ITC Decides To Review Initial Determination In Certain Probe Card Assemblies (337-TA-621)
On September 14, 2009, the International Trade Commission issued a notice determining to review in part ALJ Bullock’s June 29, 2009 initial determination (“ID”) finding no violation of Section 337 by Respondents Phicom Corp., Phiam Corp., Micronics Japan Co., Ltd., and MJC Electronics Corp. (“Respondents”) in Certain Probe Card Assemblies, Components Thereof and Certain Tested DRAM and NAND Flash Memory Devices and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-621).
By way of background, and as explained in our July 23 post, ALJ Bullock determined in the ID that there was no violation of Section 337 by Respondents for importation into the U.S., the sale for importation, or the sale within the U.S. after importation of certain probe card assemblies and components thereof, certain probe card assemblies and components thereof, and certain tested DRAM and NAND flash memory devices and products containing same, in connection with claims 1, 3, 4, 18, 19, 23, 24, 29, 32, 33, 36, 37, and 41 of U.S. Patent No. 6,615,485 (the ‘485 patent); claims 1-3, 12, 24, and 25 of U.S. Patent No. 6,509,751 (the ‘751 patent); claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 7,225,538 (the ‘538 patent); and claims 21-23, 27-37, and 33-35 of U.S. Patent No. 5,994,152 (the ‘152 patent). Further, the ALJ determined that Complainant FormFactor, Inc. had satisfied the domestic industry requirement with respect to the ‘751 patent, but that it had not satisfied the domestic industry requirement for the ‘485, ‘538, and ‘152 patents.
In the September 14 notice, the Commission determined to review: (1) “the ID’s finding that Japanese Patent Application Publication H10-31034 to Amamiya et al. (‘Amamiya’ or RX-166) does not anticipate the asserted claims of the ‘751 patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102; (2) the ID’s conclusion of law regarding non-infringement of the ‘751 patent by Phicom’s accused products; (3) the ID’s conclusion that no analysis of the validity of the asserted claims that depend from claim 21 of the ‘152 patent is needed.” The Commission also “determined not to review the remainder of the final ID.” In addition, the notice requests briefing on two questions of particular interest to the Commission.
The parties’ briefs to the Commission are due by September 25, 2009, with reply submissions due by October 2, 2009.
