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
A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit expands which intellectual property (IP) owners can seek relief before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) to block the import of infringing...more
Lashify, Inc. is an American company, with headquarters and employees in the United States, that distributes, markets, and sells eyelash extensions (and cases and applicators for the eyelash extensions) in the United States....more
In this edition of The Precedent, we outline the decision in Wuhan Healthgen Biotechnology Corp. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently emphasized that Section 337’s...more
Lashify, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, No. 23-1245, 2025 WL 699368 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 2025) - On March 5, 2025, the Federal Circuit vacated the International Trade Commission (“ITC”)’s decision and exercised its “independent...more
In a recent ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upended years of settled law and ruled that sales and marketing expenses, by themselves, can be the basis for a finding of domestic industry in an...more
On this episode of Ropes & Gray's ITC-focused podcast series, Talkin' Trade, IP litigators Matt Rizzolo, Matt Shapiro, and Patrick Lavery discuss a groundbreaking Federal Circuit decision in Lashify v. ITC. This pivotal...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) recently issued a landmark decision in Lashify, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, expanding what expenditures count to prove the economic prong of...more
On March 5, the Federal Circuit held that sales, marketing, warehousing, quality control, or distribution expenditures may count as “employment of labor or capital” for purposes of satisfying the economic domestic industry...more
In Lashify v. ITC, the Federal Circuit held that the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement, which is a precondition for obtaining International Trade Commission Section 337 relief, can be satisfied with...more
In a precedential decision issued on March 5, the Federal Circuit held that the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) must consider various domestic expenditures related to foreign-made products in determining whether 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
Examine real-world strategies for tackling the most pressing challenges in ITC practice at ACI’s 17th Annual Practitioners' Think Tank on ITC Litigation & Enforcement. Be in the same room with leading in-house counsel,...more
On March 5, 2025, the Federal Circuit rejected the ITC’s longstanding practice of excluding certain types of activities from qualifying as “domestic industry” activities under Section 337(a)(3)(B), finding the ITC’s approach...more
Section 337 investigations at the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) remain an efficient and powerful method for American businesses seeking relief from foreign acts of unfair competition, including infringement of...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
The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) remains a pivotal forum for addressing intellectual property disputes under Section 337, particularly those involving design patents. Although the Commission issued no remedial...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
Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc., No. 1:06-cv-00605 (Fed. Cir. October 3, 2024) - On October 3, 2024, the Federal Circuit held that a party may be liable for false advertising violations under Section 43(a)(1)(B) of the...more
In this episode, Mike Burke, AGG Corporate partner and co-chair of the firm’s International practice, is joined by Andrew Beverina, AGG Litigation & Dispute Resolution and Intellectual Property of counsel and former...more
In a recent presentation featuring Uma Everett, Director at Sterne Kessler, and Dallin Glenn, General Counsel at BTL Industries, Inc., we discussed strategies for succeeding in an ITC investigation, focusing primarily on the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a district court’s grant of summary judgment, finding that the language used in an invention assignment clause was subject to more than one reasonable...more
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
Returning to Washington in May, ACI’s 16th Annual Practitioners’ Think Tank on ITC Litigation & Enforcement is your opportunity to learn from and network with key members of the ITC Bench, senior ITC Attorneys and leading...more