AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
U.S. International Trade Commission
In its recent decision in Lashify, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, the Federal Circuit opened the door for patent owners to include expanded categories of domestic investment to satisfy the economic prong of the...more
For years, the U.S. International Trade Commission maintained that the potent remedies available under Section 337 were unavailable to intellectual property owners considered to be nothing more than “mere importers.” That...more
On Friday, Feb. 7, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in Wuhan Healthgen Biotech. Corp. v. U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n, No. 23-1389, 2025 WL 420819 (Fed. Cir. 2025). The three-judge panel, consisting of Chief...more
A domestic industry may never be too small so long as the commercial product is 100% American-made according to the latest Federal Circuit opinion. In Wuhan Healthgen Biotech v. ITC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the...more
A US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit panel consisting of Judges Sharon Prost, Richard Taranto, and Raymond Chen recently heard oral argument in Lashify, Inc. v. US International Trade Commission, an appeal from a...more
Recently, Chief Administrative Law Judge (“CALJ”) Bullock of the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”), in Certain Carburetors and Products Containing Such Carburetors, Inv. No. 337-TA-1123, Order No. 77, suggested that...more
In a recent opinion, the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) held that economic investments and activities related to patented pre-commercial and non-commercial articles can meet Section 337’s domestic industry...more
Administrative Law Judge Lord held the economic prong can be satisfied even when the percentage of complainant’s domestic investments in the patented products is small in relation to its overall domestic investments. In re...more