Diatek Licensing, LLC v. AccuWeather, Inc.
Infringement action filed 29 Dec 2021 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and closed 4 May 2023, with 2 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US7079752B1US8195828B2
- Case no.
- 1:21-cv-11144
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- S.D.N.Y.
- Court level
- District Court
- Case region
- New York
- Chief judge
- John P. Cronan
- Trial level
- First instance
- Filed – Closed
- 29 Dec 2021 – 4 May 2023
- Duration
- 491 days
- Basis of termination
- Voluntary dismissal
- Products & marks
- Method for discontinuous transmission, in sections, of data in a network of distributed stations, as well as a network subscriber station as a requesting appliance for carrying out a method such as this, and a network subscriber station as a source appliance for carrying out a method such as this · Process for recording a scrambled MPEG stream
Check this patent against your own product
Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.
Get an FTO claim chart- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Process for recording a scrambled MPEG stream
A process whereby scrambled data of the stream are, in parallel with their recording (6), descrambled (2, 3) so as to extract (4) therefrom additional data corresponding to information required by at least one function of the special mode or “trick mode” (fast forward, fast rewind, accelerated motion, slow motion, etc.). These additional data are also recorded (6) on the recording medium. Applications relate most particularly to recordings on hard disk or DVD.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 18 Jul 2006
- Earliest priority
- 22 Nov 1999
- Est. expiry
- 20 Jan 2024
- Validity challenges
- 1 on recordIPR2022-00638 · Other · filed by Unified Patents, LLC
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- LEYENDECKER, PHILIPPE
- Classification
- H04N5/76G11B15/04G11B19/04H04N7/167G11B15/00H04N5/85G06F21/10G11B19/00G11B20/10H04N5/781H04N5/783H04N5/91H04N5/92H04N9/804H04N9/82H04N19/00H04N19/467H04N19/70H04N19/88
- Prosecution counsel
- Thomson Licensing Inc.
- Examiner
- TRAN, THAI
Method for discontinuous transmission, in sections, of data in a network of distributed stations, as well as a network subscriber station as a requesting appliance for carrying out a method such as this, and a network subscriber station as a source appliance for carrying out a method such as this
When data streams are being transmitted in a network of distributed stations (10, 20) in which the network subscriber stations are controlled on the basis of the Internet Protocol, a resource (such as a file) can very often be transmitted using the HTTP-GET method. However, this does not support discontinuous transmission, in sections, of data, as is required, for example, in the case of trick modes (search processes) for a video film. The invention describes an extension to the known HTTP-GET method, such that this application is likewise possible. For this purpose, additional parameters relating to the required search are transmitted to the source appliance (10) in the HTTP-GET request. The source appliance (10) then sends the respective data sections for the search.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 5 Jun 2012
- Earliest priority
- 14 Nov 2003
- Est. expiry
- 8 Jan 2028
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- HUTTER, INGO
- Classification
- G06F15/16G06F13/00H04L12/16H04L29/06H04L29/08H04N7/173H04N21/2387H04Q9/00
- Examiner
- STRANGE, AARON
Parties of record
Diatek Licensing, LLC
- Core tech
- H04N5/76G11B15/04G11B19/04H04N7/167
- Counsel
- Cortney Alexander
- Firm
- Kent & Risley LLC
AccuWeather, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Joseph Michael Drayton
- Firm
- Cooley LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Cortney Alexander | Diatek Licensing, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Joseph Michael Drayton | AccuWeather, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“On May 1, 2023, Plaintiff was informed by a third party that Diatek Licensing LLC’s infringement theories presented in the Second Amended Complaint filed in this case rely on technology provided to AccuWeather, Inc. by the third party and that the third party received a license to the asserted patents in January 2023. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant having not yet filed or served upon Plaintiff either an answer or a motion for summary judgment, Plaintiff hereby dismisses this action without prejudice.”
Case 1:21-cv-11144 · S.D.N.Y. · closed 4 May 2023
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 1:21-cv-11144?
1:21-cv-11144 is a patent infringement action brought by Diatek Licensing, LLC against AccuWeather, Inc., filed on 29 Dec 2021 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case closed on 4 May 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 1:21-cv-11144?
US7079752B1 (“Process for recording a scrambled MPEG stream”), assigned to DIATEK LICENSING LLC, currently inactive; US8195828B2 (“Method for discontinuous transmission, in sections, of data in a network of distributed stations, as well as a network subscriber station as a requesting appliance for carrying out a method such as this, and a network subscriber station as a source appliance for carrying out a method such as this”), assigned to DIATEK LICENSING LLC, currently inactive. The record also lists Method for discontinuous transmission, in sections, of data in a network of distributed stations, as well as a network subscriber station as a requesting appliance for carrying out a method such as this, and a network subscriber station as a source appliance for carrying out a method such as this and Process for recording a scrambled MPEG stream.
How was case 1:21-cv-11144 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: “On May 1, 2023, Plaintiff was informed by a third party that Diatek Licensing LLC’s infringement theories presented in the Second Amended Complaint filed in this case rely on technology provided to AccuWeather, Inc. by the third party and that the third party received a license to the asserted patents in January 2023. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant having not yet filed or served upon Plaintiff either an answer or a motion for summary judgment, Plaintiff hereby dismisses this action without prejudice.”
What does dismissal without prejudice mean?
A dismissal without prejudice ends this action but leaves the claims alive — the plaintiff may file them again later, subject to the limitation period.
How long did case 1:21-cv-11144 take?
491 calendar days, from filing on 29 Dec 2021 to closure on 4 May 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:21-cv-11144?
Chief Judge John P. Cronan presided. Cortney Alexander is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Diatek Licensing. Joseph Michael Drayton appears for defendant AccuWeather.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:21-cv-11144 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.
Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.
No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.
No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.