Not a patent troll.
Patent trolls are companies that register/steal/buy patents with the sole intention of using them to sue, without actually having any product based on the patent.
This company does actually have real, tangible products which are indeed of the same architecture as the patents they own. If Sony (and it's cell friends) has actually infringed on this patent with the Cell processor then the company does have a legitimate claim because Sony is essentially profiting of a patented idea without paying the required fees to license the technology.
Whilst I completely disagree with the whole patent system in the first place personally, I certainly can't find fault with Parallel's actions here because far from being a patent troll, they're actually using the patent system as it's intended to be used. They're putting forward a court case regarding a company that is profiting off a patent they own that pertains to hardware they produce. If Sony et al. knew that Cell infringed on this patent then the correct course of action would've been to either pay Parallel to license the patent or to pay Parallel to develop a Cell-type product for them based on this patent.
I know it's easy to cry patent troll when a company you've never heard of sues a big name company, but in this case it's far too early to be crying patent troll, at first looks this seems to actually be a legitimate claim. If you developed a technology first, patented it and then a company like Sony came along and copied it rather than licensing the technology off you or bought your existing product wouldn't you be rather annoyed?