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:
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:
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 AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
- 1Roberts Calls Court's Relationship With Congress 'Strained.' Who's to Blame?
- 2Class Certification, Cash-Sweep Cases Among Securities Litigation Trends to Watch in 2025
- 3Buchanan Ingersoll Launches in Chicago With 17-Lawyer Team From Locke Lord
- 4$2M Settlement for Woman Struck by New Jersey Transit Bus
- 5'The Most Viable Solution': Donald Trump to Face Sentencing on January 10, Judge Rules
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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