Competition record
Sulzer
Deep profile · 1 linked library matter
Sulzer's Mixpac unit sells cartridges and mixing tips that combine two-part materials as they are applied, including in dental and industrial uses. An antitrust counterclaim was dismissed with prejudice on 30 September 2026 because a trademark theory did not state a monopoly act.
Overview
Mixpac cartridges and the tips that fit them are used where two components have to mix on the way out of the tube. A rival tip that does not fit cannot replace the one designed for that cartridge.
A counterclaim treated the trademark position on that system as a monopoly act. On 30 September 2026 the court dismissed the antitrust counterclaim with prejudice.
The court held that the trademark theory did not state a monopoly act. The dismissal is final as the claim was pleaded, so that antitrust theory cannot be filed again in the same form.
Competition footprint
Fit between cartridge and mixing tip is the product design behind the trademark dispute.
Dismissal with prejudice ends the antitrust counterclaim that was actually pleaded.
The order rejects that monopoly theory and is not a ruling on every Mixpac supply contract.
Consumer & business angle
Dentists and industrial users buy cartridges and tips through distributors.
The dismissed counterclaim belonged to the party that tried to turn the trademark dispute into a monopoly claim.
What to watch
- Whether anyone appeals the 30 September 2026 dismissal.
- The trademark dispute itself, which the court said was not a monopoly act.
Markets
two-part mixing systems · dental and industrial cartridges · trademarks
Also known as: mixpac, sulzer mixpac