AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
U.S. International Trade Commission
The first quarter of 2025 saw the International Trade Commission issue the following public orders addressing a wide variety of issues ranging from evaluation of significance for domestic industry to staying remedial orders...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
Trudell Medical International Inc. v. D R Burton Healthcare, LLC, Appeal Nos. 2023-1777, -1779 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 7, 2025) This week’s Case of the Week presents a cautionary tale for litigators to be sure they’ve timely...more
Addressing a decision by the US International Trade Commission finding a violation of Section 337 based on importation of certain TV products, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed that the patent holder had...more
In August 2023, one complainant filed a new complaint for a violation of Section 337 in the International Trade Commission. Specifically, on August 22, NJOY, LLC, filed a complaint against JUUL Labs, Inc., in Vaporizer...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed an International Trade Commission decision finding a § 337 violation. The Court concluded that the Commission correctly found that an open-ended claim was enabled since...more
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more
The International Trade Commission can more readily provide injunctive relief against an adjudged infringer than a district court, under appropriate conditions (i.e., with regard to an infringing product or a product made by...more
BIO-RAD LABORATORIES, INC. v. ITC - Before Newman, Lourie, and Dyk. Appeal from the ITC. Summary: Patentees cannot escape the bounds of their claims by promoting oversimplified characterizations of those claims....more
Last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed imposition of an exclusion order under 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930) by the Federal Trade Commission against 10X Genomyx (an intervenor in this appeal) over...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
Last month, the Federal Circuit affirmed an exclusion order imposed by the International Trade Commission against Bio-Rad for importing infringing microfluidic systems and components used for gene sequencing or related...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
Goodwin’s 337 Quarterly Insider remains the premiere publicly available source for keeping up to date on all meaningful decisions coming out of the Commission. Please find below Goodwin’s insights on the months of April, May,...more
272-1 Federal Circuit Holds a New Invalidity Challenge at the ITC is not a Change in Condition that Enables the ITC to review the Validity of a Patent or Rescind an Exclusion Order - The Federal Circuit (Court) recently...more
The Federal Circuit has issued another opinion arising from the patent conflict between The Chamberlain Group and Techtronic Industries—and, once again, a patent owned by Chamberlain suffered a major blow. In Techtronic...more
In a recent order issued in the Northern District of Texas, Judge Godbey denied a Defendant’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion despite the Federal Circuit’s holding that the asserted patent was invalid as indefinite. Hyosung TNS, Inc. v....more
On December 5, 2019, Judge David C. Godbey of the Northern District of Texas denied the defendant Diebold Nixdorf, Inc.’s (“Diebold”) motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), in Nautilus Hyosung Inc. v. Diebold, Inc. et al.,...more
From time to time, international trade and patent law matters overlap. We expect to see these interactions in disputes filed pursuant to Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. § 1337). In other instances, the U.S....more
We recently posted about when a complainant is permitted to amend its complaint and the good cause that must be shown. Similar issues arise where a respondent wants to amend an answer without showing good cause. An order...more
In a recent order, Administrative Law Judge McNamara denied Complainants Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. and ATI Technologies ULC’s motion for leave to file an amended complaint to assert U.S. Patent Nos. 8,760,454 and 9,582,846...more
Judge Pender issued Order No. 19 in Certain Access Control Systems and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1016, denying Complainant The Chamberlain Group’s (“CGI”) motion for summary determination that the accused products...more