By Eric SchweibenzOn December 21, 2012, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice and order in Certain Static Random Access Memories and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-792). In the notice, the Commission determined to review Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock’s October 25, 2013 initial determination (“ID”) which found no violation of Section 337. Further, the Commission issued an order remanding the investigation back to ALJ Bullock.
By way of background, the Complainant in this matter is Cypress Semiconductor Corporation (“Cypress”) and the remaining Respondents are GSI Technology, Inc. (“GSI”), Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”); and Avnet, Inc. (“Avnet”; collectively, the “Respondents”). The patents at issue in the investigation are U.S. Patent Nos. 6,651,134 (the ‘134 patent); 6,262,937 (the ‘937 patent); 7,142,477 (the ‘477 patent); and 6,534,805 (the 805 patent). See our July 26, 2011 post for more information about this investigation.
In his October 25, 2015 ID, ALJ Bullock determined that the Respondents’ accused products do not infringe any of the four patents. The ALJ also determined that Cypress failed to meet the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement for any of the four patents. In light of these findings, the ALJ declined to make any findings regarding validity or enforcement of the patents in the interests of judicial economy. See our December 21, 2012 post for additional details.
According to the December 21, 2012 notice, the Commission has determined to review the “final ID in its entirety” and remand the investigation to the ALJ to consider the parties’ invalidity and unenforceability arguments and make appropriate findings. The Commission specifically notes that “the ALJ should have resolved these issues given the procedural posture of this investigation.” The Commission did not seek further briefing. Specifically, the Commission held that briefings, if any, will await Commission consideration of ALJ Bullock’s remand ID.