Well, it was bound to happen sooner or later. With four class actions pending against HP over a firmware update that caused aftermarket cartridges to suddenly stop working in certain HP inkjet printer models, it seemed more likely than not that we would see a motion to transfer and potentially consolidate these cases at some
If at first you don’t succeed, try, try, try again. Samsung seems to have taken this as its motto in its litigation against third-party cartridge resellers in Europe. On November 30, the Court of the Hague in the Netherlands issued a decision in Samsung’s favor in a patent-infringement and comparative advertising case that the OEM
On December 2, MyMail, Ltd. filed a patent-infringement lawsuit against Lexmark International in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Lexmark, of course, requires little introduction. The Kentucky-based printer OEM was spun off from IBM in 1991 and has been in the printer business ever since. Lexmark was acquired by a consortium
On November 30, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issued five seizure-and-forfeiture orders to companies that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) caught trying to import cartridges in violation of the ITC’s general exclusion orders (GEOs). Altogether, three companies received such orders: Discount Ink, Golden State FC, and Green Project. This latest batch brings the
In huge news for the printer supplies industry, the U.S. Supreme Court indicated on Friday, December 2, that it will hear Impression Products v. Lexmark International, a case that raises two key questions about patent exhaustion. As Impression Products put it in its petition to the Supreme Court (see “Impression Products Appeals to the Supreme
One of the more exciting lawsuits we have been following is Epson’s counterfeiting and trademark-infringement suit against an alleged cartridge-counterfeiting ring in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. The wealth of details about the raids on the defendants’ operations captured our attention, and the enormous scope of the counterfeiting operations surprised us.
Last week, Seiko Epson Corporation, Epson America, and Epson Portland (collectively Epson) filed suit against Nano Business and Technology in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The lawsuit claims that Nano Business and Technology sells third-party inkjet cartridges that infringe a pair of Epson patents. Moreover, Epson claims that Nano’s continued sale
A trio of class actions filed against HP in federal district court in California allege that HP continued to advertise a printer-installation technology called Smart Install on a number of laser printers when this technology had actually been disabled. All three lawsuits were filed by the same group of attorneys. One of these class actions
In August, news broke that HP Inc. and Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) had been named as defendants in a class action that claimed the companies practiced age discrimination in their layoffs by jettisoning workers aged 40 and above and replacing them with younger workers (see “HP Faces Suits over Age and Sex Discrimination, ERISA Litigation”).
On November 9, Christopher Ware filed a class action against HP Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit is over a firmware update that HP rolled out on some OfficeJet, OfficeJet Pro, and OfficeJet Pro X inkjet printer models that caused certain aftermarket cartridges to stop working in