I'll research this entity before writing the profile.
Business Line Data — profile
Company overview. No independent corporate profile could be verified for "Business Line Data." The name appears in the records only as a litigation party caption, always listed alongside Philips Taiwan, Ltd. and Philips Optical Storage. That grouping indicates it was a Philips-related entity—most plausibly a business unit/affiliate of Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.'s Optical Storage (POS) organization, whose PC-related "Data" business line was consolidated in Taiwan from 2003. I could not verify a legal form, headquarters, founding year, employee count, revenue, or current ownership status from any primary source; the entity does not appear in the company's own materials or in company databases I could locate. Treat the Philips affiliation as an inference from the case caption, not a confirmed fact.
Products / operations. There is no evidence that Business Line Data operates as a standalone company with its own product lines. In the case below it was named by Quanta Storage, Inc. as a third-party defendant on an indemnification claim, which is consistent with a supplier role in the optical disc drive supply chain rather than a product brand. Specific products or services cannot be confirmed.
Patent-litigation posture. Across the tracked data, Business Line Data has 0 cases as plaintiff and 1 as defendant. It is not a patent assertion entity and shows no one-way plaintiff filing pattern. Its single appearance is a defensive/third-party posture—pulled into a supplier-indemnity chain rather than initiating a suit. The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, not a plaintiff-friendly venue such as the Eastern District of Texas.
Notable case. Ricoh Company, Ltd. v. Quanta Computer Inc. et al., No. 06-C-462-C (W.D. Wis., filed Aug. 24, 2006), on appeal at 550 F.3d 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2008). Ricoh asserted optical-disc-drive patents covering write strategy ('109), background formatting ('955), disc rotation speed control/Zone-CLV ('552), and multi-session writing ('755) against Quanta Computer, Quanta Storage, Quanta Computer USA, and NU Technology. Quanta Storage filed third-party indemnification claims against Philips Taiwan, Business Line Data, and Philips Optical Storage; the district court dismissed those claims as moot after dismissing Ricoh's infringement claims against Quanta and NU. Business Line Data's role was peripheral to the merits.