9 known cases. View patent page →
RAH Color Technologies suit against X-Rite. The complaint listed US 7,791,761 among ten patents-in-suit, but the exact filing date and disposition were not confirmed, and the complaint was not independently matched to this docket in a single source.
Part of In re RAH Color Technologies LLC Patent Litigation (MDL No. 2874); the '761 patent was asserted here along with three related patents. Complaint filed January 31, 2018 and served February 1, 2018. Dismissed by joint stipulation on September 27, 2021.
Inter partes review of U.S. Patent 8,416,444 B2. Claims 11, 13, 15, 18, 19, 26, and 27 were challenged. The Board determined that Petitioner did not demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the challenged claims are unpatentable.
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.
The '444 patent was listed among the Patents-in-Suit. RAH alleged Ricoh failed to respond substantively to a licensing offer dated October 20, 2014. Settlement likely, but outcome was not confirmed.
The '444 patent was named among the Patents-in-Suit; the Kodak complaint listed '444 as Exhibit 5. A related W.D.N.Y. case number 6:19-cv-06112 also appears. No final disposition was confirmed.
JPML centralized and consolidated the Adobe, Xerox, Electronics for Imaging (EFI), Kodak, Dalim, and Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG cases for coordinated pretrial proceedings. Claim construction addressed terms in the '870 and '444 patents, including 'sites' and 'interactive conference'.
RAH Color Technologies LLC sued Fujifilm entities in the Northern District of Illinois; the '314 patent was one of eight asserted patents. The outcome was not confirmed in the narrative.
Asserted '870, '444, and '704; transferred into MDL No. 2874 by Conditional Transfer Order.