In a recent order, ALJ Bullock indicated that it is unsettled whether evidence related to unreleased products can be used to establish that a domestic industry exists. As a result, he denied respondent’s motion to strike...more
In a recent order, ALJ Lord highlighted that standing requirements at the ITC differ from those in federal courts. At the ITC, only one complainant needs to demonstrate standing. See Certain Road Construction Machines &...more
As we previously reported, after almost 3 years, new rules for ITC patent cases will go into effect in June. The new rules will apply to all ITC investigations instituted after June 7, 2018.
The new rules include several...more
While the ITC rarely issues general exclusion orders (“GEO”), two recent cases illustrate the importance of seeking such relief in appropriate circumstances. 19 U.S.C. § 1337 gives the Commission authority to enjoin the...more
Droplets, Inc. v. E*TRADE Bank, No. 16-2504 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 19, 2018), is a cautionary tale on the need for careful patent prosecution. Because of an error in the priority claim, Droplets lost its right to claim an earlier...more
The U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) terminated Investigation No. 337-TA-1094 based on actual expiration of the asserted patent at issue. Upon a review of the Initial Determination (“ID”), the Commission determined...more
4/20/2018
/ Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Cease and Desist Orders ,
Exclusion Orders ,
Final Determinations ,
Initial Determination (ID) ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Patent Assertion Entities ,
Patent Expiration ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Petition For Rehearing
In a recent Opinion, the Commission continued the practice of including its usual certification provision in the Limited Exclusion Order despite the complainant’s request for a more restrictive certification provision. In re...more
On February 27, 2018, Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) Bullock issued an Initial Determination granting Respondents’ renewed emergency motion to terminate the Investigation because the Commission will be unable to issue a...more
In a recent order, Administrative Law Judge Bullock granted Respondents Fujifilm Holdings Corporation, Fujifilm Corporation, Fujifilm Holdings America Corporation, and Fujifilm Recording Media U.S.A., Inc. (collectively,...more
The Situation: Industry leaders are taking serious interest in artificial intelligence, which is the development of computer systems able to perform tasks that normally require human intelligence and judgment.
The Impact:...more
In Cisco Systems, Inc. v. ITC, No. 16-2563 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 28, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Commission’s exclusion order entered in Certain Network Devices, Related Software and Components Thereof (I), Inv. No....more
ALJ Pender’s initial determination in Certain Mobile Device Holders and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1028 (Sept. 12, 2017), finding a violation of Section 337, provides important guidance on what investments count...more
10/18/2017
/ Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Copyright ,
Domestic Industry Requirement ,
Initial Determination (ID) ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Investment ,
Mobile Devices ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Section 337 ,
Trademarks
In a decision dated August 17, 2017, the Board denied institution of Kingston Technology Company, Inc.’s petition requesting inter partes review of claims 1-3, 6-8, 11-15, 23-28, and 36-39 of U.S. Patent No. 6,088,802 (“the...more
In an earlier post, we summarized ALJ McNamara’s recent Summary Determination in Certain UV Curable Coatings For Optical Fibers, Coated Optical Fibers, And Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1031, Order No. 33 (July 6,...more
As noted in a previous post, ALJ Lord issued a domestic industry ruling, which the Commission later vacated without position, finding that R&D-based investments in plant and equipment or labor and capital cannot count towards...more
Before 2011, the ITC routinely found violations of Section 337 based on the infringement of method claims through a respondent’s own use of an article post-importation. This changed when the ITC issued its Opinion in Certain...more
5/23/2017
/ Direct Infringement ,
Electronic Devices ,
Imports ,
Indirect Infringement ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Method Claims ,
Motion for Reconsideration ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Section 337 ,
Settlement
Judge McNamara determined to reopen the record after the hearing and take judicial notice of two PTAB decisions denying institution of IPR challenges of the asserted patents in Certain Composite Aerogel Insulation Materials...more
In a decision dated February 27, 2017, the Board denied institution of Google Inc.’s petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review of claims 20, 21, 23–26, 28, and 29 of U.S. Patent No. 6,128,651 (“the ’651 patent”)...more
As a follow up to our previous post, Judge McNamara has issued the public version of her Initial Determination pursuant to the 100-day Pilot Program proceeding on domestic industry in Certain Silicon-On-Insulator Wafers, Inv....more