaikovsky, Hong Lin, and Amol Parikh. Having read the papers' filed in conjunction with the motion and carefully considered the arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the court hereby GRANTS plaintiffs motion as follows.

BACKGROUND

..This is a patent case. Plaintiff Netflix originally filed a declaratory judgment action against defendants, seeking declaratory judgments of non-infringement and invalidity of five Rovi patents. Rovi then filed counterclaims asserting infringement of those five patents, as well as three additional patents (for a total of eight patents).…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.