Join us for our upcoming webinar, “Strategies for ITC Success: Insights from the Client Perspective,” on Tuesday, June 4, 2024, from 1:00 PM – 2:00 PM (EDT). Director Uma Everett will be joined by Dallin Glenn, General...more
The International Trade Commission found a violation of Section 337 by Comcast X1 set-top boxes, and Comcast appealed two issues of statutory interpretation underlying the Commission’s finding. First, Comcast argued that its...more
Mayborn petitioned the International Trade Commission to rescind a general exclusion order (GEO) after the complainants informed Mayborn that its self-anchoring beverage containers were potentially subject to the order. The...more
[co-author: Kathleen Wills]
Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more
2/3/2021
/ Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) ,
Adidas ,
Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Administrative Proceedings ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Appointments Clause ,
Certiorari ,
Claim Construction ,
Comcast ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Covenant Not to Sue ,
Denial of Certiorari ,
Dismissals ,
Due Process ,
Estoppel ,
Evidence ,
FanDuel ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Google ,
Hewlett-Packard ,
Hulu ,
Inter Partes Reexamination ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Judicial Review ,
Lack of Authority ,
Motion to Amend ,
Nike ,
Obviousness ,
Oral Argument ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Section 337 ,
Subject Matter Jurisdiction ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO
In ClearCorrect v. ITC, issued on November 10, 2015, the Federal Circuit interpreted the term “articles” as used in Section 337 to be tangible, physical items. Accordingly, electronic transmissions were held to be outside the...more
En banc Court reverses panel decision 6-4 and upholds U.S. International Trade Commission determination that it has broad authority to address acts of induced infringement based upon post-importation conduct.
Procedural...more
8/13/2015
/ Chevron Deference ,
Direct Infringement ,
En Banc Review ,
Imports ,
Induced Infringement ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Judicial Authority ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Section 337
Enforcement of biologic patents at the United States International Trade Commission under Section 337 provides certainty and tactical advantages to patent holders that are unavailable in district court under the BPCIA. For...more
Court considers whether the U.S. International Trade Commission has authority over allegations of induced infringement and infringement of method-of-use claims by importers.
Procedural Background -
Suprema v....more
On April 3, 2014, the United States International Trade Commission affirmed that the importation of digital data via electronic transmission can constitute “importation” of a patent-infringing product in violation of Section...more
What’s at Stake?
The panel majority held that exclusion orders under § 337 may not issue based on a theory of induced infringement where the direct infringement does not occur until after the articles are imported. The...more