3m suing Xpel

Counterpart · January 2, 2016

If 3M was 'awarded' the patent in 2014 i would have thought the development of XPEL Ultimate was before then, or have they been hiding their Pro Series technology for years.... Will be interesting, maybe 3M's paint protection wing needs more funding for development so they have to do what they have to do

3M filed the patent No. 8,765,263 since 2006 and the priority date was 2005. Priority date is considered to be the effective date of filing for the patent examination.

Counterpart · January 2, 2016

CASE 0:15-cv-04576-PJS-JSM

https://search.rpxcorp.com/litigation_documents/11791384

tango2 · January 2, 2016

Thanks for the link fat cat

That is pretty daunting and has severe implications IMHO

I didn't expect a jury trial to be honest

Interesting read

Glass Tinting Supplies · January 3, 2016

Nice research Fat

I would encourage those who currently use Xpel and are happy with the service and product to stick with it.

If the court result ends badly for Xpel, there will be a long transition period where you can jump ship if need be. I have my doubts that it will come about. I think this is more about territory than who makes what, and who came up with the idea.

There was a hole... Xpel filled that hole. They have been great and experienced amazing growth over the past 24 months. I have been keeping a close eye on it. Good for them and they deserve it. I think they have been representing good value for money in the PPF market.

However... 3M would have been waiting for the right moment to flex their muscles. And it is very difficult to take on a marketing goliath that employs many a lawyer. e.g. Why take Xpel down whilst they are getting on their feet?

3M live and die by their patients and they wouldn't have chased their own tail if they were not prepared to fight for their desired result. Xpel are newbies in the justice system, and 3M are the experienced old hands.

If I was Xpel, I would reach out to my customers, distributors, friends, industry piers and what you would also consider your opposition. I have been amazed as to just how many people out there want to share and help each other. I can not believe it.

Do this... And you can't lose... If you know what I mean...

Anyhow's.. I am just a 1 man tinting biz tucked away out there in western Sydney down under.

Good luck Jeff and gang. I hope it ends in a happy result for all of ya'll.

Counterpart · January 3, 2016

Nice research Fat

If the court result ends badly for Xpel, there will be a long transition period where you can jump ship if need be. I have my doubts that it will come about. I think this is more about territory than who makes what, and who came up with the idea.

Thanks for the link fat cat

That is pretty daunting and has severe implications IMHO

The link was from my Korean mate.

They are a major PPF supplier. There are TPU facilities in all over the world and PPF manufacturers are following closely.

They asked me to interprete Part 8 to 15 of the document in the link because they felt that some of the charges do apply to other PPF manufacturers in the world.

In a way, their response is very similiar to my first thought when I read Tango2's post; CCL Industries will be monitoring closely too.

Counterpart · January 3, 2016

There was a hole... Xpel filled that hole.

Let's turn back time, exactly 10 years ago, Xpel claims that their PPF of their were from 3M

https://web.archive.org/web/20060101013448/http://www.xpel.com/products/paint.asp

Glass Tinting Supplies · January 3, 2016

There was a hole... Xpel filled that hole.

Let's turn back time, exactly 10 years ago, Xpel claims that their PPF of their were from 3M

https://web.archive.org/web/20060101013448/http://www.xpel.com/products/paint.asp

Xpel is no longer a 4 year old child that needs to have their hand held. They are more like the 17 year old son or daughter that has the ambition to to the parent idea and do something better with it.

Once again... I am just a 1 man tinter that has no clue how to best install PPF.

This is just my opinion, and worth very little it is.

tango2 · January 3, 2016

The key to sticking with it will be the injunctive relief sought that could happen very quickly indeed as those measures are designed to prevent further harm while the main action gets listed for trial.

If 3m are successful in that the implications could be dire

Calling for folk to rally to a flag is honorable and all but the court will are the ones who will set the agenda I suspect many will take business decisions based around their own self interest here.

silverbullet · January 3, 2016

Glad that we all have other options and choices when it comes to patterns and film...this will be costly.

Roach · January 6, 2016

If 3M wanted to stop XPEL, they would have done it as soon as XPEL brought their product to market. 3M knew... it would be foolish to think it took all this time for 3M's lawyers to figure out XPEL violated their patent. (IF that is the case)

These companies wait until the infringing company is large enough to either extort $$$$ from them, or that they are big enough & have such a market share the other company has no choice but to start paying with some type of royalty deal.

Patent cases are all about the money, plain and simple.

I'm sure XPEL will be fine... 3M might be a little richer when all is said and done, but business will continue for both parties, IMO.