#WFMstagram: See What the Industry is Posting Online

What’s trending in the film industry? Here are some of the top posts on Instagram from the past week. Don’t forget to follow WFM on Instagram, and tag @WindowFilmMag on your latest installations; we look forward to seeing your awesome pics! #WindowFilmWednesday

INTINTZ Window Tinting installed tint on 2017 Dodge Challenger.

A post shared by Al Satterfield (@intintz) on

Tint Avenue, in San Antonio, Texas, showed off one of its latest PPF installations.

A post shared by Tint Avenue (@tint_avenue) on

Who doesn’t love a Range Rover, especially when it’s wrapped in red? Courtesy of Kyle Kovacs Window Tint.

#WFMstagram: See What the Industry is Posting Online

What’s trending in the film industry? Here are some of the top posts on Instagram from the past week. Don’t forget to follow WFM on Instagram, and tag @WindowFilmMag on your latest installations; we look forward to seeing your awesome pics! #WindowFilmWednesday

Sainz Designs shows off one of its latest tint installations, complete with a hydrophobic windshield glass coating.

Deco Tint installing PPF on this Nissan 370Z.

A post shared by Brodie Mathews (@deco_tinting) on

WBC Graphics completed this wrap for Darth Shader Window Tinting’s ’67 Falcon Wagon.

A post shared by Sharon (@darthshader_tinting) on

3M and XPEL Settle Lawsuit

After nearly two years of court filings, St. Paul, Minn.-based 3M and San Antonio, Texas-based XPEL have reached a settlement agreement in a patent infringement lawsuit brought forth by 3M on December 30, 2015 in federal district court in Minnesota.

The original suit alleged that XPEL’s XPF paint protection film (PPF) product infringed 3M’s U.S. Patent No. 8,765,263 (`263), which is “a multilayer protective film comprising a first layer, a second layer and a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer.” XPEL denied the allegations.

The companies have now agreed to a settlement, under which XPEL will acquire a license to the ‘263 patent. The court document simply states:

“It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties through their respective attorneys that:

  1. Plaintiffs 3M Company and 3M Innovative Properties Company (‘3M’) dismiss without prejudice their causes of action against XPEL Technologies Corporation (‘XPEL’).
  2. XPEL dismisses without prejudice its causes of action against 3M.
  3. Each party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs.”

During XPEL’s recent fourth quarter 2016 earnings call with investors, Ryan Pape, CEO, touched on the settlement, stating, “The agreement’s confidential, and we don’t expect a material impact to the business as a result, and that’s really about all I can say.” He added, “There’s no reason to drag it out and talk about it. It’s done, we’re moving on, and there’s plenty of work for us to do on our own operations and with our customers to better serve them.”