So

So v. HP, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 14, 20225:22-cv-02327California5,937 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

24 As alleged in the Complaint, Defendant HP sells both printers and associated HP-branded 25 ink and toner cartridges for use in its printers. ECF No. 1 (“Compl.”) ¶¶ 20-21. For a cartridge to 26 be compatible with a printer, both the hardware and the software must align. Id. ¶ 25. Each model 27 of HP printer is compatible only with the associated cartridge model. Id. ¶ 24. HP has competitors in the market for cartridges, as consumers can choose to buy cartridges from HP (“HP cartridges”) or a different company (“third-party cartridges”). Id. ¶ 35. Third-party cartridges can be 25%-75% less expensive than HP cartridges. Id. ¶ 34. So alleges that HP periodically pushes out firmware updates to its printers that prevent consumers from using third-party cartridges. Compl. ¶¶ 65-70. He claims that the firmware also causes the printer to “display a (false) error message” stating there is a “supply problem, cartridge communication error, or cartridge problem.” Id. ¶ 68. Further, So alleges that HP installs technology in its printers that records data about the consumer’s printing habits and transmits it back to HP…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.