NovaCloud Licensing LLC filed NovaCloud Licensing LLC v. Akamai Technologies, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-01130 (D. Del.), on September 4, 2026. The complaint describes NovaCloud as a Delaware limited liability company based in Palo Alto, California, formed in 2024 to take ownership of patented technology that emerged from a telecommunications equipment company's research in cloud computing, networking, and content delivery. It describes Akamai as a Delaware corporation headquartered in Cambridge, Massachusetts. A September 9, 2026 docket entry assigns the case to Judge Maryellen Noreika. NovaCloud demands a jury trial.
The patents
The complaint asserts five patents: U.S. Patent 8,401,028, Selection of an Edge Node in a Fixed Access Communication Network, issued March 19, 2013; U.S. Patent 9,225,651, Method and Apparatus for Load Balancing, issued December 29, 2015; U.S. Patent 8,825,867, Two Level Packet Distribution with Stateless First Level Packet Distribution to a Group of Servers and Stateful Second Level Packet Distribution to a Server Within the Group, issued September 2, 2014; U.S. Patent 8,949,206, System and Method for Creating Multiple Versions of a Descriptor File, issued February 3, 2015; and U.S. Patent 9,900,262, Methods, Nodes and Computer Program for Enabling of Resource Component Allocation, issued February 20, 2018. The complaint says its claim chart exhibits show how the accused products infringe at least claim 1 of the '028 patent, claim 17 of the '651 patent, claim 15 of the '867 patent, claim 14 of the '206 patent, and claim 9 of the '262 patent.
Claim 1 of the '028 patent recites a method in which a selection node receives a host entity's request for a network service, obtains status and capability data for each of several edge nodes in a fixed access communications network from a dynamically updated database, selects an edge node that provides a path between the host entity and the requested service, and sends the host a response identifying that edge node. Claim 17 of the '651 patent recites a load balancer, with at least one processor and memory, that selects a target processing engine for a packet of a traffic flow based on a mapping entry and, when the target engine's load exceeds a threshold, updates the selection based on the flow's scheduling status so that the packet is dispatched to the same target engine as the flow's previous packet. Claim 15 of the '867 patent recites a multi-level packet distribution system that keeps flows of packets sticky to servers: a static first level module selects a group of servers for a packet of an existing flow without using state that assigns the packet to that group, and a distributed stateful second level system, on separate hardware, selects a server in the group using state that assigns the flow to that server and distributes the packet to it. Claim 14 of the '206 patent recites a method of receiving source descriptor files, which include a media presentation with multiple periods spliced together, and associated adaptive bit rate segments for master content files, receiving rules on how multiple descriptor files are to be created, creating those files by manipulating at least one of the source descriptor files under the rules without transcoding them to an adaptive stream format and without generating new content files, and distributing the new descriptor files to downstream systems. Claim 9 of the '262 patent recites a resource manager connected to at least two hosts that determines a metric of a resource component for performance monitoring of an application at the hosts, instructs each host to measure it, receives a resource frame of the application from each host, determines resource allocation from those frames, and combines frames from the hosts, with the frames forming an operations profile of the application in a shared environment that is dynamic over time.
The accused products
Count I identifies Akamai's Node Balancer. Count II identifies Akamai's Global Traffic Management and Application Load Balancer. Count III identifies Akamai's DNS, Global Traffic Management, and Application Load Balancer. Count IV identifies Akamai's manifest manipulation services. Count V identifies Akamai DataStream, such as DataStream 1 and DataStream 2. Each count points to a claim chart exhibit.
What the complaint alleges
Each count alleges that Akamai has directly infringed, literally and under the doctrine of equivalents, and has induced others to infringe, and that it knowingly and intentionally induces and contributes to infringement in violation of 35 U.S.C. §§ 271(b)-(c). The complaint says that around February 27, 2025, NovaCloud reached out to Akamai with a list of NovaCloud's patents, told Akamai the patents are relevant to its product offerings, including its Edge computing and video streaming services, invited Akamai to meet, and offered to discuss a license. It alleges that Akamai has known of or been willfully blind to each patent and the infringing nature of the accused products since at least around that date and no later than the filing and service of the complaint, and that Akamai has known, or been willfully blind to the fact, that making, using, offering to sell, and selling the accused products would constitute willful infringement. The complaint alleges, on information and belief, that Akamai uses, imports, offers for sale, and sells infringing products in the United States with the accused instrumentalities, and that its inducing acts include providing information and instructions on their use and indemnifying patent infringement within the United States. It also alleges that NovaCloud and its predecessors in interest have satisfied 35 U.S.C. § 287(a) for each patent.
Relief requested
The prayer asks for a judgment of direct infringement, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, a permanent injunction, damages, costs, expenses, and pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, an accounting and supplemental damages, a finding that the case is exceptional under 35 U.S.C. § 285 with attorneys' fees, and other relief.
Where the case stands
Akamai was served on September 9, 2026, and a stipulation so ordered on September 30, 2026, extended its response deadline to October 30, 2026. On that date Akamai filed a partial motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). The motion asks the court to dismiss Count I, on the ground that the asserted claims of the '028 patent claim unpatentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101; the claims of pre-suit willful and indirect infringement of all five patents; and all of the induced infringement claims, pre-suit and post-suit. Akamai's opening brief and supporting declaration are filed under seal, and on November 2, 2026, Judge Noreika so ordered Akamai's unopposed motion for leave to file them under seal. The docket lists November 13, 2026, as the due date for the answering brief. Watch for NovaCloud's answering brief and the court's ruling on the motion.
NovaCloud's earlier suits on these patents
NovaCloud's original complaints in earlier suits assert some of the same patents: the '028 patent in Nos. 1:25-cv-00674 and 1:25-cv-01272 (D. Del.), Nos. 2:25-cv-00700 and 2:25-cv-01228 (E.D. Tex.), and No. 7:26-cv-00035 (W.D. Tex.); the '206 patent in Nos. 1:25-cv-00674, 1:25-cv-01272, and 1:26-cv-00433 (D. Del.) and No. 2:25-cv-01266 (E.D. Tex.); the '867 patent in Nos. 1:25-cv-01272 and 2:25-cv-01228; and the '651 and '262 patents in No. 2:25-cv-00700. Nos. 1:25-cv-00674, 1:25-cv-01272, and 1:26-cv-00433 ended in September 2026 on stipulations of dismissal, and Nos. 2:25-cv-01228 and 2:25-cv-01266 ended in September 2026 with orders dismissing them with prejudice. Nos. 2:25-cv-00700 and 7:26-cv-00035 are pending. In No. 3:26-cv-10585 (N.D. Cal.), a company seeks a declaratory judgment against NovaCloud that it does not infringe the '028 patent and four other patents.