Defendant
10 cases as defendant.
Xerox Corporation, commonly known as Xerox, is an American multinational corporation headquartered in Norwalk, Connecticut, though it was founded in Rochester, New York, in 1906 as the Haloid Photographic Company. The company is publicly traded on Nasdaq under the ticker symbol XRX. As of late 2025/early 2026, Xerox employs approximately 22,900 to 23,000 individuals and reported estimated annual revenues in the range of $6.22 billion to $7.2 billion. Its market capitalization is around $401 million to $423 million.
Xerox is a pioneer in office technology, widely recognized for introducing the first plain-paper photocopier, the Xerox 914, in 1959. Today, the company manufactures and sells a diverse range of office equipment, including scanners, printers, and multifunction systems that combine scanning, printing, copying, emailing, and faxing capabilities. It also provides high-volume digital printing presses and production printers for the graphic communications industry, alongside digital services, managed print services, IT solutions, and workflow automation software.
In terms of patent litigation, Xerox Corporation operates as a defendant, reflecting its posture as an operating company that defends against assertions of patent infringement. The company has been involved in one tracked case, appearing solely as a defendant and not as a plaintiff.
The notable case involving Xerox is MPHJ Technology Investments, LLC v. Ricoh Americas Corporation et al., where Xerox is a defendant. This case ascended to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. MPHJ Technology Investments, LLC is widely identified as a patent assertion entity (PAE) or "patent troll," known for asserting patents related to networked scanning technology, particularly the scan-to-email function, against various businesses.
Flexiworld asserted US10140071B2, US10873856B2, and US9036181B2 against Xerox. The case was dismissed with prejudice by stipulated dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), with all claims and counterclaims extinguished, each party bearing its own costs and fees.
Flexiworld Technologies sued Xerox Corporation for patent infringement, later asserting the '847 patent along with three other patents. The action was dismissed with prejudice by stipulation under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), with all pending claims and counterclaims dismissed and each party bearing its own costs. No merits determination was made.
Monument Peak Ventures sued Xerox in the Eastern District of Texas asserting six patents, including 7684090. Xerox moved to dismiss for improper venue or transfer; the case was settled and dismissed with prejudice.
RAH Color Technologies LLC sued Xerox Corporation in the Western District of New York, asserting eight patents including US 8,537,357. The case closed in December 2018 and was centralized into MDL No. 2874 in the Northern District of California.
MDL No. 2874 consolidated RAH Color Technologies LLC's infringement actions against Adobe, Xerox, and others with Electronics For Imaging's declaratory-judgment action. The NPE Litigation Database lists the MDL as involving U.S. Patent 7,710,560; final judgment was entered on September 27, 2021, and the MDL docket closed July 26, 2022.
RAH's W.D.N.Y. action against Xerox appears in MDL-related proceedings and lists 7,280,251 as asserted per the Google Patents family record. Final disposition is not confirmed.
Named in the First Amended Complaint among eight Patents-in-Suit, including the '444 patent. RAH's pre-suit notice letter included claim charts for the '870, '008, and '444 patents. Consolidated into the MDL; final merits disposition of the '444 count was not confirmed.
RAH asserted the '704 patent, which was one of six patents in the original complaint and one of eight in the amended complaint. RAH alleged Xerox had knowledge of the '704 at least from a February 26, 2015 claim-chart letter. The N.D. Illinois case was closed in September 2018, consistent with transfer/consolidation to the W.D. New York action.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that claims 1–8 of US Patent 8488173 are invalid on the grounds of anticipation or obviousness.
Flexiworld sued Xerox in the Western District of New York. The parties stipulated to dismissal of all claims and counterclaims with prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), each side bearing its own costs/fees, without any Markman ruling, validity determination, or infringement finding.