`
`
`
`600 N. King Street ● Suite 400
`
`
`
`
`P.O. Box 25130 ● Wilmington, DE 19801
`
`
`
`
`Zip Code For Deliveries 19801
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`VIA CM/ECF
`Honorable Jennifer L. Hall
`United States District Court for the District of Delaware
`844 North King Street
`Wilmington, DE 19801
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Writer’s Direct Access:
`
`
`
` (302) 429-4232
`
` Email: sbrauerman@bayardlaw.com
`
`February 14, 2025
`
`
`
`
`
`
`RE: Robocast, Inc. v. Netflix, Inc., C.A. No. 22-305-JLH-CJB
`
`
`
`
`Dear Judge Hall:
`
`
`Pursuant to the Court’s Order dated February 7, 2014 (D.I. 456), Plaintiff Robocast, Inc.
`(“Robocast”) hereby respectfully submits this letter identifying what it believes to be the “three
`most analogous” prior Federal Circuit cases within the meaning of Enfish that would warrant
`consideration herein as part of an “abstract idea” analysis at step one of the Alice § 101 test:
`
`
`
`• Data Engine Technologies LLC v. Google LLC, 906 F.3d 999 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (method
`claims relating
`to a user-friendly
`interface for navigating
`through electronic
`spreadsheets).
`
`
`
`
`
`• Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc., 880 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2018)
`(claims directed to a user interface for computerized electronic devices such as mobile
`phones).
`
`• DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (claims directed
`to a “particular Internet-centric problem”).
`
`
`Counsel for Robocast will be prepared to more fully address the above-listed cases at the
`
`upcoming § 101 oral argument scheduled for February 21, 2025 should the Court wish to do so
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`/s/ Stephen B. Brauerman
`
`Stephen B. Brauerman (#4952)
`
`www.bayardlaw.com
`
`
`
` Phone: (302) 655-5000
`
`
`
` Fax: (302) 658-6395
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
