LD Products Countersues HP for Suppressing Remans

LD Products counterclaimed that HP discourages consumers from buying third-party cartridges.

LD has countersued HP, claiming that the OEM is the one liable for false advertising. As stated by LD, “Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the doctrine of unclean hands because Plaintiff has engaged in false, misleading, and/or deceptive advertising regarding toner cartridges concurrently with the alleged false advertising alleged in Plaintiff’s Complaint. Similarly, Plaintiff’s claims are barred because Plaintiff, 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.”

According to LD Products, HP has made false statements and claims regarding the quality, performance, and environmental benefits of remanufactured cartridges.

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 retorts HP’s characterization of remanufactured cartridges, saying, “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 likely that we will never see how HP’s claims and LD’s counterclaims end. A settlement would be made much more challenging.

HP’s lawsuit claims that LD Products advertised and sold new-built cartridges as remanufactured ones in violation of the Lanham Act. The act covers false or misleading statements. LD is also accused of violating California’s false advertising law, unfair competition law and common law.