跳到正文
WorldBrand.AI

SharkNinja的争议事件

以下收录公开来源中与该品牌相关的争议事件。列出一条并不表示过错已经证实。

返回词条共 4 条

  1. 2023

    煎锅温度广告诉讼

    一项诉讼指控SharkNinja对某些涂层煎锅的广告可能误导消费者，声称涂层过程涉及30,000华氏度的温度，尽管煎锅的标称烹饪温度限制为500华氏度。该案于2024年10月被无偏见驳回。

    来源

  2. 2019

    SharkNinja 就 Ninja Foodi 提起专利诉讼

    提起诉讼

    SharkNinja 在美国联邦法院对 Tristar Products 和 Emeril Lagasse 提起诉讼。起诉书指控 Tristar 的 Emeril Lagasse Pressure AirFryer 侵犯了与 Ninja Foodi 压力锅相关的三项专利。该纠纷涉及有关 Ninja Foodi 压力锅技术的专利侵权主张。

    SharkNinja 在美国联邦法院起诉 Tristar Products 和 Emeril Lagasse，指控 Tristar 的 Emeril Lagasse Pressure AirFryer 侵犯了与 Ninja Foodi 压力锅相关的三项专利。

    来源摘录

    • filed a complaint on Friday against Tristar Products, Inc. and Emeril Lagasse in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida for infringement of three U.S. patents related to its Ninja® Foodi® pressure cooker kitchen appliance.
    来源

  3. 2019

    SharkNinja 就专利不侵权提起诉讼

    提起诉讼

    SharkNinja Operating LLC 在特拉华州提起诉讼，请求法院裁定 Shark IQ Robot 未侵犯 iRobot 的某些专利。SharkNinja 称，此举是针对 iRobot 指控其侵权的信件作出的回应。

    来源摘录

    • SharkNinja Operating LLC (SharkNinja), an innovation leader in the consumer floorcare industry and creator of the Shark IQ Robot™ vacuum cleaner, filed a complaint last week against iRobot Corporation (iRobot) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware seeking a ruling from the court that the Shark IQ Robot does not infringe certain iRobot patents directed to robotic vacuum cleaners.
    • In response to SharkNinja's lawsuit, yesterday iRobot filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts alleging infringement of some of the patents identified in SharkNinja's original Delaware lawsuit.
    来源

  4. 2019

    Tristar就专利争议对SharkNinja提出反诉

    提起诉讼

    Tristar在法院文件中指称，SharkNinja及其律师明知专利无效仍获取并执行专利，以干扰Tristar业务并限制竞争。Tristar请求法院裁定相关专利无效、未被侵权且不可执行，并要求律师费和损害赔偿；这些均为诉状中的指称。

    来源摘录

    • Tristar Products, Inc. ("Tristar") sues SharkNinja and its attorneys, the law firm of Cantor Colburn LLP, Daniel R. Gibson, and SharkNinja's Chief Legal Officer, Pedro J. Lopez-Baldrich, for "knowingly participat[ing] in a scheme to tortiously interfere with Tristar's business by fraudulently obtaining and enforcing invalid patents for the purpose of limiting competition and removing Tristar from the market."
    • Tristar seeks a declaration that the patents are invalid, not infringed, and unenforceable, and Tristar also seeks attorneys' fees and damages.
    • Defendant Tristar Products Inc.'s Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint and Counterclaims, Civ. Action No. 19-cv-24114 (S.D. FL.) (filed November 29, 2019)
    来源