Placeholder image

Oh Brother! 30 for 337 action

August 20, 2019

The USITC’s headquarters in Washington D.C.

The OEM has petitioned the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) for a permanent general and limited exclusion order pursuant to Section 337, alleging over 30 proposed defendants import infringing cartridges into the United States.

In the documents seen by The Recycler Brother filed a complaint with the USITC on Monday 19 August, alleging that the proposed 32 respondents import toner cartridges infringing Brother’s patents U.S. Patent No. 9,785,093 (‘093 Patent), U.S. Patent No. 9,575,460 (‘460 Patent), U.S. Patent No. 9,568,856 (‘856 Patent), U.S. Patent No. 9,632,456 (‘456 Patent) and U.S. Patent No. 9,846,387 (‘387 Patent).

Brother accuses AMI Brothers, Inc. (“AMI”); An An Beauty Limited (“An An Beauty”); Aster Graphics, Inc. (“Aster”); Aztech Enterprises Limited (“Aztech”); Billiontree Technology USA Inc. (“Billiontree”); Carlos Imaging Supplies, Inc. (“Carlos Imaging”); Cartridge Evolution, Inc. (“Cartridge Evolution”); Do it Wiser, LLC (“Do it Wiser”); Eco Imaging Inc. (“Eco Imaging”); Ecoolsmart Co. (“Ecoolsmart”); EPrinter Solution LLC (“EPS”); E-Z Ink Inc. (“E-Z Ink”); Globest Trading Inc. (“Globest”); Greencycle Tech, Inc. (“Greencycle”); Hongkong Boze Co., Ltd: (“Hongkong Boze”); 18 International Inc. (“18 International”); IFree E­Commerce Co. (“IFree”); Ikong E-Commerce (“Ikong”); Intercon International Corp. (“Intercon”); IPrint Enterprise Limited (“IPrint”); LD Products, Inc. (“LD Products”); Linkyo Corp. (“Linkyo”); Mangoket LLC (“Mangoket”); New Era Image LLC (“New Era”); OW Supplies Corp. (“OW Supplies”); Solong E-Commerce Co., LLC (“Solong E-Commerce”); Smartjet E­Commerce Co., LLC (“Smartjet”); Super Warehouse Inc. (“Super Warehouse”); Theresa Meng; Triple Best LLC (“Triple Best”); V4ink, Inc. (“V4ink”); and Zhuhai Xiaohui E-Commerce Co., Ltd. (“Xiaohui E-Commerce”), all imported toner cartridges that infringe one or more claims of each of United States Patents named above.

The claim from Brother relates to TN-221BK, TN-221C, TN-221M, TN-221Y, TN-223BK, TN-223C, TN-223M, TN-223Y, TN-225C, TN-225M, TN-225Y, TN-227BK, TN-227C, TN-227M, TN- 227Y, TN-420, TN-450, TN-630, TN-660, TN-730, TN-760, and TN-770 cartridges.

Brother seeks as relief a general exclusion order (GEO) saying it deems “a general exclusion order is appropriate relief in this case, given the numerous sources abroad of infringing toner cartridges and components thereof and the available channel of distribution.”

Brother calls it “a widespread pattern of importation and sale of infringing toner cartridges in the United States…”, evidenced by the OEM with numerous USITC Investigations. Brother argues: “These investigations demonstrate that the market for infringing toner cartridges is very lucrative, with a multitude of existing sources of infringing products and a low barrier to entry for future participants.”

Categories : World Focus

Tags :

Leave a Reply