Cisco anti-competitive practices lawsuits: Difference between revisions

Cisco's principal service contract for end users is marketed as "SmartNet." A SmartNet contract typically provides software updates, technical support, and hardware replacement for covered equipment.<ref name="cisco-smartnet-qa">{{cite web |title=Cisco SMARTnet Service Q&A |url=https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/das.ohio.gov/technology-strategy/next-generation-telephony-service/technical-implementation/service-details/Cisco%20Smartnet%20Service.pdf |publisher=Cisco Systems, Inc. |access-date=April 29, 2026}}</ref> The complaints state that customers without an active SmartNet contract may lose access to security and operational updates necessary for their equipment to continue functioning properly, leaving most enterprise customers effectively dependent on the contract.<ref name="law360-filing" /><ref name="Summit360Complaint" />

Throughout the ''Dexon'' litigation, Cisco maintained that the substantive dispute between the two companies was its own earlier-filed counterfeiting suit against Dexon in the Northern District of California, in which Cisco alleged that Dexon had trafficked in counterfeit Cisco products.<ref name="kellogghansen">{{cite web |title=Cisco Systems Resolves Antitrust Allegations and Counterfeit-Trafficking Claims in Sweeping Settlement Agreement |url=https://kellogghansen.com/cisco-systems-resolves-antitrust-allegations-and-counterfeit-trafficking-claims-in-sweeping-settlement-agreement/ |publisher=Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick |date=January 31, 2024 |access-date=April 29, 2026}}</ref> Cisco moved to transfer the Texas antitrust case to California and to dismiss the complaint, but the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas denied both motions in March 2023, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit declined to issue a writ of mandamus directing transfer in July 2023.<ref name="dexon-mtd-order-2023">{{cite court |litigants=Dexon Computer, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc. |court=E.D. Tex. |date=March 31, 2023 |url=https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/dexon-comput-v-cisco-929144568 |docket=5:22-CV-00053-RWS-JBB}}</ref><ref name="commlit-mandamus">{{cite news |title=5th Circuit Denies Cisco Mandamus Relief to Transfer Dexon's Antitrust Case to Northern Calif. |url=https://communicationslitigationtoday.com/article/2023/07/21/5th-circuit-denies-cisco-mandamus-relief-to-transfer-dexons-antitrust-case-to-northern-calif-2307200034 |work=Communications Litigation Today |date=July 21, 2023 |access-date=April 29, 2026}}</ref> In October 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted Cisco a preliminary injunction barring Dexon from selling certain products that Cisco had identified as counterfeit.<ref name="law360-injunction">{{cite news |last=Kim |first=Gina |title=Cisco Systems Blocks Dexon From Selling Knockoff Products |url=https://www.law360.com/articles/1729870 |work=Law360 |date=October 5, 2023 |access-date=April 29, 2026}}</ref>

In a January 17, 2024 summary judgment ruling, the court dismissed Dexon's Sherman Act § 1 conspiracy and per se tying claims while allowing the monopolization claims under Section 2 to proceed to trial.<ref name="dexon-msj-order">{{cite court |litigants=Dexon Computer, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc. |court=E.D. Tex. |date=January 17, 2024 |url=https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/65a9fae2f5042d01406bd1da |docket=5:22-CV-00053-RWS-JBB}}</ref><ref name="law360-teedup">{{cite news |last=Koenig |first=Bryan |title=Reseller's Antitrust Claims Against Cisco Teed Up For Trial |url=https://www.law360.com/articles/1787028/reseller-s-antitrust-claims-against-cisco-teed-up-for-trial |work=Law360 |date=January 17, 2024 |access-date=April 29, 2026}}</ref> CDW reached a separate settlement with Dexon shortly before trial.<ref name="register-cdw" /> Trial began in Texarkana, Texas on January 22, 2024.<ref name="reuters-trial-mirror">{{cite news |last=Scarcella |first=Mike |title=Cisco battles reseller's antitrust lawsuit over network equipment |url=https://www.ciplawyer.com/articles/152656.html |work=Reuters |publisher=Republished by China Intellectual Property Lawyers Network |date=January 23, 2024 |access-date=April 29, 2026}}</ref>

On January 29, 2024, before the case reached the jury, Dexon and Cisco reached a global settlement that resolved both the Texas antitrust case and the parallel California counterfeit case without a verdict.<ref name="law360-drop">{{cite news |last=Foretek |first=Jared |title=Reseller Drops Antitrust Countersuit Against Cisco Midtrial |url=https://www.law360.com/articles/1791064/reseller-drops-antitrust-countersuit-against-cisco-midtrial |work=Law360 |date=January 29, 2024 |access-date=April 29, 2026}}</ref><ref name="kellogghansen" /> A related insurance-coverage matter, ''Dexon Computer, Inc. v. Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America'', was decided by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit in May 2024.<ref name="dexon-travelers-8th">{{cite court |litigants=Dexon Computer, Inc. v. Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America |court=8th Cir. |date=May 20, 2024 |docket=23-1328 |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca8/23-1328/23-1328-2024-05-20.html}}</ref>