Lawsuits involving Dell Inc.

Last updated October 01, 2024

This article lists lawsuits involving Dell Inc. .

In 1997 Håkan Lans sued Dell for infringement of his color-graphics display patent, U.S. patent no. 4,303,986.^[1] Dell won the case because Lans did not have any ownership interest in the patent, having assigned it to a corporation that he owned.
In 2005, Dell began the construction of a facility in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.^[2] Many claims emerged that Dell had used unfair practices to obtain huge incentives.^[3] Dell Inc. fought a lawsuit which the court system later dismissed.^[4]
In October 2005, Dell filed a lawsuit in a Paris court to sue Minorca-based independent website-designer Paul Dell of "Dellimages" for engaging in "parasitism and unfair competition". This related to his company website "DellWebsites".^{[ citation needed ]}
On January 31, 2007, some shareholders filed a lawsuit accusing Dell and Intel of conspiring, and accusing Dell executives (including Michael Dell) of backdating options and of propped financial reports.^[5] Specific allegations claimed that:
- Dell had received kickback from Intel to maintain Intel exclusivity
- Dell had used the funds to prop up its sales-figures
- Dell reduced the period and scope of its warranties and cut corners on manufacturing and testing in order to funnel additional funds to sales; causing the stock-price to inflate to around $40 per share
- once stock-prices had peaked, several Dell executives, including Michael Dell, sold massive amounts of their personal stock-holdings to benefit from the artificially inflated stock-price
On February 8, 2007, seven current and former workers at a call-center in Roseburg, Oregon sued the computer-maker, saying the company worked its sales reps "off the clock", failed to provide proper rest-breaks and improperly recorded their lunch-periods.^[6] Moves have begun to turn the case into a class action. Dell suddenly closed down the facility at Roseburg, Oregon on August 2, 2007.^[7] The facility had consisted of computer and electronics sales-agents and of customer-service representatives.
In March 2007 an article titled "Computer Giant Faces Consumer Lawsuit Consumers Allege They Didn't Get the Tech Support They Paid For" appeared on an ABC News website.^[8] "Part of the suit claims that though Dell gave the impression of an "award-winning service" available to consumers "24 hours a day, seven days a week", consumers faced "nightmarish obstacles" to get help and technical service for their computers. New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said that New York had received 700 complaints about Dell — more than the number of complaints for any other related subject.
In May 2007, Andrew Cuomo filed a lawsuit against Dell for "false advertising and deceptive business practices, including offering misleading financing, and failing to honor rebates, warranties and service contracts". Dell spokesman Bob Pearson portrayed the lawsuit as based on only a small portion of Dell's customers and as in no way reflecting the way the company treats its customers. Dell's hardware-warranty contract says that customers must troubleshoot over the phone — including possibly opening the computer — before Dell will send a technical service provider to replace a part. On May 27, 2008, State Supreme Court Justice Joseph Teresi required Dell to clarify its financing and warranty criteria, saying the computer maker engaged in fraud, false advertising, deceptive business and abusive debt-collection practices.[9] Parties have filed more than 1,000 additional complaints with the attorney general's office since the initial filing of the lawsuit in May 2007.^[10]
On December 5, 2007, Typhoon Touch Technologies filed a lawsuit naming Dell inc. along with other defendants, and alleging patent-violations over Dell's use of touchscreen technology.^[11]
On June 28, 2010, The New York Times described a civil case against Dell in Federal District Court in North Carolina, in which Dell shipped at least 11.8 million computers from May 2003 to July 2005 that were at risk of failing because of faulty capacitors made by the Japanese manufacturer Nichicon. The suit alleges that these faulty components in Dell's OptiPlex desktop computers, were known by Dell to cause problems or computer failure up to 97 percent of the time over a three-year period, and yet it is alleged that Dell knowingly concealed these component problems from customers.^[12]
On February 18, 2019, Cicilia Gilbert, a transgender employee, filed suit in New York federal court for discriminatory termination. Dell invoked an arbitration clause, and the case was sent to binding arbitration. On March 4, 2022, the Arbitrator ruled that Dell had terminated the employee because of gender identity and disability. Gilbert v. Dell Technologies Inc., 1:19-cv-01938-JGK (Southern District of New York).^[13]
On June 18, 2020, Merkamerica Inc filed a 9.6 million dollar suit against Dell Marketing on behalf of Dell Outlet. The claim is that Dell Outlet issued secret rebates to one of its resellers, harming competition. Merkamerica Inc. v. Dell Marketing LP et al 2:20-cv-05408.^[14]

Related Research Articles

Dell Inc. is an American technology company that develops, sells, repairs, and supports computers and related products and services. Dell is owned by its parent company, Dell Technologies.

Inspiron is a line of consumer-oriented laptop computers, desktop computers and all-in-one computers sold by Dell. The Inspiron range mainly competes against Acer's Aspire; Asus's Transformer Book Flip, VivoBook and Zenbook; HP's Pavilion, Stream, and ENVY; Lenovo's IdeaPad; Samsung's Sens; and Toshiba's Satellite.

Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology was a case in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primarily concerned with the enforceability of box-top licenses and end user license agreements (EULA) and their place in U.S. contract law. During the relevant period, Step-Saver Data Systems was a value-added reseller, combining hardware and software from different vendors to offer a fully functioning computer system to various end users. Step-Saver's products included software produced by Software Link, Inc (TSL), computer terminals produced by Wyse Technology, and main computers produced by IBM. The fundamental question raised in this case was whether the shrinkwrap licenses accompanying TSL's software were legally binding, given that different terms were negotiated over the phone with Step-Saver prior to receiving physical copies of the software. The case was first heard in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, where the court ruled that the shrinkwrap licenses were legally binding. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit subsequently reversed this decision, ruling that the shrinkwrap licenses were not legally binding.

A declaratory judgment, also called a declaration, is the legal determination of a court that resolves legal uncertainty for the litigants. It is a form of legally binding preventive by which a party involved in an actual or possible legal matter can ask a court to conclusively rule on and affirm the rights, duties, or obligations of one or more parties in a civil dispute. The declaratory judgment is generally considered a statutory remedy and not an equitable remedy in the United States, and is thus not subject to equitable requirements, though there are analogies that can be found in the remedies granted by courts of equity. A declaratory judgment does not by itself order any action by a party, or imply damages or an injunction, although it may be accompanied by one or more other remedies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">TigerDirect</span> Consumer Electronics Retailer

TigerDirect was an El Segundo, California-based online retailer dealing in electronics, computers, and computer components. The company was previously owned by Systemax, which is known for its acquisitions of the intellectual property of the defunct U.S. retail chains Circuit City and CompUSA and relaunching them as online retailers. The two brands were subsequently shuttered in late-December 2012 and consolidated into the TigerDirect site.

In marketing, a rebate is a form of buying discount and is an amount paid by way of reduction, return, or refund that is paid retrospectively. It is a type of sales promotion that marketers use primarily as incentives or supplements to product sales. Rebates are also used as a means of enticing price-sensitive consumers into purchasing a product. The mail-in rebate (MIR) is the most common. An MIR entitles the buyer to mail in a coupon, receipt, and barcode in order to receive a check for a particular amount, depending on the particular product, time, and often place of purchase. Rebates are offered by either the retailer or the product manufacturer. Large stores often work in conjunction with manufacturers, usually requiring two or sometimes three separate rebates for each item, and sometimes are valid only at a single store. Rebate forms and special receipts are sometimes printed by the cash register at time of purchase on a separate receipt or available online for download. In some cases, the rebate may be available immediately, in which case it is referred to as an instant rebate. Some rebate programs offer several payout options to consumers, including a paper check, a prepaid card that can be spent immediately without a trip to the bank, or even as a PayPal payout.

The multinational technology corporation Apple Inc. has been a participant in various legal proceedings and claims since it began operation and, like its competitors and peers, engages in litigation in its normal course of business for a variety of reasons. In particular, Apple is known for and promotes itself as actively and aggressively enforcing its intellectual property interests. From the 1980s to the present, Apple has been plaintiff or defendant in civil actions in the United States and other countries. Some of these actions have determined significant case law for the information technology industry and many have captured the attention of the public and media. Apple's litigation generally involves intellectual property disputes, but the company has also been a party in lawsuits that include antitrust claims, consumer actions, commercial unfair trade practice suits, defamation claims, and corporate espionage, among other matters.

Newegg Commerce, Inc., is an American online retailer of items including computer hardware and consumer electronics. It is based in City of Industry, California. It is majority-owned by Liaison Interactive, a multinational technology company.

<i>Alcatel-Lucent v. Microsoft Corp.</i> Legal case

Alcatel-Lucent v. Microsoft Corp., also known as Lucent Technologies Inc. v. Gateway Inc., was a long-running patent infringement case between Alcatel-Lucent and Microsoft litigated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California and appealed multiple times to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Alcatel-Lucent was awarded $1.53 billion in a final verdict in August 2007 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California in San Diego. The damages award was reversed on appeal in September 2009, and the case was returned for a separate trial on the amount of damages.

Arts and media industry trade groups, such as the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) and Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), strongly oppose and attempt to prevent copyright infringement through file sharing. The organizations particularly target the distribution of files via the Internet using peer-to-peer software. Efforts by trade groups to curb such infringement have been unsuccessful with chronic, widespread and rampant infringement continuing largely unabated.

MonaVie is a defunct, American multi-level marketing company that manufactured and distributed products made from blended fruit juice concentrates, powders, and purées. The company was the subject of several controversies. Health claims for its products had not been scientifically confirmed or approved by regulatory authorities, and its chairman had been previously involved in false health claims concerning another beverage company. According to Forbes, MonaVie's business plan resembled a pyramid scheme. In 2015, the company defaulted on a US$182 million loan and went into foreclosure. Florida-based Jeunesse Global took over MonaVie’s assets when it purchased the note for $15 million.

MagicJack, also known as magicJack, is a service that allows people in the United States and Canada to make phone calls over the Internet. This type of phone service is called Internet-based telephone service (VoIP).

<i>Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. v. Intel Corp.</i> Private antitrust lawsuit

AMD v. Intel was a private antitrust lawsuit, filed in the United States by Advanced Micro Devices ("AMD") against Intel Corporation in June 2005.

Microsoft has been involved in numerous high-profile legal matters that involved litigation over the history of the company, including cases against the United States, the European Union, and competitors.

Vringo was a technology company that became involved in the worldwide patent wars. The company won a 2012 intellectual property lawsuit against Google, in which a U.S. District Court ordered Google to pay 1.36 percent of U.S. AdWords sales. Analysts estimated Vringo's judgment against Google to be worth over $1 billion. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned the District Court's ruling on appeal in August 2014 in a split 2-1 decision, which Intellectual Asset Magazine called "the most troubling case of 2014." Vringo appealed to the United States Supreme Court. Vringo also pursued worldwide litigation against ZTE Corporation in twelve countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, Malaysia, India, Spain, Netherlands, Romania, China, Malaysia, Brazil and the United States. The high profile nature of the intellectual property suits filed by the firm against large corporations known for anti-patent tendencies has led some commentators to refer to the firm as a patent vulture or patent troll.

Rambus Inc. v. NVIDIA Corporation was a patent infringement case between Rambus and Nvidia. The case was heard in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

iYogi is a remote technical support firm based in Gurgaon, India, with customers in the United States, the United Kingdom, the United Arab Emirates, Australia, Canada, and India. It has been the subject of lawsuits and numerous claims of misconduct.

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. is the general title of a series of patent infringement lawsuits between Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics in the United States Court system, regarding the design of smartphones and tablet computers. Between them, the two companies have dominated the manufacturing of smartphones since the early 2010s, and made about 40% of all smartphones sold worldwide as of 2024. In early 2011, Apple initiated patent infringement lawsuits against Samsung, who typically responded with countersuits. Apple's multinational litigation over technology patents became known as part of the smartphone wars: extensive litigation and fierce competition in the global market for consumer mobile communications.

Apple Inc. v. Pepper, 587 U.S. ___ (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case related to antitrust laws related to third-party resellers. The case centers on Apple Inc.'s App Store, and whether consumers of apps offered through the store have Article III standing under federal antitrust laws to bring a class-action antitrust lawsuit against Apple for practices it uses to regulate the App Store. The case centers on the applicability of the "Illinois Brick doctrine" established by the Supreme Court in 1977 via Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, which determined that indirect consumers of products lack Article III standing to bring antitrust charges against producers of those products. In its 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that since consumers purchased apps directly through Apple, that they have standing under Illinois Brick to seek antitrust charges against Apple.

OPTi Inc. was a fabless semiconductor company based in Milpitas, California, that primarily manufactured chipsets for personal computers. The company dissolved in 2001 and transferred its assets to the unaffiliated non-practicing entity OPTi Technologies

References

↑ U.S. patent no. 4,303,986 , Data Processing system and apparatus for color graphics display, Dec. 1, 1981
↑ "Dell Delivers Computer Assembly Plant to North Carolina" Archived 2008-12-06 at the Wayback Machine , an advisory from Industrialinfo.com
↑ The Register: Sci/Tech News for the World Archived 2010-03-10 at the Wayback Machine
↑ "Dell wins incentives lawsuit" Archived 2009-01-04 at the Wayback Machine
↑ "Inside the Dell Shareholder Lawsuit: Did Dell and Intel Conspire?". 3 February 2007.
↑ "OregonLive.com: At Work". The Oregonian. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-08-09. Retrieved 2009-12-28.
↑ newsreview.info - Serving Roseburg & Douglas County, Oregon - News Archived 2008-02-04 at the Wayback Machine
↑ ABC News: Dell Sued Over Shoddy Tech Support
↑ Wakabayashi, Daisuke (2008-05-27). "NY judge: Dell engaged in fraud, false advertising". Reuters. Retrieved 2008-05-28.
↑ Fox News
↑ United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, Captioned Typhoon Touch Technologies, Inc. and Nova Mobility Systems, Inc. v. Motion Computing, Inc. and Dell, Inc., Civil Action No. 6:07cv546. Online copy of filing
↑ In Faulty Computer Suit, Window to Dell’s Fall, The New York Times, 28 June 2010
↑ Ennis, Dawn. "Dell Found Liable For Discriminating Against Trans Employee". Forbes. Retrieved 2024-06-27.
↑ "MerkAmerica Inc. v. Dell Mktg. LP, Case No. 2:20-cv-05408-ODW (RAOx) | Casetext Search + Citator". casetext.com. Retrieved 2024-06-27.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.

[1] U.S. patent no. 4,303,986 , Data Processing system and apparatus for color graphics display, Dec. 1, 1981

[2] "Dell Delivers Computer Assembly Plant to North Carolina" Archived 2008-12-06 at the Wayback Machine , an advisory from Industrialinfo.com

[3] The Register: Sci/Tech News for the World Archived 2010-03-10 at the Wayback Machine

[4] "Dell wins incentives lawsuit" Archived 2009-01-04 at the Wayback Machine

[5] "Inside the Dell Shareholder Lawsuit: Did Dell and Intel Conspire?". 3 February 2007.

[6] "OregonLive.com: At Work". The Oregonian. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-08-09. Retrieved 2009-12-28.

[7] wsreview.info - Serving Roseburg & Douglas County, Oregon - News Archived 2008-02-04 at the Wayback Machine

[8] ABC News: Dell Sued Over Shoddy Tech Support

[9] Wakabayashi, Daisuke (2008-05-27). "NY judge: Dell engaged in fraud, false advertising". Reuters. Retrieved 2008-05-28.

[10] Fox News

[11] United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division, Captioned Typhoon Touch Technologies, Inc. and Nova Mobility Systems, Inc. v. Motion Computing, Inc. and Dell, Inc., Civil Action No. 6:07cv546. Online copy of filing

[12] In Faulty Computer Suit, Window to Dell’s Fall, The New York Times, 28 June 2010

[13] Ennis, Dawn. "Dell Found Liable For Discriminating Against Trans Employee". Forbes. Retrieved 2024-06-27.

[14] "MerkAmerica Inc. v. Dell Mktg. LP, Case No. 2:20-cv-05408-ODW (RAOx) | Casetext Search + Citator". casetext.com. Retrieved 2024-06-27.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]