Mito Clarifies Confusion Over Similar Named Company in Canon Case
Previously, RT reported Canon filed patent cases against 26 defendants regarding toner supply containers for its Canon imageRunner copiers.
Among the respondents listed by Canon, one has the name of MITOCOLOR INC which happens to be very similar to the well-known China-based Mito Color Imaging Co., Ltd (Mito).
In order to avoid any confusion as well as protect its customers, the China-remanufacturer made the following statement:
In Canon’s 337 investigation on March 8 2021, MITOCOLOR INC is registered with the address: 18351 Colima Road, Suite A #2810, Rowland Heights, California 91748.
However, many people still ask if there is any relationship between Mito Color Imaging Co., Ltd and MITOCOLOR INC.
In response, Mito would like to formally state that it has no relationship with MITOCOLOR INC. And it never offered any toner products to MITOCOLOR INC either.
Should any customer buy any product from MITOCOLOR INC, Mito shall not take any responsibility for quality and IP infringement. Please make sure the products you buy are safe and non-infringing.
Mito respects intellectual property rights and is committed to providing the best products with consistent quality and top performance for customers.
For more information, please contact email@example.com
Established in 2003 in Zhuhai, China, Mito Color Imaging Co. Ltd is a high-tech enterprise that has specialized in research and development, remanufacturing and sales of colour laser toner cartridges.
The company claims it is one of the largest professional colour remanufacturing companies in the world to provide consistent, quality products.
In 2013, Mito became the first Chinese public company to produce compatible laser toner cartridges in the printer consumables industry after being acquired by Hubei Dinglong Company Limited and is now a significant part of DingLong Group’s integrated supply chain taking advantage of its upstream resources.
Please leave your comments to the story “Mito Clarifies Confusion Over Similar Named Company in Canon Case” below.