The PlayStation 4, the PlayStation Network and the games developed and marketed for the platform infringe six videogaming patents dating to 2008, alleged patent entity Bot M8 in a complaint (in Pacer) Monday in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. All the patents originally were assigned to Japanese casino-gaming equipment supplier Aruze or Universal Entertainment, the company that Azure became in 2009, said the complaint, which names as plaintiffs Sony in Japan, the Sony America holding company in New York and the Sony Interactive Entertainment videogaming subsidiary in California. Each of the patents “generally relates to a gaming machine, a gaming information authentication loading device, and a gaming information loading device,” said the complaint, which calls Bot M8 the rightful owner of the patents, but doesn’t say when it bought them. "We don’t comment on pending litigation," emailed Sony America spokesperson Lisa Gephardt Thursday.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals 2-1 reversed a lower court's dismissal of a class-action antitrust complaint against DirecTV and the NFL over the MVPD's Sunday Ticket package (see 1707030002). In the docket 17-56119 opinion Tuesday by Judge Sandra Ikuta and joined by George Steeh, the 9th Circuit said the allegations by the plaintiffs -- primarily sports bars and individual subscribers -- on their face are an adequate allegation of injury to competition, and even though the alleged antitrust conspiracy involves multiple levels of producers, distributors and sales, plaintiffs sufficiently allege an injury that can withstand motion to dismiss. In his dissent, Judge Randy Smith noted the Supreme Court 1977 Illinois Brick says indirect purchasers can't use a pass-on theory to recover damages and don't have standing. He said plaintiffs haven't alleged NFL teams set or conspired to set the price paid by consumers, and their claim for damages stemming from an alleged horizontal agreement among the teams fails that test. Defendants' outside counsel didn't comment Wednesday.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court's grant to SiriusXM of summary judgment (see 1711280013) in a lawsuit against the company alleging violation of the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act (DPPA). SiriusXM was sued after sending unsolicited advertising to the buyer of a used car, using personal information provided by the dealership. In a docket 18-55169 ruling Thursday, Judges Milan Smith, Michelle Friedland and Stanley Bastian said DPPA doesn't apply where the source of personal information is a driver’s license in the possession of its owner and not a state motor vehicles department. It also agreed with the lower court's denial of the plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint to add a Computer Fraud and Abuse Act violation claim. The appellate court agreed there wasn't a viable CFAA claim since there was no qualifying loss. Smith wrote the decision. Plaintiff's outside counsel didn't comment Friday.

Defendants Wilmy Jimenez and Femandez DaRocha are the “controlling operators” of eight branded “streaming services” that carry pirated Dish Network programming, alleged a Dish complaint Monday (in Pacer) in U.S. District Court in Newark. It said Jimenez and DaRocha “are believed to" be "receiving DISH's channels ... for retransmission on Defendants' pirate streaming services without authorization. Defendants have a history of trafficking in similar piracy streaming services that rebroadcast DISH content without authorization.” They advertise and sell subscriptions to their pirate streaming services “through various online forums, domains, and social media websites,” said the complaint. The ads say the services provide “600 plus” channels, “all for $25/month which includes 4 devices per household,” it said. “Defendants provide the end user with instructions and device codes that can be used to add the service to various streaming devices.” The complaint seeks a permanent injunction barring the wrongful conduct, plus an order authorizing Dish to “take possession of and destroy all subscriptions and passcodes to Defendants' pirate streaming services.” It also wants the court to order the removal of the ads from social media. Jimenez and DaRocha could not be reached for comment.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals should deny Qualcomm’s request for a stay in its appeal of an FTC lawsuit over the company's alleged mobile chip monopoly (see 1907160069), the agency said (in Pacer) Thursday. A stay could mean some customers continue paying “unreasonably high royalty rates,” the agency said. In addition to failing to show the public interest favors a stay, Qualcomm failed to show it will suffer “irreparable injury” absent a stay, the agency said: It failed to meet its burden of establishing a likelihood of success on the merits. The lower court correctly said Qualcomm’s “no license, no chips” policy is anticompetitive, the commission said. DOJ backs the company.

Nanosys produces quantum-dot materials at its Silicon Valley facility using processes that infringe a 13-year-old patent on nanocrystal manufacturing, alleged technology developer NNCrystal US in a complaint (in Pacer) Monday in U.S. District Court in Wilmington, Delaware. NNCrystal has “an exclusive license” to U.S. patent 7,105,051, and “the right to sue for infringement,” it said. Nanosys immediately denied the allegations. The patent, granted in September 2006, was assigned to the University of Arkansas, where Xiaogang Peng, one of the patent's three listed inventors, was a chemistry professor. Peng left teaching and founded NNCrystal, formerly NN-Labs, in 2001 to commercialize his inventions, said a company backgrounder. Before the development of the technology described in the patent, “the lack of adequate methods for producing high-quality nanocrystals hampered the development of nanocrystal-based emitters,” said the complaint. Earlier methods “provided irreproducible results, low-quality crystals, high polydispersity, and/or unacceptable levels of impurities,” it said. The patented technology established for the first time that “non-coordinating solvents could be used to produce high-quality, small, highly monodisperse nanocrystals, with the added benefits of a safer, more environmentally friendly, and less costly process,” it said. NNCrystal is entitled to compensatory and treble punitive damages because Nanosys has “willfully infringed” the patent, said the complaint. It also seeks a permanent injunction blocking Nanosys from producing the quantum-dot materials. "Nanosys believes NNCrystal’s claims are without merit and we will vociferously defend ourselves against this lawsuit," emailed CEO Jason Hartlove Monday through spokesperson Jeff Yurek. "As the leading provider of quantum dot materials and technology, Nanosys maintains the world’s largest independent quantum dot patent portfolio. We continue to offer our global customers the best quantum dot solutions in the market.”

Samsung asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals not to disclose “highly confidential” royalty rate-related information in Qualcomm’s FTC antitrust case (see 1907090066). Qualcomm July 8 filed a motion that would make public Samsung’s royalty rate information previously sealed by a lower court. Samsung requested (in Pacer) emergency intervention Friday and a ruling on the request by July 29. If Qualcomm’s motion is granted, Samsung royalty rates “under two different licenses would be disclosed to third parties, including other current and future licensors and competitors who could misuse this information to Samsung’s competitive disadvantage,” Samsung said. The company “would face irreparable harm if its highly confidential effective royalty rates under two separate licenses were released publicly,” it said.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals should stay a lower court’s antitrust judgment (see 1905220035) against Qualcomm as the company seeks to reverse the patent-licensing decision, the defendant asked (in Pacer), posted Tuesday. The chipmaker is looking to avoid renegotiating licensing agreements with phone manufacturers, warning the judgement would "fundamentally change the way it has done business for decades." The FTC sued the chipmaker, claiming Qualcomm has a mobile chip monopoly.

Music labels have given Charter Communications clear notice of hundreds of thousands of its subscribers illegally pirating those labels' songs since 2012 but Charter chose to keep those subscribers and their subscription fees rather than terminate the accounts. That's according to the labels in an opposition to Charter's motion to dismiss the claim for vicarious liability (see 1905290002) filed (docket 19-cv-00874, in Pacer) Monday in U.S. District Court in Denver. They said the ISP has both the right and ability to control users' infringing conduct but receives direct financial benefit from that conduct. Charter outside counsel didn't comment Wednesday.

Roku components such as the Roku Streaming Stick infringe three Wi-Fi patents held by Aegis 11, alleged (in Pacer) the Luxembourg technology company Friday in U.S. District Court in Wilmington, Delaware. The patents were granted in January 2005, February 2017 and December 2017 and were originally assigned to LG, which was “actively involved with standards-development organizations that developed industry standards relevant to LG’s product portfolios, including LG’s Wi-Fi enabled consumer electronic goods,” said the complaint. Aegis 11 acquired two of the patents from LG in April and the third from Sisvel International this month, it said. Aegis 11 “reserves the right” to treat Roku as “an unwilling licensee,” it said. That frees Aegis 11 to seek “the maximum available reasonable royalty damages” to compensate for Roku’s allegedly infringing activities, regardless of IEEE bylaws requiring the licensing of Wi-Fi patents on reasonable and nondiscriminatory terms, it said. Roku didn’t comment Monday.