By Eric Schweibenz
On March 15, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public version of Order No. 67 (dated February 27, 2013) granting Respondents Funai Corporation, Inc.; Funai Electric Co., Ltd.; P&F USA, Inc.; and Funai Service Corporation’s (collectively, “Funai’) motion for summary determination of non-infringement in Certain Audiovisual Components and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-837).

According to the Order, Funai argued that it identified over 200 products in its interrogatory responses as “accused products,” but Complainants LSI Corporation and Agere Systems LLC’s (collectively, “Complainants”) experts provided infringement contentions for only 39 products.  Accordingly, Funai asserted that it was entitled to summary determination of non-infringement for all of the accused products that lack infringement contentions.

In opposition, Complainants argued that it was premature and improper to grant summary determination because there was still time in the procedural schedule to allow Complainants to procure evidence regarding infringement from third parties. 

ALJ Shaw determined that Complainants’ experts did not provide infringement contentions for 10 products that appeared on both Funai’s motion for summary determination and the Joint Statement of Funai Accused Products.  Further, ALJ Shaw held that additional third-party discovery would adversely affect pre-hearing activities.  Therefore, ALJ Shaw granted Funai’s motion for summary determination of non-infringement for the 10 enumerated Funai products.