"Newegg Chief Legal Officer Lee Cheng says the move is necessary since Minero dismissed its Texas lawsuit without prejudice, meaning it can refile the case at a time of its choosing.
Cheng noted that Minero continues to litigate against other retailers that sell Rosewill-branded products and that Newegg may have defense obligations to those other companies. Minero continues to press its case against more than 20 companies, with the defendants including Office Depot, Walmart, and Amazon—three big retailers that sell Rosewill products.
Newegg's lawsuit asks only for a judicial ruling of non-infringement, not money damages..."
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/newegg-sues-paten...
That's actually not only awesome, but smart. You do not want to sue Newegg for patent infringement. Notice how fast that company dropped their patent suit? Unfortunately for them, Newegg never, ever gives in. Ever.
Blue Jeans Cable took much the same approach to Monster Cable. The response was an all-time classic. I've posted snippets here before but can't resist doing it again:
if you file on this sort of basis, you are in
Rule 11 frivolous-claim territory
...
You are required, as a matter of legal ethics,
to display good faith and professional candor
in your dealings with adverse parties, and you
have fallen miserably short of your ethical
responsibilities
...
Read the patents narrowly, and Monster loses;
read them broadly, and Monster loses.
...
I spent nineteen years in litigation practice
...
I am "uncompromising" in the most literal sense
of the word. If Monster Cable proceeds with
litigation against me I will pursue the same
merits-driven approach: I do not compromise with
bullies and I would rather spend fifty thousand
dollars on defense than give you a dollar of
unmerited settlement funds.
...
Not only am I unintimidated by litigation;
I sometimes rather miss it.
Not only am I unintimidated by litigation;
I sometimes rather miss it.
Along with: http://www.lettersofnote.com/2013/08/arkell-v-pressdram.html
Another great quote from Cheng [1]:
"I never get invited to parties anymore," Cheng said in an e-mail. "Now I keep getting kicked out."
[1] http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/patent-troll-real...
I don't think I'd conclude that: effectively if someone is claiming a section of the "public domain" as private IP then they're infringing on all of our rights (why don't the public prosecute such cases?). It impacts Cheng's company more, ergo they are suing - but it's responsive rather than some sort of vendetta. It's the opposite of personal if it doesn't matter who took the action they would still sue.
An analogy in real property: Minero has taken a public park and put gates up and a notice saying it's theirs. Cheng just happens to be the first to roll up wanting access to the park but it's an affront to all those who might wish to use it.