News & Analysis as of

Section 337 Tariff Act of 1930 Imports

Womble Bond Dickinson

How the Lashify Decision Could Expand IP Enforcement Strategies at the ITC to Protect U.S. Domestic Industry

Womble Bond Dickinson on

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

Morrison & Foerster LLP

“Line-by-Line” vs. “As-a-Whole” Analysis: Clarifying the Mere Importer and Domestic Industry Analysis

The International Trade Commission’s (“Commission”) majority and dissenting opinions in Certain In Vitro Fertilization Products, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same (“In Vitro Fertilization”) illustrate two...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Downstream Remedy at the ITC: The Continuing Applicability of the EPROMs Analysis

Under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“Section 337”), the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC” or “Commission”) has the authority to issue exclusion orders barring the importation of articles that...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

The Federal Circuit En Banc Expands U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Authority To Enforce Antidumping and Countervailing Duty...

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) rarely sits en banc to address international trade issues that fall within its subject matter jurisdiction. It last did so nearly five years ago in Suprema,...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Continued Developments in Challenges to Customs’s Enforcement of Section 337 Exclusion Orders in Disputes Before the U.S. Court of...

At the end of 2018, the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) issued an opinion in One World Techs., Inc. v. United States. In that decision, Judge Choe-Groves concluded that U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

When International Trade and Patent Law Overlap: One World Techs., Inc. v. United States Slip Op. 18-173 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2018)...

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

Jones Day

The ITC is Not Just for Patents – Brand Owners are Welcome Too

Jones Day on

When people think of actions filed with the International Trade Commission (ITC) under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, they likely think of patent infringement cases. And the majority of ITC cases do involve patents,...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Section 337 and the New Trump Administration: Your Top Ten Questions Answered

Foley & Lardner LLP on

As shown by the recent announcement by the Trump Administration of a Section 232(b) national security review of steel imports, (a type of investigation that has not been used since 2001), there are a number of ways in which...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Anti-Competitive Conduct Claims In ITC Section 337 Cases

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Last week in Investigation No. 337-TA-1002 (certain carbon and alloy steel products); the U.S. International Trade Commission instituted an investigation of imported steel products from China. The investigation will include...more

Knobbe Martens

ITC Powerless to Block Importation of Infringing Digital Files

Knobbe Martens on

The Federal Circuit held that the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) could not block the import of infringing digital files because the ITC lacked jurisdiction. According to the Federal Circuit, the term “articles”...more

Bracewell LLP

Federal Circuit Strengthens ITC's Authority to Police Importation

Bracewell LLP on

On August 10, 2015, the Federal Circuit, acting en banc, ruled that the International Trade Commission (ITC) has the authority to prevent importation of products based on claims for induced infringement where the predicate...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Federal Circuit Upholds ITC Interpretation of § 337 to Cover Induced Infringement

McDermott Will & Emery on

Suprema, Inc. and Mentalix Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Case No. 12-1170 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 10, 2015) (Reyna, J.) (O’Malley, Proust, Lourie, and Dyk JJ., dissenting). By way of background, appellee Suprema manufactures...more

12 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide