Netflex, Inc. Patent litigation record

Company 38 cases

38 cases on record naming Netflex, Inc.: 12 as claimant, 26 as respondent. Each row links to that case’s full docket record.

Profile this company in Eureka
Litigation indexPatsnap Litigation Data··Docket source: PACER

38 cases on record

Cases on record
38
As claimant
12
As respondent
26
Patents held
Not recorded
Core tech
Not recorded
Case no.PartiesRoleCourtFiledDurationOutcome
3:25-cv-03738 Netflex, Inc. v. Broadcom, Inc. Plaintiff N.D. Cal. 29 Apr 2025 218 d Judgment on the merits for Defendant
25-1588 Gotv Streaming, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 26 Mar 2025 456 d Voluntary dismissal
25-1589 Gotv Streaming, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 26 Mar 2025 456 d Appeal Dismissed
5:24-cv-09324 Netflex, Inc. v. Broadcom, Inc. Plaintiff N.D. Cal. 23 Dec 2024 270 d Dismissed with Prejudice
25-1131 Videolabs, Inc. v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 30 Oct 2024 559 d Unpatentable
24-1744 Netflex, Inc. v. Gotv Streaming, LLC Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 26 Apr 2024 654 d Closed
24-1669 Gotv Streaming, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 9 Apr 2024 671 d Closed
1:24-cv-01789 Touchmusic Entertainment LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant N.D. Ill. 3 Mar 2024 474 d Case Dismissed
24-1082 CA, Inc. v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 26 Oct 2023 642 d Unpatentable
23-1836 Netflex, Inc. v. Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 1 May 2023 779 d Appeal Dismissed in Part
23-1815 Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 28 Apr 2023 671 d Unpatentable
23-1817 Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 28 Apr 2023 782 d Vacated and Remanded
23-1750 Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 14 Apr 2023 572 d Appeal Dismissed
21-1788 Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 3 Mar 2023 236 d Voluntary dismissal
22-2208 Netflex, Inc. v. Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 15 Sep 2022 543 d Patent Upheld
3:22-cv-05003 WAG Acquisition, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant N.D. Cal. 1 Sep 2022 202 d Case Stayed
22-2168 Netflex, Inc. v. Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 31 Aug 2022 692 d Vacated and Remanded
22-2147 Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 24 Aug 2022 597 d Appeal Dismissed
22-2041 Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 19 Jul 2022 597 d Unpatentable
22-1936 Netflex, Inc. v. Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 24 Jun 2022 760 d Vacated and Remanded
22-1800 Netflex, Inc. v. Avago Technologies International Sales Pte. Limited Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 17 May 2022 664 d Patent Upheld
22-1764 Broadcom Corporation v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 10 May 2022 408 d Appeal Dismissed
22-1481 Divx, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant Fed. Cir. 17 Feb 2022 425 d Unpatentable
22-1204 Netflex, Inc. v. Divx, LLC Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 1 Dec 2021 693 d Unpatentable
22-1138 Netflex, Inc. v. Divx, LLC Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 10 Nov 2021 670 d Appeal Dismissed in Part
22-1043 Netflex, Inc. v. Divx, LLC Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 13 Oct 2021 561 d Appeal Dismissed in Part
22-1203 Netflex, Inc. v. Divx, LLC Plaintiff Fed. Cir. 1 Oct 2021 754 d Unpatentable
3:20-cv-04677 Broadcom Corporation v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant N.D. Cal. 14 Jul 2020 1728 d Judgment on the merits for Defendant
2:19-cv-01602 Divx, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant C.D. Cal. 5 Mar 2019 2620 d Judgment on the merits for Defendant
2:16-cv-05807 Max Blu Technologies, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant C.D. Cal. 4 Aug 2016 116 d Procedural Outcome
4:16-cv-00243 Digital Media Technologies, Inc. v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant N.D. Fla. 25 Apr 2016 434 d Likely Settlement
2:15-cv-01905 XBranch, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant E.D. Tex. 30 Nov 2015 175 d Likely Settlement
3:15-cv-02160 Convergent Media Solutions LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant N.D. Tex. 26 Jun 2015 668 d Likely Settlement
4:15-cv-00597 iMTX Strategic, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant N.D. Cal. 6 Feb 2015 669 d Likely Settlement
3:14-cv-01525 Opentv, Inc. v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant N.D. Cal. 2 Apr 2014 315 d Likely Settlement
1:14-cv-00365 Copy Protection, LLC v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant D. Del. 20 Mar 2014 641 d Likely Settlement
1:14-cv-00314 CRFD Research, Inc. v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant D. Del. 7 Mar 2014 1516 d Voluntary dismissal
1:12-cv-01743 Trans Video Electronics, Ltd. v. Netflex, Inc. Defendant D. Del. 20 Dec 2012 929 d Likely Settlement
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Cases naming Netflex, Inc. in the current snapshot. Run this in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

See what Netflex is protecting

Portfolio, claim scope and where its coverage is thin. Every answer cites the records behind it.

Analyse this portfolio
10,000 free credits to start

About this summary. This page summarises the litigation records within the coverage and snapshot dates stated here. Counts describe records in that dataset and do not, by themselves, establish the conduct, litigation success or legal position of any person or organisation.

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. The filing of a claim is not a court finding, and a docket marked “closed” does not by itself establish infringement, validity, settlement or a decision on the merits.

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.

Third-party names and marks. Party, attorney, judge and company names appear for identification only. Company names may be trademarks of their owners; their appearance does not, by itself, imply affiliation with or endorsement by Patsnap.

Corrections and privacy requests. To report an inaccurate record or attribution, use the “Report an incorrect record” link on this page. For requests concerning your personal information, including, where applicable, the rights to access, rectify, erase, restrict or object to processing, use the “Privacy request” link. We assess requests under applicable law. See our Privacy Policy for details of this processing.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.