Back in May of this year, SITO Mobile R&D IP, LLC and SITO Mobile filed a lawsuit against WWE, alleging the WWE Network may have violated their existent patents related to “system and method for routing media.”

In their original lawsuit, they claimed:

On information and belief, and without SITO’s approval, authorization and license, WWE owns, controls, operates and uses a system for streaming media that includes the WWE Streaming Platform, as well as other WWE networks, systems, devices, components and/or services for streaming media, that practices and infringes the media streaming method recited in at least claim 49 of the ‘949 patent.

SITO has requested a jury trial and also claimed they have “been damaged by the direct infringement of WWE, and is suffering and will continue to suffer irreparable harm and damages as a result of this infringement.”

WWE has since responded and filed a counter lawsuit in an update from PWInsider. Filed on October 5, WWE denied all allegations in a 32-page response.

To the extent a response is required, WWE denies that SITO is entitled to any of the requested relief. WWE expressly denies that it directly, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, has infringed or is infringing any of the patents-in-suit; expressly denies that SITO is entitled to any award of damages, including supplemental damages for any alleged post-verdict infringement; expressly denies that SITO is entitled to pre-judgment and post-judgement interests; and expressly denies that SITO is entitled to costs of this action, including all disbursements, and attorneys’ fees. WWE specifically denies that SITO is entitled to any award of “supplemental damages for any continued post-verdict infringement” or post-judgment interest for the patents-in-suit that expired prior to the filing of the SAC.

In the countersuit, WWE says SITO is damaging them by filing a lawsuit without valid claims of patent infringement:

There is an actual, substantial, and continuing justiciable controversy between WWE and SITO regarding the infringement of any valid and enforceable claims of the patentsin-suit, and of the validity of the claims of the patents-in-suit.

WWE went on to deny each individual claim from SITO that they do not perform or transmit data that’s in patent violation. WWE has also requested a jury trial.

WWE asked the courts that SITO be responsible for WWE’s costs and “reasonable” attorney’s fees.