On March 18, the Commission issued a Notice of Final Determination finding a violation of section 337 and general exclusion order (“GEO”) in Certain Shaker Screens for Drilling Fluids, Components Thereof, and Related Marketing Materials (Inv. No. 337-TA-1184).

Read More

On March 4, 2021, the ITC issued a Notice of Investigation in Certain Semiconductor Devices, Wireless Infrastructure Equipment Containing the Same, and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-1254).

Read More

On February 10, 2021, the ITC issued a notice of its final determination finding a violation of section 337 in Certain Lithium Ion Batteries, Batter Cells, Battery Modules, Battery Packs, Components Thereof, and Processes Therefor (Inv. No. 337-TA-1159). According to the notice, the Commission found a violation of section 337 and issued a limited exclusion order (“LEO”) and cease-and-desist order against Respondents SK Innovation Co., Ltd. of Republic of Korea (“SKI”) and SK Battery America, Inc. of Atlanta, Georgia (“SKBA”) (collectively, “SK”).

Read More

On December 18, 2017, the U.S. International Trade Commission (“Commission”) issued a notice regarding its final determination in Certain L-Tryptophan, L-Tryptophan Products, and Their Methods of Production (Inv. No. 337-TA-1005).

By way of background, this investigation is based on a May 10, 2016 complaint filed by Ajinomoto Co., Inc. and Ajinomoto Heartland Inc. alleging violation of Section 337 by way of unlawful importation into the U.S., selling for importation, and/or selling within the U.S. after importation certain L-tryptophan and L-tryptophan products that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,666,655 and 6,180,373. See our May 10, 2016 and June 13, 2016 posts for more details on the complaint and Notice of Investigation, respectively.

Read More

On July 20, 2017, the International Trade Commission (“Commission”) issued a notice of its decision to deny Respondent Arista Networks Inc.’s (“Arista”) petitions to suspend or temporarily rescind the limited exclusion order (“LEO”) and cease and desist order (“CDO”) issued in Certain Network Devices, Related Software and Components Thereof (II) (Inv. No. 337-TA-945).

By way of background, this investigation is based on a December 19, 2014 complaint filed by Cisco Systems, Inc. of San Jose, California alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain networking equipment and components and software thereof that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,023,853; 6,377,577 (the ’577 patent); 7,460,492; 7,061,875; 7,224,668 (the ’668 patent); and 8,051,211. See our December 29, 2014 and February 6, 2015 posts for more details on the complaint and Notice of Investigation, respectively. On May 4, 2017, the Commission issued its final determination finding that Arista violated Section 337 with respect to the ’577 and ’668 patents, and issued an LEO and a CDO. See our May 8, 2017 post for more details.

Read More

On May 17, 2017, the International Trade Commission (“Commission”) issued a notice of its decision to issue a final determination of violation of Section 337 in Certain Air Mattress Systems, Components Thereof, and Methods of Using The Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-971).

By way of background, this investigation is based on an October 16, 2015 complaint filed by Select Comfort Corp. and Select Comfort SC Corp. (collectively, “Select Comfort”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain air mattress systems and components thereof by Respondents Sizewise Rentals LLC, American National Manufacturing Inc., and Dires LLC (d/b/a Personal Comfort Bed) (collectively, “Respondents”) that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,904,172 (“the ’172 patent”) and 7,389,554 (“the ’554 patent”). See our October 19, 2015 and November 17, 2015 posts for more details on the complaint and Notice of Investigation, respectively. On November 18, 2016, ALJ Bullock issued the ID finding no violation of Section 337. See our December 13, 2016 post for more details on the public version of the ID.

Read More

On May 18, 2017, the U.S. International Trade Commission (“Commission”) issued a notice in Certain Radiotherapy Systems and Treatment Planning Software, and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-968).

By way of background, this investigation is based on a September 25, 2015 complaint filed by Varian Medical Systems, Inc. and Varian Medical Systems International AG alleging violation of Section 337 by Respondents Elekta AB, Elekta Ltd., Elekta GmbH, Elekta Inc., IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc., Elekta Instrument (Shanghai) Ltd., and Elekta Beijing Medical Systems Co. Ltd. in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain radiotherapy systems and treatment planning software and components thereof that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,945,021; 8,116,430; 8,867,703; 7,880,154; 7,906,770; and 8,696,538. See our September 30, 2015 and November 3, 2015 posts for more details on the complaint and Notice of Investigation, respectively. On November 28, 2016, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public version of his Initial Determination (the “Final ID”) finding a violation of Section 337. See our December 27, 2016 post for more details. On January 13, 2017, the Commission determined to review the Final ID's conclusions on several issues and remanded the investigation to the ALJ. On March 31, 2017, the ALJ issued his remand initial determination finding the claims subject to the remand to be nonobvious.

Read More

On February 28, 2017, the International Trade Commission (“Commission”) issued a notice of its determination to review and reverse the Initial Determination (“ID”) of ALJ Dee Lord in Order No. 46 terminating Complainant U.S. Steel Corp.’s (“U.S. Steel”) false designation of origin claim in Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Products (Inv. No. 337-TA-1002).

By way of background, this investigation was based on a complaint filed by U.S. Steel alleging a violation of section 337 by numerous Chinese steel producers and distributors—as well as certain Hong Kong and U.S. affiliates—by reason of: (1) a conspiracy to fix prices and control output and export volumes, the threat or effect of which is to restrain or monopolize trade and commerce in the U.S.; (2) misappropriation and use of trade secrets, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the U.S.; and (3) false designation of origin of manufacturer, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the U.S. See our April 26, 2016, June 7, 2016, August 30, 2016, and November 14, 2016 posts for more details on this investigation.

Read More

On March 3, 2017, the International Trade Commission (“Commission”) issued a notice in Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Products (Inv. No. 337-TA-1002).

By way of background, this investigation was instituted based on a complaint filed by U.S. Steel alleging a violation of section 337 by numerous Chinese steel producers and distributors—as well as certain Hong Kong and U.S. affiliates—by reason of: (1) a conspiracy to fix prices and control output and export volumes, the threat or effect of which is to restrain or monopolize trade and commerce in the U.S.; (2) misappropriation and use of trade secrets, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the U.S.; and (3) false designation of origin of manufacturer, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the U.S. See our April 26, 2016, June 7, 2016, August 30, 2016, and February 27, 2017 posts for more details on this investigation.

Read More

On February 24, 2017, the International Trade Commission (“Commission”) issued a notice in Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Products (Inv. No. 337-TA-1002).

By way of background, this investigation was instituted based on a complaint filed by U.S. Steel alleging a violation of section 337 by numerous Chinese steel producers and distributors—as well as certain Hong Kong and U.S. affiliates—by reason of: (1) a conspiracy to fix prices and control output and export volumes, the threat or effect of which is to restrain or monopolize trade and commerce in the U.S.; (2) misappropriation and use of trade secrets, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the U.S.; and (3) false designation of origin of manufacturer, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the U.S. See our April 26, 2016, June 7, 2016, August 30, 2016, and November 14, 2016 posts for more details on this investigation.

Read More