The U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC” or “Commission”) has the authority to issue exclusion orders barring the importation of articles that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights. The default remedy is a limited...more
In a recent decision in UV Curable Coatings for Optical Fibers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1031, Judge MaryJoan McNamara struck a respondent’s inequitable conduct defense, which the respondent based on the complainants’ conduct during...more
Since February 2015, when the U.S. International Trade Commission announced its pilot program for expedited rulings on whether ITC exclusion and cease-and-desist orders cover redesigns or new products, the commission has...more
On November 28, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a writ of certiorari seeking appeal of the Federal Circuit’s decision to uphold the ITC’s imposition of a $6.2 million penalty against DBN, Inc. and BDN LLC (collectively,...more
Since February 2015, when the ITC announced its Pilot Program for expedited rulings on whether ITC exclusion and cease-and-desist orders cover redesigns or new products, the Commission has issued four decisions under the...more
Reversing an earlier panel decision, the en banc Federal Circuit confirmed that the ITC has the authority to issue exclusion orders against imported products that ultimately are used to infringe method claims, even if those...more
8/12/2015
/ Covered Business Method Patents ,
Direct Infringement ,
En Banc Review ,
Imports ,
Induced Infringement ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Section 337 ,
Suprema