The Procter & Gamble Company

I'll verify the company's profile with a few searches.

The Procter & Gamble Company (P&G) — Public (NYSE: PG), incorporated in Ohio, headquartered at One Procter & Gamble Plaza, Cincinnati, Ohio. Founded October 31, 1837 by William Procter and James Gamble. It is a standalone public company with no parent. Scale (FY2025, ended June 30, 2025): net sales of roughly US$84.3 billion, net earnings about US$16 billion, and approximately 107,000–109,000 employees; market capitalization has run in the mid-$300 billions. Sources: P&G 10-K/annual report, Wikipedia, Fortune, FT markets profile.

Products / operations. P&G is a multinational branded consumer-packaged-goods manufacturer, not an NPE. It operates five reportable segments: Beauty (Hair Care — Head & Shoulders, Pantene, Herbal Essences; Skin & Personal Care — Olay, Old Spice, Secret, SK-II); Grooming (Gillette, Venus, Braun razors, blades and appliances); Health Care (oral care — Crest, Oral-B — and personal health — Vicks, Metamucil, Pepto-Bismol, Neurobion); Fabric & Home Care (Tide, Ariel, Downy, Gain, Cascade, Dawn, Febreze, Mr. Clean, Swiffer — its largest segment at ~35% of net sales); and Baby, Feminine & Family Care (Pampers, Luvs, Always, Tampax, Bounty, Charmin, Puffs). It sells in roughly 180 countries through retailers, pharmacies, wholesalers and e-commerce.

Patent-litigation posture. Operating company appearing only as a defendant in the tracked data: 2 defendant cases, 0 plaintiff cases. Both tracked suits are infringement actions brought against P&G, consistent with a large branded manufacturer being targeted rather than a patent asserter. The venues are the Central District of California and the Southern District of Ohio; neither is an Eastern District of Texas cluster.

Notable cases. Blueprint IP Solutions, LLC v. The Procter & Gamble Co. (S.D. Ohio, filed Jan. 29, 2020), asserting U.S. Patent 8,089,980 and seeking declaratory/counterclaim relief from P&G; Blueprint IP Solutions appears as a serial plaintiff suing numerous unrelated companies, characteristic of a non-practicing entity. CAO Group, Inc. v. The Procter & Gamble Co. (C.D. Cal., filed Oct. 26, 2022) alleged that Crest 3D Whitestrips and ARC whitening strips infringed CAO's peroxide-gel patents (e.g., U.S. 10,603,259 / 10,646,419 / 11,219,582); CAO is an operating competitor selling its own SheerWhite strips. The parties settled in March 2023. P&G has also historically asserted teeth-whitening patents as a plaintiff (e.g., against Team Technologies), so its overall posture is that of an operating company that litigates both ways.