<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for ITC Law Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.itcblog.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.itcblog.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:43:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Federal Circuit Affirms in Ninestar Appeal (2009-1549) by jbiz</title>
		<link>http://www.itcblog.com/20120210/federal-circuit-affirms-in-ninestar-appeal-2009-1549/comment-page-1/#comment-291653</link>
		<dc:creator>jbiz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:43:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.itcblog.com/?p=11069#comment-291653</guid>
		<description>Any idea what the ITC does with the penalty payments it actually receives?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Any idea what the ITC does with the penalty payments it actually receives?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ITC Announces Retirement Of Chief ALJ Luckern by ATM</title>
		<link>http://www.itcblog.com/20110804/itc-announces-retirement-of-chief-alj-luckern/comment-page-1/#comment-164060</link>
		<dc:creator>ATM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:15:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.itcblog.com/?p=9155#comment-164060</guid>
		<description>Is Judge Luckern&#039;s retirement unscheduled?  The appointment of Judge Bullock as acting chief ALJ seems to suggest that is case.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is Judge Luckern&#8217;s retirement unscheduled?  The appointment of Judge Bullock as acting chief ALJ seems to suggest that is case.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Canon Files New 337 Complaint Regarding Certain Toner Cartridges by Alex Bancroft</title>
		<link>http://www.itcblog.com/20100630/canon-files-new-337-complaint-regarding-certain-toner-cartridges/comment-page-1/#comment-37354</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Bancroft</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jul 2010 21:09:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.itcblog.com/?p=5313#comment-37354</guid>
		<description>I am not sure if my last post went through.

Both patents -
 Appears to be an apparatus that has a driving force.
Would anyone know if this is related to the 05A and O5X drum drive shaft?

Any datsa would helps us all perhaps.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am not sure if my last post went through.</p>
<p>Both patents -<br />
 Appears to be an apparatus that has a driving force.<br />
Would anyone know if this is related to the 05A and O5X drum drive shaft?</p>
<p>Any datsa would helps us all perhaps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Canon Files New 337 Complaint Regarding Certain Toner Cartridges by Alex Bancroft</title>
		<link>http://www.itcblog.com/20100630/canon-files-new-337-complaint-regarding-certain-toner-cartridges/comment-page-1/#comment-37353</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex Bancroft</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jul 2010 21:07:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.itcblog.com/?p=5313#comment-37353</guid>
		<description>On the patent 5,903,803 -It appears to be an apparatus that has a driving force.

Would anyone know if this is related to the 05A and O5X drum drive shaft? Or is just referring to the OPC (Drum).

The patent 6,128,454 is simular in description.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the patent 5,903,803 -It appears to be an apparatus that has a driving force.</p>
<p>Would anyone know if this is related to the 05A and O5X drum drive shaft? Or is just referring to the OPC (Drum).</p>
<p>The patent 6,128,454 is simular in description.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ALJ Rogers Denies Motion For Temporary Relief In Certain Silicon Microphone Packages (337-TA-695) by Interested Party</title>
		<link>http://www.itcblog.com/20100325/alj-rogers-denies-motion-for-temporary-relief-in-certain-silicon-microphone-packages-337-ta-695/comment-page-1/#comment-18298</link>
		<dc:creator>Interested Party</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2010 18:37:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.itcblog.com/?p=4150#comment-18298</guid>
		<description>Curiously, Knowles somehow sees this loss as a victory:

http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view&amp;newsId=20100325006755&amp;newsLang=en</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Curiously, Knowles somehow sees this loss as a victory:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view&#038;newsId=20100325006755&#038;newsLang=en" rel="nofollow">http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view&#038;newsId=20100325006755&#038;newsLang=en</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on ALJ Essex Issues Initial Determination Finding Violation Of Section 337 In Certain Optoelectronic Devices (337-TA-669) by Paul</title>
		<link>http://www.itcblog.com/20100316/alj-essex-issues-initial-determination-finding-violation-of-section-337-in-certain-optoelectronic-devices-337-ta-669/comment-page-1/#comment-17900</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 04:43:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.itcblog.com/?p=4054#comment-17900</guid>
		<description>There also is a district court case that was stayed pending a final determination by the ITC. If the respondent appeals the ITC&#039;s final determination to the Federal Circuit, does the district court&#039;s stay remain in effect? It would seem a waste of judicial resources for a case to be in parallel proceedings before both the district court and the Federal Circuit on appeal.

Also, many records are labeled as confidential on the ITC&#039;s website for this case, and this presumably explains the large volume of protective orders in the ITC record. Before the final determination, there will certainly be some transferring of information, particularly confidential information, to the district court, whether via requests to the party that supplied the information, or via a 28usc1659b request.

Due to the relatively fast-paced nature of an ITC proceeding, there is a greater likelihood that the parties may learn of new relevant information after discovery has closed, or at an otherwise too-late date in the ITC proceeding, such that the ALJ denies admission of the new information. If the losing party appeals to the Federal Circuit, it may be denied the opportunity to present arguments based on the new information. The losing party could of course raise the arguments before the district court, but then the right to appeal the ITC decision may be lost.

Res judicata also is a factor at this stage. For example, the ITC&#039;s determination may be that certain patent claims are not invalid, while the district court&#039;s decision, which is based upon consideration of the new information and whatever it deems persuasive from the ITC case, may be that those same patent claims are invalid. In this sense, the fast-paced nature of an ITC proceeding can be used as an effective strategy for either party.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There also is a district court case that was stayed pending a final determination by the ITC. If the respondent appeals the ITC&#8217;s final determination to the Federal Circuit, does the district court&#8217;s stay remain in effect? It would seem a waste of judicial resources for a case to be in parallel proceedings before both the district court and the Federal Circuit on appeal.</p>
<p>Also, many records are labeled as confidential on the ITC&#8217;s website for this case, and this presumably explains the large volume of protective orders in the ITC record. Before the final determination, there will certainly be some transferring of information, particularly confidential information, to the district court, whether via requests to the party that supplied the information, or via a 28usc1659b request.</p>
<p>Due to the relatively fast-paced nature of an ITC proceeding, there is a greater likelihood that the parties may learn of new relevant information after discovery has closed, or at an otherwise too-late date in the ITC proceeding, such that the ALJ denies admission of the new information. If the losing party appeals to the Federal Circuit, it may be denied the opportunity to present arguments based on the new information. The losing party could of course raise the arguments before the district court, but then the right to appeal the ITC decision may be lost.</p>
<p>Res judicata also is a factor at this stage. For example, the ITC&#8217;s determination may be that certain patent claims are not invalid, while the district court&#8217;s decision, which is based upon consideration of the new information and whatever it deems persuasive from the ITC case, may be that those same patent claims are invalid. In this sense, the fast-paced nature of an ITC proceeding can be used as an effective strategy for either party.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Commission Issues Final Determination in Certain Sucralose (337-TA-604) by Brooks</title>
		<link>http://www.itcblog.com/20090408/commission-issues-final-determination-in-certain-sucralose-337-ta-604/comment-page-1/#comment-13837</link>
		<dc:creator>Brooks</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 01:31:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.itcblog.com/?p=931#comment-13837</guid>
		<description>Any word on if the public version of this opinion has been released yet or where it is published?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Any word on if the public version of this opinion has been released yet or where it is published?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
