How to Search
ALJ Bullock

ALJ Bullock Grants Joint Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Digital Televisions (337-TA-764)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
28
On August 23, 2011, Acting Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of Order No. 13 in Certain Digital Televisions and Components Thereof, and Certain Electronics Devices Having a Blu-Ray Disc Player and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-764).

According to the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a joint motion filed by Complainant LG Electronics, Inc. (“LGE”) and Respondents Sony Corporation, Sony Corporation of America, Sony Electronics, Inc., Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc., and Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC (collectively, “Sony”) to terminate the investigation based on their having entered into a memorandum of understanding (the “Agreement”).  After reviewing the confidential and non-confidential versions of the Agreement, and receiving the response of the Commission Investigative Staff in support of the motion, ALJ Bullock granted the joint motion filed by LGE and Sony.
Share

Read More

ALJ Essex and ALJ Bullock Deny Motions to Consolidate Investigations 337-TA-784 and 337-TA-785 and ALJ Essex Sets Target Date In Certain Light Emitting Diodes (337-TA-784)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
30
On August 23, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex and Acting Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 3 and Order No. 4, respectively, both denying motions filed by Respondents LG Electronics, Inc., LG Innotek Co., Ltd., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., and LG Innotek U.S.A., Inc (collectively “LG”) to fully consolidate Inv. Nos. 337-TA-784 and 337-TA-785.  ALJ Essex’s Order No. 3 further set the target date in Certain Light Emitting Diodes and Products Containing the Same(Inv. No. 337-TA-784). 

Consolidation of 784 and 785 Investigations
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices (337-TA-796)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
31
Further to our August 8, 2011 post, on August 30, 2011, Acting Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 5, setting the procedural schedule in Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-796).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock included provisions for the early exchange of claim terms, claim construction expert reports, Markman briefs, and a Markman hearing on November 21-22, 2011.  The evidentiary hearing is scheduled for May 31-June 6, 2012.  The Initial Determination is due October 5, 2012 and the target date for completing the investigation is February 5, 2013.
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Static Random Access Memories (337-TA-792)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
31
Further to our August 1, 2011 post, on August 31, 2011, Acting Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 7, setting the procedural schedule in Certain Static Random Access Memories and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-792).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock included provisions for the early exchange of claim terms, claim construction expert reports, Markman briefs, and a Markman hearing on October 14, 2011.  The evidentiary hearing is scheduled for March 12-16, 2012.  The Initial Determination is due July 28, 2012 and the target date for completing the investigation is November 28, 2012.
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Grants Motion to Terminate Investigation As To E&S International In Certain Digital Televisions (337-TA-789)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
02
On August 31, 2011, Acting Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of Order No. 13 in Certain Digital Televisions and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-789).  In the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a motion filed by Complainant VIZIO, Inc. (“Vizio”) to terminate the investigation as to the Respondent E&S International Enterprises, Inc. (“E&S”) based on a settlement agreement and patent license agreement.  According to the Order, Vizio stated that E&S joined in the request to terminate this Investigation with respect to them, but that E&S did not sign the motion or jointly move to terminate because E&S had not yet made an appearance in this Investigation.

After reviewing the confidential and non-confidential versions of the agreements, and receiving the support from the Commission Investigative Staff, ALJ Bullock granted the motion filed by Vizio.
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Sets Target Date For Enforcement Proceeding In Certain DC-DC Controllers (337-TA-698)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
15
Further to our September 5, 2011 post, on September 6, 2011, ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 58 in Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-796).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock set September 6, 2012 as the target date for completing the investigation (which is twelve months after institution of the investigation).
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Static Random Access Memories (337-TA-792)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
20
On September 15, 2011, ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 9 in Certain Static Random Access Memories and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-792).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a joint motion filed by Complainant Cypress Semiconductor Corporation and Respondents Arrow Electronics, Inc. and Nu Horizons Electronics Corporation to terminate the Investigation based on a consent order stipulation.
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Sets 19-Month Target Date In Certain Digital Televisions Containing Integrated Circuit Devices (337-TA-806)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
21
Further to our September 14, 2011 post, on September 19, 2011, ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 2 in Certain Digital Televisions Containing Integrated Circuit Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-806).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock set April 19, 2013 as the target date for completing the investigation (which is nineteen months after institution of the investigation).
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Computer Forensic Devices (337-TA-799)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
23
Further to our August 26, 2011 post, on September 22, 2011, ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 10:  Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Computer Forensic Devices and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-799).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock included provisions for the early exchange of claim terms, claim construction expert reports, Markman briefs, and a Markman hearing on January 19, 2012.  The evidentiary hearing is scheduled for May 3-9, 2012.  The Initial Determination is due August 29, 2012 and the target date for completing the investigation is December 29, 2012 (which is sixteen months after institution of the investigation).
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation As To Voom Technologies In Certain Computer Forensic Devices (337-TA-799)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
14
On October 13, 2011, ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 14 in Certain Computer Forensic Devices and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-799).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a motion filed by Complainant MyKey Technology Inc. (“MyKey”) to terminate the investigation with respect to Respondent Voom Technologies, Inc. (“Voom”) on the basis of withdrawal of its allegations as to Voom.  According to the Order, the Commission Investigative Staff and the remaining respondents did not oppose the motion.  Accordingly, ALJ Bullock granted MyKey’s motion to terminate.
Share

Read More

Charles E. Bullock Named Chief Administrative Law Judge At The ITC

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
20
On October 20, 2011, the International Trade Commission issued a press release announcing that Charles E. Bullock has been named the Chief Administrative Law Judge at the ITC. 

The ITC’s press release states:
Deanna Tanner Okun, Chairman of the United States International Trade Commission (USITC), announced today that Judge Charles E. Bullock has been named the Chief Administrative Law Judge at the USITC.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Grants Motion to Terminate Investigation As To MStar Semiconductor In Certain Digital Televisions (337-TA-789)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
17
On November 15, 2011, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of Order No. 17 in Certain Digital Televisions and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-789).  In the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a joint motion filed by Complainant VIZIO, Inc. (“Vizio”) and Respondent Mstar Semiconductor, Inc. (“MStar”) to terminate the investigation as to MStar based on Vizio’s withdrawal of those portions of the complaint directed to MStar.

After reviewing the confidential and non-confidential versions of the agreements, ALJ Bullock granted the motion filed by Vizio and MStar.
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Sets Target Date In Certain Navigation Products (337-TA-810)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
28
Further to our October 28, 2011 post, on November 21, 2011, ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 4 in Certain Navigation Products, Components Thereof, and Related Software(Inv. No. 337-TA-810).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock set March 4, 2013 as the target date for completing the investigation (which is sixteen months after institution of the investigation).
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Denies Joint Motion To Conduct Mediation By Telephone In Certain Static Random Access Memories (337-TA-792)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
28
On November 22, 2011, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 14 in Certain Static Random Access Memories and Products Containing Same(Inv. No. 337-TA-792).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock denied a joint motion filed by Complainant Cypress Semiconductor Corporation (“Cypress”) and Alcatel-Lucent and Alcatel-Lucent USA, Inc. (collectively “Alcatel”) requesting permission to allow Cypress’ and Alcatel’s respective client representatives to attend the December 1, 2011 mediation by telephone.  Specifically, ALJ Bullock determined that “it is critical to the success of the mediation to have the in-person participation of the decision makers in order to not only facilitate communication, but also to identify and overcome issues that may create an impasse to settlement.”  While ALJ Bullock denied the joint motion, he noted that the “parties may seek permission to conduct the mediation on another date in order to ensure the in-person attendance of their respective client representatives.”
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Sets 18-Month Target Date In Certain Wiper Blades (337-TA-816)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
12
Further to our November 28, 2011 post, on November 29, 2011, ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 2 in Certain Wiper Blades(Inv. No. 337-TA-816).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock set March 29, 2013 as the target date for completing the investigation (which is eighteen months after institution of the investigation).  ALJ Bullock determined that there is good cause for setting a target date exceeding sixteen months in this investigation in light of “the number of patents (i.e., 9), asserted claims (i.e., 66) and respondents (i.e., 13), as well as [ALJ Bullock’s] responsibilities in other investigations…”
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Rules on Motion to Compel In Certain Video Game Systems and Wireless Controllers (337-TA-770)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
19
On December 14, 2011, ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of Order No. 28 (dated December 1, 2011) granting-in-part Complainants Creative Kingdoms, LLC and New Kingdoms, LLC’s (collectively, “Creative Kingdoms”) motion to compel discovery responses from Respondents Nintendo of America, Inc. and Nintendo Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Nintendo”) in Certain Video Game Systems and Wireless Controllers, and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-770).

By way of background, this investigation was instituted on April 20, 2011 based on Creative Kingdom’s complaint.  The complaint alleged a violation of Section 337 by Nintendo for the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain video game systems and wireless controllers and components thereof including Nintendo’s Wii wireless game system and controllers.  See our March 23, 2011 and April 21, 2011 posts for more information.  
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Navigation Products (337-TA-810)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
23
Further to our October 28, 2011 and November 28, 2011 posts, on December 21, 2011, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 6: Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Navigation Products, Components Thereof, and Related Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-810).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock included provisions for the early exchange of claim terms, claim construction expert reports, Markman briefs, and a Markman hearing on March 21, 2012.  ALJ Bullock also determined that the evidentiary hearing will commence on August 6, 2012.  The Initial Determination is due on November 5, 2012 and the target date for completing the investigation is March 4, 2013.
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Denies Joint Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Static Random Access Memories (337-TA-792)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
04
On December 28, 2011, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 18 in Certain Static Random Access Memories and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-792).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock denied a joint motion filed by Complainant Cypress Semiconductor Corporation (“Cypress”) and Respondents Nokia Siemens Networks BV and Nokia Siemens Networks US LLC (collectively, “NSN”) to terminate the investigation on the grounds that Cypress and NSN have entered into a settlement agreement.  Specifically, ALJ Bullock denied the joint motion because the parties did not file a public version of the subject settlement agreement as required by Commission Rule 210.21(b).  Accordingly, ALJ Bullock denied the joint motion without prejudice.
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Issues Public Version of Initial Determination In Certain Portable Electronic Devices (337-TA-721)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
05
On December 21, 2011, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of the Initial Determination(“ID”) (dated October 17, 2011) finding no violation of Section 337 in Certain Portable Electronic Devices and Related Software(Inv. No. 337-TA-721).

By way of background, the Complainant in this investigation is HTC Corporation (“HTC”) and the Respondent is Apple Inc. (“Apple”).  In the ID, ALJ Bullock determined that no violation of Section 337 had occurred by Apple in the importation into the U.S., sale for importation, or sale within the U.S. after importation of certain portable electronic devices and related software.  As detailed below, the ALJ found that Apple does not infringe various claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,999,800 (the ‘800 patent), 5,541,988 (the ‘988 patent), 6,320,957 (the ‘957 patent), and 7,716,505 (the ‘505 patent).  ALJ Bullock also found that the asserted claims are not invalid.  Lastly, the ALJ found that a domestic industry exists with respect to the ‘988 and ‘957 patents, but not with respect to the ‘800 and ‘505 patents.  Because the domestic industry analyses in the ID are heavily redacted, we have not provided a separate discussion of these issues below.
Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Strikes Post-Hearing Reply Brief In Certain Automated Media Library Devices (337-TA-746)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
09
On January 3, 2012, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 37 in Certain Automated Media Library Devices (Inv. No. 337-TA-746).  In the Order, ALJ Bullock determined to strike Respondents BDT AG, BDT Automation Technology, BDT de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V., and BDT Products, Inc.’s (collectively, “BDT”) post-trial reply brief in its entirety.

According to the Order, Complainant Overland Storage, Inc. (“Overland”) moved to strike certain arguments in Respondents’ joint post-hearing reply brief on the basis that Respondents had failed to assert these arguments in their pre-hearing or initial post-hearing briefs.  In Order No. 33, ALJ Bullock granted-in-part Overland’s motion and ordered the Respondents to submit a revised joint-reply post-hearing brief where all references to testing in the U.S. regarding the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement were removed.  Respondents failed to submit the revised post-hearing reply brief.  
Share

Read More

Copyright © Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. | Disclaimer
The opinions, commentary and characterizations provided to this online forum by the authors and moderators are provided for encouraging discussion, thought and debate on important ITC issues. These postings are in no way representative of the opinions of the Oblon firm, or its clients, but rather the personal views of the individual authors.