The remanufacturer and reseller has now concluded both its IP cases with the OEM.
LD Products’ base in California
Canon’s statement reported that LD Products has concluded both cases concerning alleged patent infringement in the USA, with The Recycler previously reporting on the settlement in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, and this new announcement confirms the settlement in the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) case.
The cases concern the infringement of “certain toner cartridges and photosensitive drum units sold for use” in Canon and HP laser printers, with the district court case beginning in February and the USITC case in May.
The “successful resolution” of both cases with LD Products means that the company has agreed to a USITC consent order relating to the US patents 8,280,278, 8,630,564, 8,682,215, 8,676,090, and 8,688,008. It has also agreed to a consent judgment and permanent injunction from the Southern District of New York regarding the 8,280,278, 8,433,219, 8,437,669, 8,494,411, 8,630,564, 8,676,090, 8,682,215, and 8,688,008 patents.
The agreements prohibit LD Products “from making, using, selling and offering for sale in the US, and from importing into the US, the toner cartridges and photosensitive drum units that Canon accused of infringement”. Canon added that “throughout the development, sales and marketing process, Canon respects the intellectual property of other companies and individuals and expects others to similarly respect Canon’s intellectual property rights.
“Canon remains committed to pursuing legal enforcement against those who do not respect Canon’s intellectual property”.
The case in New York has seen other companies settle with the OEM in recent months, including Acecom, Do It Wiser and Green Project; ACM Technologies, Grand Image LLC, OnlineTechStores, Nectron, Provantage and Printronic.
The settlement concerns a smaller number of patents than at the onset of the case, with the original 12 patents now reduced to eight after Canon filed disclaimers at the USPTO (Patent and Trademark Office) “disclaiming all claims” of the ‘304, ‘744, ‘640 and ‘085 patents. The OEM had previously dropped some of the patents from the USITC case as well.