Defendant
1 case as defendant.
Intertape Polymer Corp. is the U.S. operating entity of Intertape Polymer Group Inc. (IPG), a packaging and protective-solutions manufacturer founded in 1981 by Melbourne F. Yull and incorporated in 1993. It is headquartered in Montreal, Québec and Sarasota, Florida. Once publicly listed on the TSX (ticker ITP), IPG was taken private in June 2022 when Clearlake Capital Group acquired it for roughly US$2.6 billion (C$40.50/share). Press coverage at the time reported about 4,200 employees, operations across 34 locations (22 manufacturing plants in North America, five in Asia, two in Europe), and trailing revenue near US$1.5 billion. It remains a Clearlake portfolio company.
Products / operations. IPG develops, manufactures and sells paper- and film-based pressure-sensitive and water-activated tapes (carton-sealing, masking, filament, cloth/duct and specialty tapes), stretch and shrink films, protective packaging, woven and non-woven products, and packaging dispensing machinery for industrial and retail customers, with a focus on B2B and e-commerce end markets. Brands include Cantech, Tuck Tape and Exlfilm. It has grown by acquisition — Cantech (2017, ~US$63M), Polyair Inter Pack (2018, ~US$146M) and Clysar (October 2026) — and is a real operating manufacturer, not an NPE.
Litigation posture. The case data show a classic operating-company-defending profile: 1 tracked case, 0 as plaintiff and 1 as defendant. The single matter is Kirsch Research & Development, LLC v. Intertape Polymer Corp., filed April 24, 2020 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (No. 3:20-cv-01029), with Intertape as the accused defendant.
Notable case context. Kirsch asserted U.S. Patent 6,308,482 (and, in related suits, 8,765,251) covering reinforced synthetic roofing underlayments, accusing Intertape's NovaSeal and Umbra lines. The N.D. Tex. action was transferred to the M.D. Fla., where the court denied Intertape's motion to dismiss in December 2020. Kirsch appears in Stanford's NPE litigation database as an individual-inventor-started non-practicing asserter and filed roughly 15 other district court suits plus an ITC action against other underlayment sellers. Intertape's involvement reflects roofing/underlayment products within its broader building-materials line.
Kirsch asserted the '482 patent against Intertape Polymer. The case was transferred to the Middle District of Florida, continuing as No. 8:20-cv-01982-T-33JSS.