JBF Interlude 2009 Ltd Israel v. Quibi Holdings LLC

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: JBF Interlude 2009 Ltd. (Israel) and Interlude U.S., Inc. d/b/a eko (Delaware)
  • Defendant: Quibi Holdings, LLC, et al. (Delaware)
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: Goodwin Procter LLP
• Case Identification: 2:20-cv-02250, C.D. Cal., 01/28/2021
• Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper as Defendant Quibi's headquarters are in Los Angeles, California, within the judicial district.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s "Turnstyle" video feature infringes patents related to adaptive video streaming, interactive video loading, and media stream synchronization.
• Technical Context: The technology addresses the challenge of providing a seamless, high-quality video experience on mobile devices, which are frequently rotated between portrait and landscape orientations.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint details extensive pre-litigation history, including a March 2017 meeting where Plaintiff's technology was demonstrated to Defendant's founder. It alleges that two of Defendant's key employees were previously employed by Snapchat, where they were given access to Plaintiff's trade secrets under an NDA. Plaintiff alleges it put Defendant on notice of its pending patent applications in March 2019 and sent a cease-and-desist letter in January 2020. The complaint also raises issues of incorrect inventorship and ownership of Defendant's own U.S. Patent No. 10,554,926, which is alleged to cover the same technology.

Case Timeline

Date	Event
2012-04-02	’220 Patent Application Filing Date
2013-03-15	’066 Patent Priority Date
2013-12-03	’220 Patent Issue Date
2015-08-26	’765 Patent Application Filing Date
2015-12-30	’066 Patent Application Filing Date
2017-03-22	Meeting between Eko's founder and Quibi's founder
2017-10-18	Quibi founded
2019-03-01	Meeting between Eko and Quibi where Eko gave notice of pending patents
2019-09-17	’066 Patent Issue Date
2019-10-29	’765 Patent Issue Date
2020-01-08	Quibi presents Turnstyle at CES
2020-01-28	Eko sends cease-and-desist letter to Quibi
2020-04-06	Quibi launches its application with Turnstyle feature
2021-01-28	Complaint Filing Date

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 10,460,765 - "Systems and Methods for Adaptive and Responsive Video," Issued October 29, 2019

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section identifies the disadvantages of conventional digital video playback on devices with varying screen sizes and orientations (Compl. ¶101). Specifically, when a device’s aspect ratio changes (e.g., rotating a phone), videos are often cropped or letterboxed, resulting in loss of content or unused screen space (’765 Patent, col. 1:25-33).
• The Patented Solution: The invention describes a "smart video response" technique where video content adapts in real-time to changes in device properties, such as orientation or window size, without the aforementioned disadvantages (’765 Patent, col. 1:35-42). This can involve modifying the video state by changing the video content, dimensional ratio, or the specific viewing region (viewport) presented to the user, thereby allowing a seamless transition between, for example, a portrait view and a landscape view that each utilize the full screen (’765 Patent, Fig. 2; col. 4:40-51).
• Technical Importance: This technology is designed to optimize the viewing experience on mobile devices, where users frequently rotate the screen and expect the content to adapt intelligently. (Compl. ¶101).

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claims 1 and 10 (Compl. ¶104).
• Independent Claim 1 is a computer-implemented method comprising the essential elements of:
  • Identifying properties associated with a user device.
  • Simultaneously receiving video from a first and a second, different video presentation.
  • Configuring and presenting a first state of the video from the first presentation based on a device property.
  • Providing a mapping of video presentations to media player window height and width ranges.
  • During playback, determining that the media player window has been resized.
  • Evaluating the mapping to determine that the second video presentation is mapped to the new window dimensions.
  • In response, seamlessly transitioning from the video of the first presentation to the video of the second presentation.
• The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.

U.S. Patent No. 8,600,220 - "Systems and methods for loading more than one video content at a time," Issued December 3, 2013

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the limitations of progressive video downloading, where playback can be interrupted by buffering and where it is difficult to create interactive experiences with branching paths because only one video is loaded at a time (’220 Patent, col. 1:11-45).
• The Patented Solution: The invention provides a system that facilitates the selective presentation of video content composed of a collection of segments (’220 Patent, col. 2:1-19). A core component is a "video loading manager" that intelligently determines a subset of possible future video segments to download based on a "download priority." This allows for multiple potential video paths to be pre-loaded, enabling a user to make real-time choices that seamlessly alter the video's progression without pausing for the next segment to load (Compl. ¶121-122).
• Technical Importance: This technology enables the creation of complex, real-time interactive and branched-narrative videos that would otherwise be impractical due to loading delays at each user decision point (Compl. ¶121).

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claims 1 and 13 (Compl. ¶123).
• Independent Claim 1 is a system for facilitating the selective presentation of video content, comprising:
  • A video loading manager for selectively determining a subset of a collection of segments to download.
  • Wherein the determination is based, at least in part, on a download priority.
• The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.

U.S. Patent No. 10,418,066 - "System and Method for Synchronization of Selectably Presentable Media Streams," Issued September 17, 2019

• Technology Synopsis: This patent is directed to synchronizing audio and video streams in selectably presentable multimedia content, particularly when a user's choice leads to a transition from one content segment to another (Compl. ¶134). The system uses separate audio and video engines and maintains a current playback time, based on audio sample timestamps, to synchronize the video playback, ensuring a seamless transition between segments by delaying or dropping video frames as needed to match the audio (’066 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:5-14).
• Asserted Claims: Claims 1 and 11 (Compl. ¶136).
• Accused Features: The Quibi application's Turnstyle feature is accused of infringing by storing and assembling multimedia content segments, determining which audio and video files to play based on user selection, and synchronizing the video playback with the audio playback based on a current playback time (Compl. ¶137, ¶138).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The accused instrumentality is the Quibi mobile application, and specifically its "Turnstyle" feature (Compl. ¶104).

Functionality and Market Context

• The complaint alleges that Turnstyle "allows mobile video consumers to seamlessly switch between watching the same video on their smartphones either vertically or horizontally" without black bars, ensuring the video fills the screen in both orientations (Compl. ¶106). This is allegedly achieved by the Quibi app determining the device's orientation (reported by the operating system) and then presenting the corresponding vertical or horizontal video content (Compl. ¶108).
• The complaint asserts that Quibi presented Turnstyle as its "signature technology" and a key differentiator in the market, claiming it "invented a new experience and technology" (Compl. ¶105, ¶106). The complaint provides screenshots from a Quibi demonstration video showing a phone being rotated from horizontal (landscape) to vertical (portrait), with the video content changing from a wide "Cinematic perspective" to a tight close-up "The character's phone takes over your phone" perspective (Compl. ¶107, p. 32).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'765 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1)	Alleged Infringing Functionality	Complaint Citation	Patent Citation
A computer-implemented method comprising: identifying one or more properties associated with a user device;	The Quibi application, when running on a smartphone, identifies device properties such as physical orientation (portrait or landscape).	¶111	col. 4:40-51
receiving, simultaneously with the video from the first video presentation, video from a second, different video presentation;	The Quibi app allegedly receives both a portrait video file and a landscape video file for a given scene.	¶101	col. 2:1-5
configuring a first state of the video from the first video presentation based on at least one of the properties associated with the user device;	Based on the initial device orientation (e.g., landscape), the Quibi app configures and presents the corresponding video (e.g., the landscape video file).	¶111	col. 4:52-58
providing a mapping of video presentations to media player window height ranges and media player window width ranges;	Quibi's system allegedly maps the portrait video to vertical device dimensions and the landscape video to horizontal device dimensions.	¶109	col. 5:61-6:10
during playback ... determining that a media player window ... has been resized to change from first dimensions ... to second, different dimensions ...	During playback, as a user rotates the phone, the Quibi app determines that the playback window has changed dimensions (e.g., from landscape to portrait).	¶109	col. 6:60-64
evaluating the mapping to determine that the second video presentation is mapped to both the particular media player window height range and the particular media player window width range;	The Quibi app evaluates its mapping to determine that the second video presentation (e.g., the portrait video) corresponds to the new window dimensions.	¶109	col. 7:1-6
in response to the evaluating, seamlessly transitioning from the video from the first video presentation to the video from the second video presentation based on the change.	In response to the rotation, the Quibi app seamlessly transitions from playing the landscape video to playing the portrait video. The complaint includes a figure from the '765 patent showing this concept.	¶109, ¶103	col. 7:7-13

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Scope Question: Does Quibi’s alleged method of switching between two distinct, pre-rendered video files meet the claim limitation of "evaluating the mapping to determine that the second video presentation is mapped to... ranges"? A court may need to determine if this claim language requires a more dynamic process of viewport calculation within a single, larger video canvas, as depicted in the patent's Figures 5A and 5B, rather than a binary switch between two separate files based on orientation.
  • Technical Question: What evidence demonstrates that Quibi’s system "simultaneously receiv[es]" two different video presentations, as opposed to simply buffering the next required stream on demand? The architecture of Quibi's content delivery network will be central to this inquiry.

'220 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1)	Alleged Infringing Functionality	Complaint Citation	Patent Citation
A system for facilitating the selective presentation of video content, wherein the video content is comprised of a collection of segments...	The Quibi application with Turnstyle presents video content that is comprised of a collection of segments (e.g., the portrait version and the landscape version of a scene).	¶124	col. 2:1-5
the system comprising: a video loading manager for selectively determining a subset of the collection of segments to download,	The complaint alleges the Quibi application contains a "video loading manager" that determines which video segments (e.g., the upcoming portrait or landscape versions) to download.	¶124	col. 2:10-12
wherein the determination is based, at least in part, on a download priority.	The selection of which segment to download is allegedly based on a priority, such as the current device orientation or potential future user actions.	¶124	col. 2:13-14

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Evidentiary Question: The complaint asserts that the Quibi system includes a "video loading manager" that operates as claimed, but provides limited technical detail on how Quibi's backend actually functions. A key question for the court will be whether discovery reveals a component in Quibi's architecture that performs the specific functions of "selectively determining a subset" of segments based on a "download priority," as distinct from a standard video buffering system.
  • Scope Question: What is the scope of a "segment"? Does switching between a portrait and landscape version of the same temporal portion of a video constitute selecting between different "segments" in the manner contemplated by the patent, which focuses on branching narrative paths?

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

For the '765 Patent:

• The Term: "seamlessly transitioning"
• Context and Importance: This term is at the core of the invention's purported advance over the prior art's jarring cropping and letterboxing. The meaning of "seamlessly" will be critical to determining if Quibi's switch between portrait and landscape videos infringes, as the complaint repeatedly touts Quibi's public statements about its "seamless" and "imperceptible" transition (Compl. ¶106, ¶32).
• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The Summary of the Invention states the transition can involve "changing audio/video content playback" and can be from a "first to a second video in a plurality of videos that are simultaneously received" (’765 Patent, col. 2:1-5), which may support Plaintiff's theory of switching between two distinct files.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description of Figures 5A and 5B describes the transition as a modification of a "viewport... in size and repositioned to better accommodate the modified state of the device" within a single, larger video (’765 Patent, col. 6:60-7:13). A defendant may argue this limits the term to viewport manipulation, not file switching.

For the '220 Patent:

• The Term: "video loading manager"
• Context and Importance: This is the primary structural element of the claimed system. Whether Quibi's application contains a component that meets the legal definition of this term will be dispositive for infringement of claim 1. Practitioners may focus on this term because the complaint makes a conclusory allegation that Quibi has such a manager without providing specific evidence of its structure or operation (Compl. ¶124).
• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent does not appear to provide an explicit definition. A party could argue it should be given its plain and ordinary meaning: any software or hardware component that manages the loading of video.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent describes the manager in a system that allows for creating custom videos from segments in real-time based on user choices along branching paths (’220 Patent, col. 2:5-19). A defendant may argue that the "manager" is not just any loading mechanism, but one specifically designed for and limited to the context of non-linear, branching interactive video.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges that Quibi induced infringement of all three patents by providing its application to end-users along with instructions for its use, which allegedly directs them to perform the infringing methods (e.g., rotating their phones) (Compl. ¶113, ¶126, ¶139).
• Willful Infringement: The complaint makes extensive allegations to support willfulness. It alleges Quibi had pre-suit knowledge of the technology and pending patents through direct meetings (Compl. ¶39, ¶54) and a cease-and-desist letter (Compl. ¶59). Crucially, it alleges that Quibi hired two former Snapchat employees, Smith and Burfitt, who were exposed to Plaintiff’s confidential technology under an NDA and were then named as inventors on Quibi’s own patent for allegedly the same technology (Compl. ¶43-53, ¶57).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

• A central issue will be one of technical and definitional scope: Does Quibi's "Turnstyle" feature, which appears to switch between two separate pre-rendered video files, fall within the scope of patent claims that are described in the specification in the context of either dynamically modifying a single video's viewport ('765 Patent) or enabling branching interactive narratives ('220 Patent)?
• A key factual and evidentiary question will be one of origin of technology: Did Quibi independently develop its Turnstyle feature, or was its development based on the alleged misappropriation of Plaintiff's trade secrets by former Snapchat employees who later joined Quibi? The answer will be critical not only for the trade secret claims but also for determining the intent required for willful infringement.
• The case also presents a significant question of patent ownership and inventorship: Can Plaintiff prove that its employees were the true inventors of the subject matter in Quibi's own '926 patent, potentially leading to a court-ordered assignment of that patent to Plaintiff?