Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_11-cv-06591/USCOURTS-cand-4_11-cv-06591-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 830
Nature of Suit: Patent
Cause of Action: 35:271 Patent Infringement

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

NETFLIX, INC., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ROVI CORPORATION, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 11-cv-06591-PJH (DMR) 

ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL 

SUBMISSION RE: JOINT DISCOVERY 

LETTER 

Re: Dkt. No. 122 

Before the court is a joint discovery letter filed by Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant 

Netflix Inc. and Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff Rovi. [Docket No. 122.] In the letter, Netflix 

moves to strike “the definitions of and all references thereafter to ‘Netflix Hardware,’ ‘Netflix 

Software,’ and ‘Netflix Hardware/Software’” from Rovi’s proposed Infringement Contentions 

Letter at 2. 

Netflix has only identified a handful of specific instances in which these terms appear in 

the Infringement Contentions: (1) the introductory definition of those terms in Rovi’s 

Infringement Contentions, see Letter Ex. 1 at 4; (2) the identification of all “Netflix 

Hardware/Software” as the Accused Instrumentalities for the ’929 Patent, see Letter Ex. 1 at 4; (3) 

the contention that “Netflix Hardware/Software” meets the “receiver” limitation of Claim 1 of the 

’929 Patent, see Letter Ex. 1-A at 1; (4) the contention that “Netflix Hardware/Software” meets 

the “processor” limitation of Claim 1 of the ’929 Patent, see Letter Ex. 1-A at 4; (5) the contention 

that “Netflix Hardware/Software” meets the “method for use in a client-server interactive 

television program guide system for tracking a user’s viewing history” limitation of Claims 1 and 

6 of the ’762 Patent, see Letter Ex. 1-B at 2; and (6) the contention that “Netflix 

Hardware/Software” meets the “method . . . wherein the media is stored in a media-on-demand 

Case 4:11-cv-06591-PJH Document 141 Filed 03/24/15 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

ser

Ha

Inf

the

and

stri

“N

wit

wit

Inf

Ne

of w

Co

unr

con

Da

rver” limitati

It uncle

ardware,” “N

fringement C

e Accused In

d other insta

ike the introd

By Ma

Netflix Hardw

th citations t

th the court, 

fringement C

etflix shall pr

which paten

Netflix 

ntentions th

redacted cop

ntext to bette

IT IS S

ated: March 2

ion of the ’9

ear whether N

Netflix Softw

Contentions, 

nstrumentalit

nces of the t

ductory defi

rch 25, 2015

ware,” “Netfl

to Rovi’s pro

and provide

Contentions i

rovide conte

nt the content

shall also in

at it does no

pies lodged w

er evaluate w

SO ORDER

24, 2015 

06 Patent, se

Netflix move

ware,” or “Ne

including, e

ties for the ’7

terms in the 

nition of tho

5 at 3:00 p.m

flix Software

oposed Infrin

e a copy to R

in which the

xt or annota

tions accuse

ndicate whet

ot find object

with chambe

whether and 

RED. 

2

ee Letter Ex

es to strike o

etflix Hardw

e.g., the iden

762, ’906, ’9

claim charts

ose terms in 

m., Netflix s

e,” or “Netfli

ngement Con

Rovi, of unre

ese terms app

ation as appro

. 

her there are

tionable. If 

ers) to five ex

under what 

___

. 1-C at 13.

only these or

ware/Softwar

ntification of

962, and ’70

s. It is also u

Rovi’s Infrin

shall file a li

ix Hardware

ntentions. N

edacted copie

pear. If it is 

opriate so th

e any uses of

so, Netflix s

xamples of s

circumstanc

__________

 Un

r all instance

re” from Rov

f all “Netflix 

09 Patents, se

unclear whet

ngement Co

st of every in

e/Software” t

Netflix shall 

es of only th

not clear fro

he court may

f those terms

shall provide

such uses so

ces the terms

___________

Donna M. 

nited States M

es of the term

vi’s proposed

Hardware/S

ee Letter Ex

ther Netflix m

ontentions. 

nstance of th

that it seeks 

simultaneou

he pages in th

om the page 

y determine w

s in Rovi’s I

e citations (a

o that the cou

s are inappro

__________

Ryu 

Magistrate J

ms “Netflix 

d amended 

Software” as

x. 1 at 4-11, 

moves to 

he terms 

to strike, 

usly lodge 

he 

alone, 

which claim

Infringement

and 

urt has 

opriate. 

________ 

Judge 

t

Case 4:11-cv-06591-PJH Document 141 Filed 03/24/15 Page 2 of 2