DCT

2:23-cv-01043

Entropic Communications LLC v. DISH Network Corp

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:23-cv-01043, C.D. Cal., 02/10/2023
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is asserted based on Defendant DISH having regular and established places of business in the Central District of California, including offices, warehouses, and storefronts, and allegedly committing acts of infringement within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s DISH Hopper and Joey set-top box systems, which create whole-home DVR networks, infringe a portfolio of twelve patents related to the Multimedia over Coax Alliance (MoCA) standard for high-speed data networking over existing coaxial cables.
  • Technical Context: MoCA technology enables the use of in-home coaxial television wiring as a high-speed, multi-room computer network, which is critical for services like whole-home DVR that require reliable, high-bandwidth connections between devices in different rooms.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff sent communications to DISH regarding its patent portfolio on March 9, 2022, in an attempt to engage in licensing discussions, but DISH did not respond. The complaint also notes that DISH was a member of the Board of the MoCA Alliance from 2017 to 2019, which may be relevant to allegations of pre-suit knowledge and willful infringement.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2001-05-04 U.S. Patent No. 7,594,249 Priority Date
2001-08-30 U.S. Patent No. 7,295,518 Priority Date
2001-08-30 U.S. Patent No. 7,889,759 Priority Date
2004-12-02 U.S. Patent No. 8,085,802 Priority Date
2004-12-02 U.S. Patent No. 8,631,450 Priority Date
2004-12-02 U.S. Patent No. 10,257,566 Priority Date
2004-12-02 U.S. Patent No. 8,621,539 Priority Date
2007-02-06 U.S. Patent No. 9,838,213 Priority Date
2007-02-06 U.S. Patent No. 10,432,422 Priority Date
2007-05-09 U.S. Patent No. 8,228,910 Priority Date
2007-11-13 U.S. Patent No. 7,295,518 Issued
2008-10-16 U.S. Patent No. 8,320,566 Priority Date
2008-10-16 U.S. Patent No. 8,363,681 Priority Date
2009-09-22 U.S. Patent No. 7,594,249 Issued
2011-02-15 U.S. Patent No. 7,889,759 Issued
2011-12-27 U.S. Patent No. 8,085,802 Issued
2012-01-01 Accused Product Launch (DISH Hopper/Joey announced)
2012-07-24 U.S. Patent No. 8,228,910 Issued
2012-11-27 U.S. Patent No. 8,320,566 Issued
2013-01-29 U.S. Patent No. 8,363,681 Issued
2013-12-31 U.S. Patent No. 8,621,539 Issued
2014-01-14 U.S. Patent No. 8,631,450 Issued
2017-12-05 U.S. Patent No. 9,838,213 Issued
2019-04-09 U.S. Patent No. 10,257,566 Issued
2019-10-01 U.S. Patent No. 10,432,422 Issued
2022-03-09 Plaintiff sends pre-suit communication to Defendant
2023-02-10 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 7,295,518 - "BROADBAND NETWORK FOR COAXIAL CABLE USING MULTI-CARRIER MODULATION"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,295,518, "BROADBAND NETWORK FOR COAXIAL CABLE USING MULTI-CARRIER MODULATION", issued November 13, 2007.

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the difficulty of using existing in-home coaxial cable wiring for a high-speed, two-way data network. It notes that such wiring was designed for one-way television signal delivery and that components like splitters create high isolation between rooms, which attenuates signals and prevents reliable communication between devices on different cable branches (’518) Patent, col. 2:30-41).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention uses a multi-carrier modulation scheme, such as Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM), to overcome these channel impairments. The core of the solution involves network devices transmitting "probe messages" to each other to characterize the unique communication channel between them. Based on the analysis of these probe messages, the devices select an optimal "bit loading" profile, which adjusts the modulation order for different frequency carriers to maximize data throughput and reliability over the imperfect coaxial wiring ('518 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:38-51).
  • Technical Importance: This technology allowed for the creation of robust, high-speed local area networks over existing coaxial infrastructure, forming a technical foundation for the MoCA standard and avoiding significant rewiring expenses for consumers and service providers (Compl. ¶¶4, 26-27).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶81).
  • Claim 1 requires, in essence:
    • A data communication network with at least two network devices, each having a multi-carrier modulator and demodulator.
    • The devices are connected by cable wiring that includes a splitter with a common port and multiple tap ports.
    • The devices communicate using multi-carrier signaling.
    • The devices transmit probe messages through the wiring and analyze the received messages to determine channel characteristics.
    • Bit loading is selected based on the determined channel characteristics.
  • The complaint states that "at least these claims" are directed to the invention, reserving the right to assert others (Compl. ¶75).

U.S. Patent No. 7,594,249 - "NETWORK INTERFACE DEVICE AND BROADBAND LOCAL AREA NETWORK USING COAXIAL CABLE"

  • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,594,249, "NETWORK INTERFACE DEVICE AND BROADBAND LOCAL AREA NETWORK USING COAXIAL CABLE", issued September 22, 2009.

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent identifies "port-to-port isolation" in signal splitters as a fundamental barrier to creating a LAN over coaxial cable. This isolation, designed to prevent interference between televisions in different rooms, also blocks network signals from traveling between devices connected to different splitter ports (’249) Patent, col. 2:30-41).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention discloses a "frequency selective network interface device" installed at the point of entry (POE) of the building's coaxial wiring. This device acts as a reflector. It allows standard cable/satellite signals to pass through but reflects signals within the specific frequency band used by the network. This reflection turns an "upstream" signal from one device back "downstream" into all other cable branches, creating a communication path that bypasses the splitter's isolation and enables all devices to communicate with each other ('249 Patent, Abstract; col. 3:9-18).
  • Technical Importance: This approach provided a method to overcome the inherent isolation of legacy coaxial cable splitters, enabling a whole-home network without requiring the replacement of existing in-wall wiring or components (Compl. ¶109).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 10 (Compl. ¶115).
  • Claim 10 requires, in essence:
    • A broadband local area network using coaxial cable wiring.
    • A filter located at the point of entry that reflects network signals back into the building wiring.
    • At least one signal splitter.
    • A plurality of terminal devices connected to the wiring branches.
    • The devices communicate via the "reflected signal path" created by the filter.
    • The devices perform equalization to overcome channel impairments caused by the reflected signals.
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert claims beyond claim 10 (Compl. ¶115).

The complaint asserts ten additional patents. The following summarizes the technology and allegations for each.

  • U.S. Patent No. 7,889,759 (Node Admission Patent): Discloses techniques for establishing a common modulation scheme for communications between nodes in a MoCA network (Compl. ¶143). At least claim 2 is asserted against the Accused MoCA Instrumentalities (Compl. ¶149).
  • U.S. Patent No. 8,085,802 (Node Admission Patent): Discloses techniques for establishing and periodically adapting optimized modulation and transmission parameters between each pair of devices in a network (’802) Patent, col. 4:7-24; Compl. ¶177). At least claim 3 is asserted against the Accused MoCA Instrumentalities (Compl. ¶183).
  • U.S. Patent No. 8,631,450 (Link Maintenance Patent): Discloses techniques for determining a common modulation scheme for communications between nodes in a MoCA network by processing probe messages at regular intervals (Compl. ¶¶21, 211). At least claim 29 is asserted against the Accused MoCA Instrumentalities (Compl. ¶217).
  • U.S. Patent No. 10,257,566 (Network Coordinator Patent): Discloses techniques for a designated "Network Coordinator" node to control the admission of other nodes to the network and to calculate and use a broadcast bitloading profile for transmissions (Compl. ¶¶31, 245). At least claim 11 is asserted against the Accused MoCA Instrumentalities (Compl. ¶251).
  • U.S. Patent No. 8,621,539 (Link Maintenance Patent): Discloses techniques for monitoring and maintaining utilized modulation profiles in a MoCA network, involving a physical layer transmitter performing RF, analog, and digital processing for transmitting MAC messages (’539) Patent, col. 4:37-48; Compl. ¶279). At least claim 1 is asserted against the Accused MoCA Instrumentalities (Compl. ¶285).
  • U.S. Patent No. 9,838,213 (PQoS Flows Patent): Discloses techniques for managing and allocating network resources to provide guaranteed quality of service (QoS) for distributing multimedia data such as video and audio (’213) Patent, col. 3:46-53; Compl. ¶313). At least claim 1 is asserted against the Accused MoCA Instrumentalities (Compl. ¶319).
  • U.S. Patent No. 10,432,422 (PQoS Flows Patent): Discloses techniques for managing resources to distribute multimedia data and allocating resources for guaranteed quality of service flows in a MoCA network (’422) Patent, col. 3:53-60; Compl. ¶347). At least claim 1 is asserted against the Accused MoCA Instrumentalities (Compl. ¶353).
  • U.S. Patent No. 8,228,910 (Packet Aggregation Patent): Discloses aggregating data packets directed to a common destination node to reduce network overhead by eliminating interframe gaps, preambles, and extra headers (’910) Patent, col. 1:66-col. 2:3; Compl. ¶381). At least claim 3 is asserted against the Accused MoCA Instrumentalities (Compl. ¶387).
  • U.S. Patent No. 8,320,566 (OFDMA Patent): Discloses allowing multiple transmitting devices to transmit under an Orthogonal Frequency Divisional Multiple Access (OFDMA) mode to a receiving device by assigning communication resources ('0,566 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶415). At least claim 1 is asserted against the Accused MoCA Instrumentalities (Compl. ¶421).
  • U.S. Patent No. 8,363,681 (Clock Sync Patent): Discloses improving local clock time synchronization between a plurality of nodes in a communication network, where clocks are synchronized with a master clock provided by a Network Coordinator (’681) Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶¶34, 449). At least claim 1 is asserted against the Accused MoCA Instrumentalities (Compl. ¶455).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The accused products are various DISH-branded set-top boxes, collectively referred to as the "Accused MoCA Instrumentalities," including the "Hopper" line of DVRs and the "Joey" line of client devices (Compl. ¶¶39, 41-42).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The Hopper and Joey devices are deployed in customer homes to create a "whole-premises DVR network" over the existing coaxial cable infrastructure (Compl. ¶39). The complaint provides a topology diagram illustrating a "Hopper 3" unit connected via coaxial cables and splitters to multiple "Joey" clients, enabling the clients to access content from the central DVR (Compl. ¶40). This functionality relies on compliance with MoCA standards 1.0, 1.1, and/or 2.0 to facilitate high-speed data transfer between the devices (Compl. ¶¶41-42). The complaint alleges that the original manufacturer for DISH publicly stated it "chose the MoCA technology" for these products to achieve the "best bandwidth and use of quality of service" for a connected home system (Compl. ¶48).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'518 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A data communication network comprising: at least two network devices, each network device comprising a multi-carrier modulator for modulating data... The DISH Hopper and Joey products are network devices that form a MoCA-compliant network, which uses multi-carrier OFDM modulation. ¶30; ¶39 col. 2:38-41
cable wiring comprising a splitter with a common port and a plurality of tap ports, and a plurality of segments of coaxial cable connecting between the splitter tap ports and the network devices; The accused products are deployed in customer homes over existing coaxial cable wiring that utilizes splitters to connect the central Hopper device to multiple Joey clients. ¶39; ¶40 col. 1:44-54
whereby network devices transmit probe messages through the cable wiring and analyze received probe message signals to determine channel characteristics and bit loading is selected based on the determined channel characteristics. The MoCA standards implemented by the accused products require the use of probe messages to create modulation profiles and optimize performance for each point-to-point link. ¶32; ¶75 col. 2:42-51
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Evidentiary Question: The complaint's infringement theory rests on the accused products' compliance with the MoCA standard. A central question will be what level of proof is required to show that the accused products actually perform the claimed steps of "transmit[ting] probe messages" and "select[ing]" bit loading, beyond general allegations of standard compliance.
    • Scope Question: A potential dispute may arise over whether the specific signaling and channel characterization performed by the accused MoCA-compliant products falls within the scope of the terms "probe messages" and "bit loading" as defined and enabled by the '518 Patent specification.

'249 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 10) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
A broadband local area network for transmitting modulated signals using coaxial cable building wiring... comprising: a filter located at the point of entry of the building wiring that... reflected... network signals... back into all branches of the building wiring; The complaint alleges the accused products form a MoCA network, and further alleges that practicing the MoCA standard is essential to practicing the claims of the '249 patent. The infringement theory appears to be that a component of the DISH system, such as the DISH Pro Hybrid Solo Hub shown in the complaint's diagram, performs the function of the claimed filter. ¶37; ¶115; ¶127 col. 3:9-18
a plurality of terminal devices connected to the wiring branches... The DISH Hopper and Joey devices are terminal devices connected via coaxial cable wiring and splitters. ¶39; ¶40 col. 2:23-29
wherein the terminal devices perform equalization on the received signal... to overcome communication channel impairments caused by the reflected signals. The accused MoCA products allegedly use "full-mesh pre-equalization techniques known as Adaptive Constellation Multitone (ACMT), a form of OFDM modulation," to overcome channel impairments. ¶30 col. 1:44-67
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Structural Question: A primary point of contention will likely be whether the accused DISH system includes a component that meets the structural and functional limitations of "a filter located at the point of entry" that "reflected... network signals." The complaint does not explicitly identify this component, raising the question of what physical structure Plaintiff will map to this claim element.
    • Functional Question: The analysis may turn on whether any signal reflection that occurs at the point of entry in the accused system is sufficient to meet the claim limitation, or if the reflection must be caused by a dedicated component designed for that purpose, as depicted in the patent's embodiments.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

Term from the ’518 Patent: "probe messages"

  • The Term: "probe messages"
  • Context and Importance: This term is critical because the active characterization of the communication channel via these messages is a core element of the asserted infringement theory. The definition will determine what kind of signals qualify and whether the accused products' standard-compliant communications meet this limitation.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent abstract describes them functionally as messages "sent between devices to characterize the communication channel and determine optimum bit loading" ('518 Patent, Abstract). This language could support a construction covering any signal used for channel characterization.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figure 7 of the patent depicts a specific "bit loading probe message" structure with a preamble, a channel estimation training sequence, and a bit loading training sequence ('518 Patent, Fig. 7). A defendant may argue that a "probe message" must contain these specific structural components.

Term from the ’249 Patent: "a filter located at the point of entry ... that ... reflected ... network signals"

  • The Term: "a filter located at the point of entry ... that ... reflected ... network signals"
  • Context and Importance: This is the central structural element of asserted claim 10. The existence and identity of this component in the accused system will be a dispositive issue for infringement of this patent. Practitioners may focus on this term because the complaint's allegations are not specific as to what component in the DISH system constitutes this "filter."
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the invention as a "network interface device" that "produces a reflection of upstream signals" ('249 Patent, col. 3:15-17). Plaintiff may argue that "filter" should be construed functionally to mean any device at the POE that achieves the claimed filtering and reflection, regardless of its name or primary purpose.
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The detailed description and figures show specific embodiments of the "filter," including a "signal splitter 300 with an impedance mismatch 310" and a filter with an "inductor 350, resistor 352, and capacitor 354" ('249 Patent, col. 4:20-22, col. 5:35-37). A defendant could argue these embodiments limit the term "filter" to a device with such specific electrical properties or components designed to create a reflection, rather than any component that might incidentally cause one.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges that DISH actively induces infringement by providing the accused products to customers with instructions and assistance for installation and maintenance, with the intent to cause end users to build and use the infringing MoCA network (Compl. ¶¶97-99, 131-133). Contributory infringement is alleged on the basis that the accused products have no substantial non-infringing use and are especially made or adapted for use in an infringing manner when creating the whole-home DVR network (Compl. ¶¶100-101, 134-135).
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on DISH's pre-suit knowledge of the patents and the infringing activity. This knowledge is alleged to stem from Entropic's direct communications to DISH on March 9, 2022, as well as DISH's familiarity with MoCA technology and Entropic's foundational role, gained in part from its position as a member of the MoCA Alliance from 2017 to 2019 (Compl. ¶¶53, 88, 92, 122, 126).

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

  • Standard Compliance vs. Element-by-Element Proof: A core issue will be one of evidentiary sufficiency: can Entropic prove infringement merely by showing the accused products comply with the MoCA standard, which it alleges incorporates its patented technology, or will it be required to provide direct technical evidence showing that the products meet each specific limitation of the asserted claims?
  • Structural Identity: The case will likely feature a key question of claim scope, particularly for the '249 patent: can the term "filter," described in the patent with specific electrical properties for creating a signal reflection, be construed to cover a general-purpose networking component in the accused DISH system, or is there a fundamental mismatch between the claimed structure and the accused instrumentality?
  • Knowledge and Intent: Given DISH's alleged history as a MoCA Alliance member and its receipt of pre-suit notice letters, a central question for willfulness and potential enhanced damages will be the state of mind: what did DISH know about Entropic's specific patent rights and when, and does its continued use of MoCA technology rise to the level of objective recklessness?