LD Products Countersues Hewlett Packard

LD Products (Long Beach, CA) responded to a lawsuit filed in February 2013 which claimed that LD Products advertised and sold new-built cartridges as remanufactured ones in violation of the Lanham Act. The Lanham Act covers false or misleading statements. HP also accused LD of violating California’s false advertising law, unfair competition law and common law.

In its countersuit, LD claimed that HP discourages consumers from buying third-party cartridges and is the one liable for false advertising. As stated by LD, ”Plaintiff’s (HP’s) claims are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands because Plaintiff has engaged in false, misleading, and/or deceptive advertising regarding toner cartridges. Similarly, HP’s claims are barred because HP, as the party asking the aid of the Court, must stand in conscientious relation towards its opponent. Plaintiff does not stand in a conscientious relation toward Defendant LD Products.”

LD cites examples of HP’s allegedly false statements, including claims that HP cartridges are better for the environment and that remans cause print quality problems, are less reliable, use low-quality toner and can harm printers, and thus have ”hidden costs.” LD claims HP has violated the portion of the Lanham Act related to false advertising and that LD has been damaged by HP’s behaviors.

LD claims HP’s characterization of remanufactured cartridges or untrue, stating, ”In general, remanufactured cartridges have environmental benefits because they are re-used and rebuilt,” and, ”In general, remanufactured cartridges work with the printers for which they were designed, will not harm that printer, and will provide good print quality.”

According to Actionable Intelligence, it is unlikely that we will ever see how these claims and counterclaims will be resolved as a settlement might never be made public.