Apple And NeXT Software File New 337 Complaint Regarding Certain Personal Data And Mobile Communications Devices
On March 2, 2010, Apple Inc. (formerly known as Apple Computer, Inc.) of Cupertino, California (“Apple”) and NeXT Software, Inc. (formerly known as NeXT Computer, Inc.) of Cupertino, California (collectively, “Complainants”) filed a complaint requesting that the ITC commence an investigation pursuant to Section 337.
The complaint alleges that High Tech Computer Corp. of Taiwan, HTC America, Inc. of Bellevue, Washington, and Exedea, Inc. of Houston, Texas (collectively, the “Proposed Respondents”) unlawfully import into the United States, sell for importation, and sell within the United States after importation “certain mobile communication devices and components thereof” that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,481,721 (the ‘721 patent), 5,519,867 (the ‘867 patent), 5,566,337 (the ‘337 patent), 5,929,852 (the ‘852 patent), 5,946,647 (the ‘647 patent), 5,969,705 (the ‘705 patent), 6,275,983 (the ‘983 patent), 6,343,263 (the ‘263 patent), 5,915,131 (the ‘131 patent), and RE 39,486 (the RE ‘486 patent) (collectively, the “Asserted Patents”).
According to the complaint, (1) the ‘721 patent “relates generally to a means of allowing computer programs running one process to access objects that are located within a different process,” (2) the ‘867 and ‘983 patents “relate to the execution of object-oriented programs on a computer running a procedural operating systems,” (3) the ‘337 patent “relates generally to the distribution of event notifications between different software elements in a computer system,” (4) the ‘852 patent “relates generally to providing an efficient way for allowing a user to access a computing resource that is stored at a remote location, including by efficiently collecting the different software components needed to access that resource,” (5) the ‘647 patent “generally relates to a computer-based system and method for detecting structures and performing computer-based actions on detected structures,” (6) the ‘705 patent “relates generally to a software environment in which a foreground application can make use of a process running in the background to perform useful operations while simultaneously allowing the user to continue interacting with the user interface,” (7) the ‘263 patent “relates generally to providing programming abstraction layers for real-time processing applications,” (8) the ‘131 patent “relates generally to the use of application programming interfaces (APIs) to access system services,” and (9) the RE ‘486 patent “generally relates to a computer system that operates using ‘component layers.’”
The accused products identified in the complaint include computing and mobile communication devices, cellular phones and smartphones, together with software designed for use on, and intended to be loaded onto, such devices. The specific products named in the complaint include, for example, certain HTC Android Products, including the HTC Nexus One, the HTC Dream (sold commercially as the T-Mobile G1), HTC Magic (sold commercially as the HTC myTouch 3G), the HTC Hero, and the HTC Droid Eris.
Regarding related litigation, Complainants assert in the complaint that the ‘705, ‘263, ‘131, ‘867, and RE ‘486 patents are the subject of pending Investigation No. 337-TA-704. See our February 22, 2010 post for more details. Complainants further assert that the Asserted Patents are the subject of a concurrently filed complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against the Proposed Respondents.
With respect to the domestic industry requirement, Complainants assert that they meet such requirement through, for example, Apple’s significant investments in physical operations, employment of labor and capital, and exploitation of the Asserted Patents.
As to potential remedy, Complainants request that the Commission issue a permanent exclusion order and permanent cease and desist orders directed to the Proposed Respondents.
