Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
Err Content IP v. FuboTV | Patent Lawsuit 1:26-cv-02230

Err Content IP, LLC v. FuboTV, Inc.

1:26-cv-02230 S.D.N.Y. Closed US10721542B2
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 18 Mar 2026 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and closed 10 Apr 2026, with US10721542B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patent involved
US10721542B2
Application no.
US14/396843
Case no.
1:26-cv-02230
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
S.D.N.Y.
Court level
District Court
Case region
New York
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
18 Mar 2026 – 10 Apr 2026
Duration
23 days
Basis of termination
Voluntary dismissal
Products & marks
FuboTV app system and related systems (e.g. https:// https://support.fubo.tv/hc/en-ca/articles/115003444191-How-do-I-cast-Fubo-using-Chromecast/)
Validity challenges
1 on record
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 1:26-cv-02230, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Open this record in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

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
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
US10721542B2 Active App. US14/396843

Method and device for providing a main content and an extra content to a user through reference item

A method for providing a main content and an extra content to a user by accessing said extra content through a reference item. The method includes receiving said main content from a first source and displaying said main content by said first device. Also, based on said reference item, said extra content is retrieved and/or received from a second source and simultaneously displayed together with said main content on said first device. Or said reference item may be forwarded to a second device, and thereby said extra content is retrieved and/or received from a second source by said second device and, simultaneously, the main content is displayed on said first device and the extra content is displayed on said second device.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Active
Granted
21 Jul 2020
Est. expiry
26 Apr 2032
Validity challenges
1 on record90019787 · EPR
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
H04N21/81H04N21/431H04N21/462H04N21/858H04N21/436H04N21/4725H04N5/445H04N21/41H04N21/422H04N5/44
Prosecution counsel
Workman Nydegger
Examiner
ALATA, YASSIN
US10721542B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US10721542B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Counsel of record

AttorneyForRole
David John HoffmanErr Content IP, LLCPlaintiff
Source: case record + Patsnap company data. Attorney names appear as recorded in the docket. Compare both portfolios
Outcome

Basis of termination

From the record · verbatim

“Pursuant to Federal Rule 41 (a)(1)(A)(i), the Plaintiff, Err Content IP, LLC hereby files this notice of voluntary dismissal of this action for all of Plaintiff’s claims as Defendant has not answered the complaint or filed a motion for summary judgement. The Plaintiff agrees that the dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims shall be WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

Case 1:26-cv-02230 · S.D.N.Y. · closed 10 April 2026
Source: case record, verbatim. The quoted paragraph is the basis-of-termination text as filed.

Related cases

Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 1:26-cv-02230?

1:26-cv-02230 is a patent infringement action brought by Err Content IP, LLC against FuboTV, Inc., filed on 18 Mar 2026 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case closed on 10 April 2026.

Which patent was asserted in 1:26-cv-02230?

US10721542B2 (“Method and device for providing a main content and an extra content to a user through reference item”), assigned to ERR CONTENT IP, LLC, currently active. The record also lists FuboTV app system and related systems (e.g. https:// https://support.fubo.tv/hc/en-ca/articles/115003444191-How-do-I-cast-Fubo-using-Chromecast/).

How was case 1:26-cv-02230 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: “Pursuant to Federal Rule 41 (a)(1)(A)(i), the Plaintiff, Err Content IP, LLC hereby files this notice of voluntary dismissal of this action for all of Plaintiff’s claims as Defendant has not answered the complaint or filed a motion for summary judgement. The Plaintiff agrees that the dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims shall be 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 1:26-cv-02230 take?

23 calendar days, from filing on 18 Mar 2026 to closure on 10 April 2026.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:26-cv-02230?

Chief Judge Jennifer H. Rearden presided. David John Hoffman is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Err Content IP.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 1:26-cv-02230 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:26-cv-02230 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.

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.