By Alex Gasser
On October 24, 2011, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice of final determination finding a violation of Section 337, issuing a general exclusion order, and terminating the investigation in Certain Inkjet Cartridges with Printheads and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-723).

By way of background, and according to the notice, Complainants Hewlett-Packard Company and Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. (collectively, “HP”) accused Respondents MicroJet Technology Co., Ltd. (“MicroJet”); Asia Pacific Microsystems, Inc. (“APM”); Mipo Technology Limited (“Mipo Tech”); Mipo Science & Technology Co., Ltd. (“Mipo”); Mextec d/b/a Mipo America Ltd. (“Mextec”); SinoTime Technologies, Inc. (“SinoTime”); and PTC Holdings Limited (“PTC”) of infringing certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,234,598; 6,309,053; 6,398,347; 6,481,817; 6,402,279; and 6,412,917 (the ’917 patent).  Respondents Mipo, Mipo Tech, SinoTime, and Mextec were subsequently terminated, and Respondent MicroJet defaulted.  HP withdrew allegations of infringement of the ‘917 patent.

In his June 10, 2011 Initial Determination (“ID”), ALJ Rogers found a violation of Section 337 and determined that MicroJet and PTC directly infringed the remaining asserted patents and found APM liable for contributory infringement (but not direct or induced infringement).  ALJ Rogers further determined that the asserted patents were not invalid and that a domestic industry existed with respect to these remaining asserted patents.  See our August 12, 2011 post for more information.

The Commission determined to review a single issue, namely, the ID’s findings that HP failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent APM induced infringement of the asserted patents.  See our August 16, 2011 post for more information.

Having examined the record of this investigation, the Commission determined there was a violation of Section 337.  The Commission reversed the ALJ’s finding with respect to Respondent APM’s induced infringement of the asserted patents, finding instead that HP established by a preponderance of the evidence that APM induced infringement of the asserted patents.  The Commission adopted ALJ Rogers’ ID in all other respects.  The Commission further determined that the appropriate remedy was a general exclusion order prohibiting the entry of inkjet ink cartridges with printheads and components thereof that infringe any of the asserted claims.  Finally, the Commission determined that a bond of 100 percent of the entered value was required to permit temporary importation during the Presidential review period.