Patent trolls go after bigger targets
Now, MPHJ has moved into a new phase, moving past demand letters and actually filing lawsuits. The biggest target on MPHJs radar, though, is soft drink giant Coca-Cola.
January 07, 2014 at 05:52 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
MPHJ Technologies is one of the most notorious patent trolls operating in the market today. The company is known for sending demand letters to companies, claiming that those businesses have violated MPHJ patents by utilizing scan-to-email technology. These letters demand fees of up to $1,000 per user and were often targeted at small businesses. The actions of MPHJ have sparked strong reactions, spurring state attorneys general such as Bill Sorrell of Vermont to take a strong stand against so-called trolls.
Now, MPHJ has moved into a new phase, moving past demand letters and actually filing lawsuits. Among its targets are some big fish, including department store chain Dillard's, insurance firm Unum and consumer goods packaging company Huhtakami. These companies range in size from 400 to 38,000 workers. The biggest target on MPHJ's radar, though, is soft drink giant Coca-Cola.
Through its lawyers, Farney Daniels, MPHJ alleges that the infringing companies have transmitted “electronic images, graphics and/or documents via a communications network from a network addressable scanner, digital copier, or other multifunction peripheral,” which is said to violate two of MPHJ's patents, numbers 8,488,173 and 7,477,410.
One factor that causes critics to label MPHJ as a “troll” is its tendency to go “downstream,” targeting users of technology rather than the technology's manufacturers. Attorneys general such as Jon Bruning of Nebraska find this practice to be deceptive and scam-like behavior. Interestingly enough, MPHJ has been working upstream as well, working out licensing deals with Canon and Sharp, though it has reportedly not reached such agreements with other manufacturers, such as Xerox or HP.
For more news on the patent troll issue, check out the following:
Pennsylvania's AG joins fight against patent trolls
A troll by any other name: Patent reform from the top down
GCs and AGs join hands to tackle patent litigation
When PAEs are not patent trolls
MPHJ Technologies is one of the most notorious patent trolls operating in the market today. The company is known for sending demand letters to companies, claiming that those businesses have violated MPHJ patents by utilizing scan-to-email technology. These letters demand fees of up to $1,000 per user and were often targeted at small businesses. The actions of MPHJ have sparked strong reactions, spurring state attorneys general such as Bill Sorrell of Vermont to take a strong stand against so-called trolls.
Now, MPHJ has moved into a new phase, moving past demand letters and actually filing lawsuits. Among its targets are some big fish, including department store chain Dillard's, insurance firm Unum and consumer goods packaging company Huhtakami. These companies range in size from 400 to 38,000 workers. The biggest target on MPHJ's radar, though, is soft drink giant Coca-Cola.
Through its lawyers, Farney Daniels, MPHJ alleges that the infringing companies have transmitted “electronic images, graphics and/or documents via a communications network from a network addressable scanner, digital copier, or other multifunction peripheral,” which is said to violate two of MPHJ's patents, numbers 8,488,173 and 7,477,410.
One factor that causes critics to label MPHJ as a “troll” is its tendency to go “downstream,” targeting users of technology rather than the technology's manufacturers. Attorneys general such as Jon Bruning of Nebraska find this practice to be deceptive and scam-like behavior. Interestingly enough, MPHJ has been working upstream as well, working out licensing deals with Canon and Sharp, though it has reportedly not reached such agreements with other manufacturers, such as Xerox or HP.
For more news on the patent troll issue, check out the following:
Pennsylvania's AG joins fight against patent trolls
A troll by any other name: Patent reform from the top down
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Critical Mass With Law.com's Amanda Bronstad: 700+ Residents Near Ohio Derailment File New Suit, Is the FAA to Blame For Last Month's Air Disasters?
- 2Law Journal Column on Marital Residence Sales in Pending Divorces Puts 'Misplaced' Reliance on Two Cases
- 3A Message to the Community: Meeting the Moment in 2025
- 4Ex-Prosecutor Denies on Witness Stand That She Tried to Protect Ahmaud Arbery's Killers
- 5Latham's Lateral Hiring Picks Up Steam, With Firm Adding Simpson Practice Head, Private Equity GC
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250