Book a demo
ScorpCast v. Manica Media — Interactive Video Patent Infringement | PatSnap
Explore in Eureka
Case ID2:20-cv-00200
FiledJun 2020
ClosedJan 2024
Patent Litigation

ScorpCast v. Manica Media: Interactive Video Patent Suit Dismissed With Prejudice

ScorpCast LLC, doing business as HaulStars, brought a patent infringement action in the Eastern District of Texas against Manica Media SL and co-defendants over US9965780B2, an interactive video technology patent. The case — one of at least six coordinated actions filed simultaneously — resolved via joint motion and was dismissed with prejudice after approximately 3.5 years of litigation.

Resolution time
1310days
Duration from filing to dismissal order
Patents asserted
1
US9965780B2 — interactive video platform technology
Outcome
Dismissed with Prejudice
With prejudice — ScorpCast cannot refile the same claims against these defendants
Cost ruling
Own Costs
Each party bears its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees — no fee award
Published by PatSnap Insights Team · Verified by PatSnap Eureka Data
Case overview

Coordinated interactive video patent campaign ends with prejudice dismissal

ScorpCast LLC, operating under the trade name HaulStars, filed suit on June 16, 2020 in the Eastern District of Texas against Manica Media SL and a co-defendant identified as Mg, asserting infringement of US9965780B2. The patent covers interactive video technology, and the accused products included Pornhub and related adult video hub sites. The case was assigned to Chief Judge Rodney Gilstrap, one of the most active patent judges in the United States, and formed part of a coordinated wave of at least six substantially parallel actions filed by ScorpCast around the same date.

The case closed on January 17, 2024, when the Court granted a joint motion to dismiss filed by ScorpCast and all defendants — including Boutique Media PTY LTD, All 4 Health SRL, KB Productions LLC, Manica Media SL, Oanasun Entertainment SRL, and Bravomax Services Limited. The dismissal was entered with prejudice, meaning ScorpCast is permanently barred from re-asserting the same claims under US9965780B2 against these specific defendants. The Court ordered each party to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees, suggesting a negotiated resolution rather than a court-imposed outcome.

The case ran for approximately 1,310 days before resolution — consistent with complex multi-defendant patent litigation in the Eastern District of Texas. The joint motion and mutual cost-bearing arrangement strongly suggest the parties reached a private settlement, though no financial terms are disclosed in the public record. What remains unknown is whether any licensing agreements were executed, whether the defendants obtained covenants not to sue on related patents, and whether ScorpCast’s parallel actions in the same docket cluster resolved on equivalent terms.

Case at a glance
Case no.2:20-cv-00200
CourtTexas Eastern
JudgeRodney Gilstrap
FiledJune 16, 2020
ClosedJanuary 17, 2024
Duration1310 days
OutcomeDismissed with Prejudice
Verdict causeInfringement Action
BasisDismissed with Prejudice
Prior Art Intelligence
See what prior art exists on this patent.
Eureka scans millions of patents and papers to surface prior art that may have invalidated these claims before costly litigation begins.
Check Prior Art
Case data sourced from PACER / Texas Eastern District Court via PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore similar cases ↗
Case timeline

Filing to filing in 1310 days

Duration from filing to dismissal order

Case timeline: Complaint filed May 13 2025, APR–MAY — 1310 days total Horizontal timeline showing the three key events in ScorpCast, LLC v Manica Media, SL from filing to voluntary dismissal. Source: PACER, Texas Eastern District Court. JUN 16 2020 Complaint filed APR–MAY 2020 Pre-trial proceedings JAN 17 2024 Ongoing in progress 1310 DAYS TOTAL
Parties and representation

Full party and counsel information

RoleNameTypeDetail
PlaintiffScorpCast, LLCCompanyInteractive video patent licensing entity (HaulStars) — holder of US9965780B2Search in Eureka ↗
DefendantManica Media, SLCompanyManica Media SL — operator of adult video streaming hub sites including PornhubSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselTodd Eric LandisAttorneyCounsel for ScorpCast, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Defendant counselChristopher GersonAttorneyCounsel for Manica Media, SLSearch in Eureka ↗
Defendant counselFrank M. GasparoAttorneyCounsel for Manica Media, SLSearch in Eureka ↗
Defendant counselJaewon LeeAttorneyCounsel for Manica Media, SLSearch in Eureka ↗
Defendant counselJonathan Mark SharretAttorneyCounsel for Manica Media, SLSearch in Eureka ↗
Defendant counselMelissa Richards SmithAttorneyCounsel for Manica Media, SLSearch in Eureka ↗
Presiding judgeJudge Rodney GilstrapChief JudgeTexas Eastern District Court — Chief JudgeSearch in Eureka ↗
Official verdict

Stipulation of dismissal — official text

“Before the Court is the Joint Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) filed by Plaintiff Scorpcast LLC d/b/a HaulStars and Defendants Boutique Media PTY LTD, All 4 Health SRL, KB Productions, LLC, Manica Media SL, Oanasun Entertainment SRL, Bravomax Services Limited (Dkt. No. 190.) In the Motion, the parties represent that the above-captioned case has been resolved and request dismissal of the above-captioned action WITH prejudice. (Id. at 1.) Having considered the Motion, the Court finds that it should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly, all claims and causes of action asserted between Plaintiff and Defendants in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees. All pending requests for relief in the above-captioned case not explicitly granted herein are DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE cases 2:20-cv-193, 2:20-cv-192, 2:20-cv-198, 2:20-cv-200, 2:20-cv-203, and 2:20-cv-210 as no parties or claims remain.”
Source: PACER Docket, Case 2:20-cv-00200, Texas Eastern District Court · Filed January 17, 2024

The order grants a joint motion and enters dismissal with prejudice across all claims and causes of action between the parties. Critically, it names six case numbers closed simultaneously, confirming this was a coordinated resolution of a multi-action campaign. The ‘each party bears its own costs’ provision signals no prevailing party was designated and no § 285 fees were sought. No merits findings were made — the patent’s validity and the defendants’ infringement exposure remain untested by any published court ruling.

PACER case 2:20-cv-00200 · Public docket record Explore in Eureka ↗
Patent at issue

US9965780B2 — Interactive Video Engagement Technology

Publication No.US9965780B2
Application No.US15/688566
Patent details
AssigneeScorpCast, LLC
ProductUS9965780B2 — interactive video platform, hub site deployment
Publication typeB2 — grant (with prior publication)
Cited in actionJune 16, 2020

US9965780B2 covers interactive video technology — broadly, systems and methods that enable user engagement actions within or upon a video stream. The application number US15/688566 indicates a direct national stage or continuation filing, and the patent was asserted against online video platforms described as ‘hub sites’, including Pornhub. The technical domain sits at the intersection of video delivery infrastructure and user-interaction overlays — a commercially significant area as streaming platforms increasingly incorporate clickable, shoppable, or choice-driven video features.

The strategic value of this patent lies in its potential applicability across any video platform deploying interactive elements — not merely adult content sites. The fact that ScorpCast filed six coordinated actions simultaneously suggests a deliberate monetisation strategy targeting an entire sector rather than a single competitor. For companies in the broader video streaming, e-commerce video, or interactive advertising space, US9965780B2 represents a potential blocking patent that warrants proactive Freedom-to-Operate analysis, particularly given the with-prejudice resolution that kept the patent alive against future defendants.

Patent data sourced from USPTO via PatSnap Eureka patent database Search patent records in Eureka ↗
Freedom to operate

Should your product team run an FTO against US9965780B2?

Any company deploying interactive video features — including clickable overlays, user-choice branching, shoppable video, or engagement-triggered content — should consider whether US9965780B2 reads on their implementation. The coordinated filing pattern and multi-year litigation survivability of this patent suggests it is not a paper tiger. R&D teams building video interactivity features, and product managers at streaming platforms, OTT services, or ad-tech companies, should treat this patent as a live risk rather than a resolved one.

PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent enables your team to map the claims of US9965780B2 against your product architecture in minutes — identifying specific claim elements that may overlap with your deployment. Eureka’s claim monitoring tools can also alert you to continuation filings or related applications in the same family that ScorpCast or HaulStars may assert next. Given the coordinated enforcement history, early detection is materially cheaper than late-stage litigation response in E.D. Texas.

PatSnap Eureka FTO Search

Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US9965780B2 to assess your product’s exposure

Run FTO in Eureka →
Related litigation

Similar interactive video patent cases in E.D. Texas and beyond

PatSnap Eureka tracks related litigation across truck body equipment, vehicle accessories, and comparable infringement actions in the Georgia district system.

🔍
Access 40+ similar cases in PatSnap Eureka
ScorpCast, LLC patent enforcement history, Texas Eastern case history, ScorpCast, LLC’s full IP portfolio, and comparable case analysis
HaulStars v. Boutique MediaInteractive video § 101 rulingsStreaming platform PAE casesE.D. Texas hub site litigation
Unlock similar cases in Eureka →
Strategic implications

What this case signals for the interactive video IP landscape

A six-case simultaneous dismissal with prejudice in E.D. Texas suggests a structured licensing resolution — with lessons for any platform streaming interactive content.

Adult video platforms face credible interactive video patent exposure

ScorpCast’s ability to sustain litigation for over three years across six coordinated actions in E.D. Texas — before achieving a resolution that includes with-prejudice dismissals — suggests US9965780B2 carried sufficient claim credibility to compel negotiation. Operators of interactive or choice-driven video platforms should assess their exposure to this patent family before a demand letter arrives.

E.D. Texas remains a preferred venue for coordinated patent assertion campaigns

Filing six parallel actions simultaneously in the Eastern District of Texas under Chief Judge Gilstrap is a deliberate strategic choice. The district’s patent-friendly procedural history and experienced bench make it a high-pressure venue for defendants. Companies receiving demand letters citing E.D. Texas should treat venue risk as a material factor in early litigation cost-benefit analysis.

🔒
Full strategic analysis in PatSnap Eureka
Includes sector IP trends, Judge Treadwell’s case history, and FTO risk assessment for the truck equipment space
IPR filing historyRelated continuationsComparable licensing outcomes
Unlock full analysis →
Analysis powered by PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore in Eureka ↗
Frequently asked questions

ScorpCast v Manica — key questions answered

Still have questions? PatSnap Eureka can answer them instantly from patent and litigation data. Ask Eureka ↗
PatSnap Eureka

Run your own interactive video patent risk analysis

Use PatSnap Eureka to map US9965780B2 claims against your product, monitor for related continuations, and track ScorpCast’s enforcement activity across jurisdictions. Early FTO analysis is significantly cheaper than E.D. Texas discovery.

Ask anything about this case.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.
Powered by PatSnap Eureka
Link copied to clipboard

Help us improve this page

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