ESPN ENTERPRISES, INC., et al. v. DISH NETWORK L.L.C.
This text of ESPN ENTERPRISES, INC., et al. v. DISH NETWORK L.L.C. (ESPN ENTERPRISES, INC., et al. v. DISH NETWORK L.L.C.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ESPN ENTERPRISES, INC., et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-07169-AS-BCM Plaintiffs, -against- DISH NETWORK L.L.C., Defendant.
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT Pursuant to Rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, DISH Network L.L.C. (“DISH”) hereby requests that the Court take judicial notice of: 1. DISH’s webpage entitled Sling Orange, available at https://www.sling.com/service/sling-orange. A true and correct Page Vault capture dated December 30, 2025 is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and was filed in this action at ECF No. 100-1; and 2. ESPN’s August 21, 2025 press release entitled ESPN Launches New Direct- to-Consumer Service, Enhanced ESPN App – ESPN Press Room U.S., available at https://espnpressroom.com/us/press-releases/2025/08/espn-launches-new-direct-to- consumer-service-enhanced-espn-app/. A true and correct Page Vault capture dated September 29, 2025 is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 and was filed in this action at ECF No. 47-2. A court may take judicial notice of “a fact that is not subject to reasonable dispute because it: (1) is generally known within the trial court’s territorial jurisdiction; or (2) can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid. 201. Courts routinely take judicial notice of publicly available information such as webpage content and news articles when the source’s authenticity is not in dispute. See, e.g., Force v. Facebook, Inc., 934 F.3d 53, 59 n.5 (2d Cir. 2019) (publicly available terms of service subject to judicial notice); Samuels v. NYC Women’s Film Fund, No. 23-CV-10045 (AS), 2025 WL 27687, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 3, 2025) (Subramanian, J.) (taking judicial notice of statements on party’s website); Finn v. Barney, 471 F. App’x 30, 32 (2d Cir. 2012) (district court did not abuse its discretion in taking judicial notice of news articles and other publicly available documents). Such is the case here, where the information listed was made publicly available on the parties’ own websites, the authenticity of which is not reasonably subject to dispute. Furthermore, the Court has previously granted a
similar request for judicial notice. Dkt. 85. For the foregoing reasons, DISH respectfully requests that the Court take judicial notice of the exhibits described above pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201. Dated: January 2, 2026 STEPTOE LLP New York, New York
By: _/s/ Elyse D. Echtman Elyse D. Echtman unopposed request for judicial notice is 1114 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 T: (212) 378-7551 Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to eechtman@steptoe.com the motion at Dkt. 103. Michael J. Allan ORDERED. Michelle Kallen (admitted pro hac vice) Emma Marshak (admitted pro hac vice) 1330 Connecticut Ave NW A Washington, DC 20036 T: (202) 429-3000 Subramanian, U.S.D.J. mallan@steptoe.com January 15, 2026 mkallen@steptoe.com emarshak@steptoe.com Attorneys for Defendant DISH Network L.L.C.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
ESPN ENTERPRISES, INC., et al. v. DISH NETWORK L.L.C., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/espn-enterprises-inc-et-al-v-dish-network-llc-nysd-2026.