Patent Troll Told That It Can't Sue The FTC For Merely Investigating Its Shakedown Scam

from the making-quick-work-of-it dept

We've written a bunch of times about the "scanner patent troll" MPHJ (which also goes by a bunch of other names, because that's how patent trolls roll). This was the company that claimed to have a patent on a network connected scanner that allowed people to email a scan. It sent out letters to tons of companies demanding between $900 and $1200 per employee for merely owning a modern scanner. While the company is a bit sketchy and hard to track down, reporter Joe Mullin more or less outed lawyer Jay Mac Rust as the "brains" of the operation.

The details were so egregious that MPHJ became the poster child for the absolute worst in patent trolling. Vermont sued the company for shaking down local businesses, and the FTC began an investigation into a short list of patent trolls, with MPHJ's name at the very top.

In response, MPHJ... sued the FTC, claiming that it had a First Amendment right to shakedown companies with bogus threats and demand letters.

That lawsuit has gone over about as well as you might expect, with a court dismissing it a few days ago. The court basically says the FTC is allowed to investigate, and MPHJ's claim is ridiculous:
May Plaintiff derail the FTC administrative process by bringing this declaratory judgment action? The short answer is, "No."
Basically, the court ticks off each of MPHJ's objections and points out that the FTC is allowed to run its investigation, and MPHJ can't claim that merely being investigated is somehow a violation of its rights. MPHJ, of course, now claims it is thinking about appealing this ruling:
MPHJ respectfully believes the Court erred in its decision. The FTC had threatened to sue MPHJ in that court, and MPHJ sought only to have the FTC's claim resolved in that court. It is important to note that MPHJ was willing to litigate the issue in the federal courts, as it is confident that its conduct was lawful, a point recently confirmed by the Nebraska Federal District Court.
Of course, the whole point of the ruling is that the FTC has to be allowed to complete its investigation before MPHJ can challenge it in court. As for the situation in Nebraska, MPHJ is correct that a court in Nebraska did say that the company has a constitutional right to send shake down letters, but even if that's true, it doesn't mean the FTC isn't allowed to investigate what's happening.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: first amendment, ftc, investigation, lawsuits, patent trolls
Companies: mphj

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 22 Sep 2014 @ 6:20pm

    Re: (Parody)

    That's not a parody; that's a recreation.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat

Warning: include(/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/ failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/ on line 8

Warning: include(): Failed opening '/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/share/pear:/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395:/home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/..') in /home/beta6/deploy/itasca_20201215-3691-c395/includes/right_column/ on line 8
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.