Dish Network 2014 Annual Report Download - page 166

Download and view the complete annual report

Please find page 166 of the 2014 Dish Network annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.

Page out of 188

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 103
  • 104
  • 105
  • 106
  • 107
  • 108
  • 109
  • 110
  • 111
  • 112
  • 113
  • 114
  • 115
  • 116
  • 117
  • 118
  • 119
  • 120
  • 121
  • 122
  • 123
  • 124
  • 125
  • 126
  • 127
  • 128
  • 129
  • 130
  • 131
  • 132
  • 133
  • 134
  • 135
  • 136
  • 137
  • 138
  • 139
  • 140
  • 141
  • 142
  • 143
  • 144
  • 145
  • 146
  • 147
  • 148
  • 149
  • 150
  • 151
  • 152
  • 153
  • 154
  • 155
  • 156
  • 157
  • 158
  • 159
  • 160
  • 161
  • 162
  • 163
  • 164
  • 165
  • 166
  • 167
  • 168
  • 169
  • 170
  • 171
  • 172
  • 173
  • 174
  • 175
  • 176
  • 177
  • 178
  • 179
  • 180
  • 181
  • 182
  • 183
  • 184
  • 185
  • 186
  • 187
  • 188

DISH NETWORK CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued
F-60
Action, in which it added claims against us alleging infringement of the 597 patent. On April 8, 2013, Norman filed
a fourth amended complaint in the 2011 Action, in which it added new claims against us alleging infringement of
additional DISH products. On May 1, 2013, Norman filed a fifth amended complaint in the 2011 Action, in which
it named Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC; Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.; Xerox Corporation; ZTE (USA) Inc. and
ZTE Solutions, Inc. as defendants, in addition to us. On July 9, 2013, the Court ordered Norman to file a new sixth
amended complaint limiting Norman’s claims against us to those specifically referenced in its September 21, 2012
preliminary infringement contentions. As a result, on July 10, 2013, Norman filed a sixth amended complaint in the
2011 Action, in which it asserted claims against our wholly-owned subsidiary DISH Network L.L.C. replacing us as
defendant, alleging that the use of certain Broadcom chipsets in DISH DVR systems infringes the 689 patent. In
addition, Norman withdrew all infringement claims against us regarding the 555 patent and the 597 patent. On July
12, 2013, we filed a motion to dismiss the 2011 Action, because Norman failed to comply with the Court’s July 9,
2013 order.
In addition, on May 10, 2013, Norman filed a separate patent infringement complaint (the “2013 Action”) against us
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, asserting infringement of the 555, 597 and 689
patents, as well as United States Patent Nos. 5,608,873 (the “873 patent”) and 5,771,394 (the “394 patent”). The
infringement claims asserted in the 2013 Action relate to different DISH products than Norman identified in the
2011 Action.
On October 18, 2013, the parties stipulated that Norman will dismiss all of its claims against DISH Network L.L.C.
in the 2011 Action, and re-assert them in the 2013 Action.
The 689 patent relates to a clock generator capable of shut-down mode and clock generation method, the 555 patent
relates to a wireless communications privacy method and system, the 597 patent relates to an interrupt enable circuit
that allows devices to exit processes without using a hardware reset, the 873 patent relates to a device and method
for providing inter-processor communication in a multi-processor architecture, and the 394 patent relates to a servo
loop control apparatus having a master microprocessor and at least one autonomous streamlined signal processor.
Norman is an entity that seeks to license an acquired patent portfolio without itself practicing any of the claims
recited therein.
On May 30, 2014, Norman dismissed the 2013 Action against us with prejudice, pursuant to a settlement
agreement.
Personalized Media Communications, Inc.
During 2008, Personalized Media Communications, Inc. (“PMC”) filed suit against us; EchoStar and Motorola Inc., in
the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, alleging infringement of United States Patent Nos.
5,109,414; 4,965,825; 5,233,654; 5,335,277 and 5,887,243, which relate to satellite signal processing. PMC is an
entity that seeks to license an acquired patent portfolio without itself practicing any of the claims recited therein.
Subsequently, Motorola Inc. settled with PMC, leaving us and EchoStar as defendants. On July 18, 2012, pursuant
to a Court order, PMC filed a Second Amended Complaint that added Rovi Guides, Inc. (f/k/a/ Gemstar-TV Guide
International, Inc.) and TVG-PMC, Inc. (collectively, “Gemstar”) as a party, and added a new claim against all
defendants seeking a declaratory judgment as to the scope of Gemstar’s license to the patents in suit, under which
we and EchoStar are sublicensees. On August 12, 2014, in response to the parties’ respective summary judgment
motions related to the Gemstar license issues, the Court ruled in favor of PMC and dismissed all claims by or
against Gemstar and entered partial final judgment in PMC’s favor as to those claims. On September 16, 2014, we
and EchoStar filed a notice of appeal of that partial final judgment, which is pending. Trial is scheduled to
commence on May 18, 2015. PMC has informed us that it will not pursue at trial its claim for infringement of
United States Patent No. 5,109,414. PMC’s damages expert had contended that we and EchoStar are liable for
damages ranging from approximately $500 million to $650 million as of March 31, 2012, and has subsequently
modified such damages as ranging from approximately $150 million to $450 million, as of September 30, 2014,
which does not include pre-judgment interest and may be trebled under Federal law.