ALJ Bullock

ALJ Bullock Grants Motion To Show Cause In Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters (337-TA-739)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
29
On January 25, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 75 granting Complainant Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc.’s (“Leviton”) motion for an order directing Respondents Shanghai ELE Manufacturing Corp., Shanghai Jia AO Electrical Co., Ltd., American Electric Depot Inc., Westside Wholesale Electric & Lighting, Inc., Westside Electric Wholesale, Inc., and Westside Wholesale, Inc. (collectively, “Respondents”) to show cause as to why they should not be found in default in Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-739) (Enforcement Proceeding).

According to the Order, Respondents failed to respond to Leviton’s complaint alleging violations of the cease and desist orders entered in the underlying investigation.  ALJ Bullock found that there was no evidence to suggest that Respondents intend to participate in the enforcement proceeding or that Respondents did not receive the notice of investigation served by the Commission.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation As To Menard And Pass & Seymour In Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters (337-TA-739)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
04
On February 4, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 76 in Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-739).

According to the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a joint motion filed by Complainant Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc., Respondent Menard Inc. (“Menard”) and Intervenor Pass & Seymour (“P&S”) to terminate the investigation as to Menard and P&S based on a settlement agreement. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Denies Motion For Forfeiture Of Respondents’ Bonds In Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters (337-TA-739)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
07
On February 4, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of Order No. 73 (dated January 15, 2013) in Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-739).

According to the Order, Complainant Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc. (“Leviton”) moved that the bonds posted by certain Respondents be forfeited to Leviton.  In support of its motion, Leviton argued that the Presidential Review Period expired on June 29, 2012, without any action by the U.S. Trade Representative.  Respondents Fujian Hongan Electric Co., Ltd., Zhejiang Trimone Electric Science & Technology Co., Ltd., Aubuchon, Inc., Garvin Industries, Inc., Menard, Inc., and Royal Pacfic, Inc. filed an opposition to the motion.  The Commission Investigative Staff also opposed Leviton’s motion.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Issues Claim Construction Order In Certain Ink Application Devices (337-TA-832)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
12
On February 8, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 21 construing the disputed terms of the asserted claims in Certain Ink Application Devices and Components Thereof and Methods of Using Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-832).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by MT. Derm GmbH and Nouveau Cosmetique USA, Inc. (collectively, “Complainants”) alleging violation of Section 337 by respondent T-Tech Tattoo, Inc. (“T-Tech”) in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain ink application devices that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,505,530  (the ‘530 patent).  See our March 2, 2012 post for more details on this investigation.  A Markman hearing was held on January 4, 2013.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Issues Remand Initial Determination In Certain Static Random Access Memories (337-TA-792)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
27
On February 25, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued a notice regarding the Remand Initial Determination on Validity and Enforceability (“RID”) in Certain Static Random Access Memories and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-792). 

By way of background, the Complainant in this matter is Cypress Semiconductor Corporation and the remaining Respondents are GSI Technology, Inc., Cisco Systems, Inc.; and Avnet, Inc.  The patents at issue in the investigation are U.S. Patent Nos. 6,651,134 (the ‘134 patent); 6,262,937 (the ‘937 patent); 7,142,477 (the ‘477 patent); and 6,534,805 (the ‘805 patent).  See our July 26, 2011 post for more information about this investigation.  On December 21, 2012, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) determined to review ALJ Bullock’s October 25, 2013 Initial Determination (“ID”) which found no violation of Section 337.  Further, the Commission issued an order remanding the investigation back to ALJ Bullock.  Specifically, the Commission determined to review the “final ID in its entirety” and remand the investigation to the ALJ to consider the parties’ invalidity and unenforceability arguments and make appropriate findings.  See our December 28, 2012 post for more details on the Commission’s notice. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Rules On Motion To Compel Deposition Of Complainants' Employees In The United States In Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets (337-TA-855)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
04
On February 26, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of Order No. 50 (dated January 25, 2013) in Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making Same and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-855).

According to the Order, Respondents Bunting Magnetics Co., Viona Corp., Yantai Zhenghai Magnetic Material Co., Ltd., Ningbo Jinji Strong Magnetic Material Co., Ltd., Anhui Earth-Panda Advance Magnetic Material Co., Ltd., Milwaukee Electric Tool Corp., Techtronic Industries Co. Ltd., Maxon Precision Motors, Inc., Nexteer Automotive Corp., Callaway Golf Co., Beats Electronics, LLC, Monster Cable Products, Inc., AKG Acoustics GmBH, Harman International Industries, DeWALT Industrial Tool Co., Bose Corp., and Bosch Security Systems, Inc. (collectively, “Moving Respondents”) moved to compel complainants Hitachi Metals, Ltd. and Hitachi Metals North Carolina (collectively, “Hitachi Metals”) to provide their employees for depositions in the United States or, alternatively, to pay for all costs and fees associated with holding depositions in Japan.  The Moving Respondents argued that holding depositions in Japan would cause them to suffer unreasonable and prejudicial hardship.  Specifically, the Moving Respondents asserted that all the attorneys cannot participate in the depositions because all the attorneys cannot be in the deposition room due to the small room sizes.  The Moving Respondents noted that the United States-Japan Bilateral Consular Convention of 1963 requires that all depositions conducted in Japan by American attorneys must be held at the U.S. Consulate in Osaka or the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo.  Further, the Moving Respondents asserted that the largest room available at either location, which can hold a maximum of fifteen people, is too small given the Investigation’s 29 named respondents.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Grants-In-Part Motion To Compel In Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets (337-TA-855)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
04
On February 27, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of Order No. 51 (dated January 29, 2013) granting-in-part Complainants Hitachi Metals, Ltd. and Hitachi Metals North Carolina’s (collectively, “Hitachi Metals”) motion to compel discovery responses from Respondents Yantai Zhenghai Magnetic Material Co., Ltd. (“Yantai”), Ningbo Jinji Strong Magnetic Material Co., Ltd. (“Ningbo”) and Anhui Earth-Panda Advance Magnetic Material Co., Ltd. (“Anhui”) (collectively, “Respondents”) in Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making Same and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-855).

According to the Order, Hitachi Metals requested that Respondents supplement their responses to interrogatories and document requests regarding:  (1) manufacturing processes and other technical documents and information; (2) rare earth magnets and products containing same sold on or after September 1, 2008; (3) foreign sales information; and (4) production, yield, capacity, sales, inventory and pricing information.  Hitachi Metals also requested additional time to respond to contention interrogatories.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Sets 14-Month Target Date In Certain Robotic Toys (337-TA-869)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
11
Further to our February 6, 2013 post, on March 5, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 4 in Certain Robotic Toys and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-869).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock set June 11, 2014 as the target date for completing the investigation (which is approximately fourteen months after institution of the investigation). 

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Grants-In-Part Complainants’ Motion For Sanctions In Certain Ink Application Devices (337-TA-832)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
14
On March 5, 2012, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 24 (dated February 21, 2013) granting-in-part Complainants MT.Derm GmbH and Nouveau Cosmetique USA, Inc.’s (collectively, “Complainants”) Motion for Sanctions against Respondent T-Tech Tattoo Device, Inc. (“T-Tech”) in Certain Ink Application Devices and Components Thereof and Methods of Using Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-832).

According to the Order, Complainants argued for sanctions against T-Tech based on T-Tech’s failure to:  (1) respond to certain paragraphs in the Complaint, and (2)  provide complete responses to Complainants’ interrogatories and requests for production.  As to T-Tech’s Answer, Complainants’ asserted that T-Tech failed to respond to “any paragraphs in the Complaint concerning the patented technology, the accused devices, the asserted patents, importation, or the existence of a domestic industry.”  Based on this assertion, Complainants requested a variety of nonmonetary sanctions.  Regarding T-Tech’s discovery responses, Complainants argued that T-Tech has failed to provide any substantive responses.  Accordingly, Complainants asserted that T-Tech has failed to comply with Order. No. 15, which ordered T-Tech to provide complete discovery responses. The Commission Investigative Staff agreed with Complainants that T-Tech’s discovery responses were incomplete and inconsistent, but disagreed that T-Tech’s Answer warranted sanctions.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation As To Viona In Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets (337-TA-855)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
14
On March 12, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 77 in Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making Same, and Products Containing Same(Inv. No. 337-TA-855). 

According to the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a joint motion filed by Complainants Hitachi Metals, Ltd. and Hitachi Metals North Carolina, Ltd. (collectively, “Hitachi”) and Respondent Viona Corp. (“Viona”) to terminate the investigation as to Viona based on a consent order stipulation, proposed consent order, and a settlement agreement. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Terminates Enforcement Proceeding Based on Settlement Agreement In Certain Prepregs, Laminates, And Finished Circuit Boards (337-TA-659)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
19
On March 18, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 20 in Certain Prepregs, Laminates, and Finished Circuit Boards (Inv. No. 337-TA-659).

According to the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a joint motion filed by Complainant Isola USA Corp. ("Isola") and Respondent Taiwan Union Technology Corp. ("TUC") to terminate the enforcement proceeding based on a settlement agreement between Isola and TUC.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Robotic Toys (337-TA-869)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
19
On March 18, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 5 in Certain Robotic Toys and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-869).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock set the procedural schedule for the investigation.  ALJ Bullock determined that the evidentiary hearing will commence on September 30, 2013; any initial determination is due no later than February 11, 2014; and the target date for completing the investigation is June 11, 2014 (which is approximately 14 months after institution of the investigation).

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Rules On Motions Relating To Collecting Evidence In Switzerland In Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets (337-TA-855)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
20
On March 18, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order Nos. 81 (public) and 82 (public version not yet available) in Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making Same, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-855).

According to Order No. 81, Complainants Hitachi Metals, Ltd. and Hitachi Metals North Carolina, Ltd. (collectively, “Hitachi”) filed a motion to compel Respondent Precision Motors, Inc. to produce documents from Maxon Motor AG, a Swiss company, and to make Stephan Mueller, a Maxon Motor AG employee, available for deposition.  Additionally, Hitachi filed a second motion seeking approval of a request for international judicial assistance in procuring the evidence from Maxon Motor AG.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Issues Public Version Of Remand Initial Determination On Validity And Enforceability In Certain Static Random Access Memories (337-TA-792)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
20
Further to our February 27, 2013 post, on March 15, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of the Remand Initial Determination (“RID”) (dated February 25, 2013) in Certain Static Random Access Memories and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-792). 

By way of background, the Complainant in this matter is Cypress Semiconductor Corporation (“Cypress”) and the remaining Respondents are GSI Technology, Inc. (“GSI”), Cisco Systems, Inc. (“Cisco”); and Avnet, Inc. (“Avnet”) (collectively, “Respondents”).  The patents at issue in the investigation are U.S. Patent Nos. 6,651,134 (the ‘134 patent); 6,262,937 (the ‘937 patent); 7,142,477 (the ‘477 patent); and 6,534,805 (the ‘805 patent).  See our July 26, 2011 post for more information about this investigation.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Rules On Motions To Compel In Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets (337-TA-855)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
27
On March 25, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 87 and the public version of Order No. 75 (dated March 11, 2013) in Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making Same, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-855).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by Hitachi Metals, Ltd. and Hitachi Metals North Carolina, Ltd. (collectively, “Hitachi”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation and sale of certain sintered rare earth magnets, methods of making same, and products containing same that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,461,565; 6,491,765; 6,527,874; and 6,537,385.  See our August 22, 2012 post for more details on Hitachi's complaint.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets (337-TA-855)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
28
On March 26, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 88 in Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making Same, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-855). 

According to the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a joint motion filed by Complainants Hitachi Metals, Ltd. and Hitachi Metals North Carolina, Ltd. (collectively, “Hitachi”) and Respondents Harman International Industries, Incorporated and AKG Acoustics GmbH (collectively, “Respondents”) to terminate the investigation as to Respondents based on a settlement agreement. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Issues Notice Of Remand Initial Determination In Certain Automated Media Library Devices (337-TA-746)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
28
On March 26, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the remand initial determination on violation of Section 337 in Certain Automated Media Library Devices (Inv. No. 337-TA-746).

By way of background, the complainant in this matter is Overland Storage, Inc. and the remaining respondents are BDT AG, BDT-Solutions GmbH & Co. KG, BDT Products, Inc., BDT Automation Technology (Zhuhai FTZ) Co., Ltd., and BDT de México, S. de R.L. de C.V.  Asserted U.S. Patent Nos. 6,328,766 (the ‘766 patent) and 6,353,581 (the ‘581 patent) are directed to automated media library devices, also known as tape libraries.  In his June 20, 2012 Initial Determination, ALJ Bullock determined that (1) the ‘766 and ‘581 patents are not infringed by BDT; (2) the patents are not invalid except for claim 15 of the ‘581 patent; and (3) a domestic industry in the United States exists for the ‘766 patent, but not for the ‘581 patent.  See our July 27, 2012 post for more details.  On October 25, 2012, the International Trade Commission (“Commission”) issued a notice and order remanding the investigation.  See our our October 31, 2012 and November 28, 2012 posts for more information on the Commission’s decision to review and remand the investigation.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Finds That Respondent Waived Invalidity Defense In Certain Ink Application Devices (337-TA-832)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
29
On March 26, 2012, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 27 denying Respondent T-Tech Tattoo Device, Inc.’s (“T-Tech”) motion for summary determination that claims 1 and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 6,505,530 are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 112 in Certain Ink Application Devices and Components Thereof and Methods of Using Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-832).

According to the Order, ALJ Bullock determined that T-Tech’s summary determination motion was procedurally improper for two reasons: (1) the deadline for such motions was March 20, 2013 and T-Tech’s motion was therefore filed out of time and did not establish good cause for the late filing, and (2) this was the third time T-Tech moved for summary determination of invalidity (after the first two attempts were denied).  ALJ further determined that the ITC’s rules clearly state that affirmative defenses must be pled with as much specificity as possible, including the basis for any assertions of invalidity.  Here, ALJ Bullock determined, “T-Tech has not only failed to plead the affirmative defense of invalidity with specificity, but has – in fact – failed to plead the defense at all.” (Emphasis in original).  Because T-Tech did not plead its invalidity defense, ALJ Bullock determined that such defense was waived by T-Tech.  Accordingly, ALJ Bullock concluded that “T-Tech may not introduce evidence or otherwise raise this affirmative defense in the Investigation, including at the upcoming evidentiary hearing and in post-hearing briefing.”

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Issues Public Version Of Remand Determination Finding No Violation Of Section 337 In Certain Automated Media Library Devices (337-TA-746)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
29
On April 23, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued the public version of the Remand Initial Determination (the “Remand ID”) (dated March 26, 2013) finding no violation of section 337 in Certain Automated Media Library Devices (Inv. No. 337-TA-746).

By way of background, the complainant in this matter is Overland Storage, Inc. (“Overland”) and the remaining respondents are BDT AG, BDT-Solutions GmbH & Co. KG, BDT Products, Inc., BDT Automation Technology (Zhuhai FTZ) Co., Ltd., and BDT de México, S. de R.L. de C.V.  Overland asserted U.S. Patent Nos. 6,328,766 (the ‘766 patent) and 6,353,581 (the ‘581 patent) which are directed to automated media library devices, also known as tape libraries.  In his June 20, 2012 Initial Determination, ALJ Bullock determined that (1) the ‘766 and ‘581 patents are not infringed by BDT; (2) the patents are not invalid except for claim 15 of the ‘581 patent; and (3) a domestic industry in the United States exists for the ‘766 patent, but not for the ‘581 patent.  See our July 27, 2012 post for more details.  On October 25, 2012, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice and order remanding the investigation.  See our October 31, 2012 and November 28, 2012 posts for more information on the Commission’s decision to review and remand the investigation.

Share

Read More

ALJ Bullock Denies Discovery Motions In Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets (337-TA-855)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
May
03
On April 23, 2013, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order Nos. 91 (dated April 4, 2013), 93 (dated April 9, 2013), and 94 (dated April 16, 2013) in Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making Same, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-855).

According to Order No. 91, Complainants Hitachi Metals, Ltd. and Hitachi Metals North Carolina, Ltd. (collectively, “Hitachi Metals”) moved to compel Anhui Earth-Panda Magnetic Material Co., Ltd. (“Earth Panda”) to produce documents and information relating to the steps that its corporate affiliate (“Baotuo”) performs in manufacturing Earth Panda’s accused products.  Hitachi Metals argued that the information is highly relevant to the “strip casting step” and “strip casting alloy” claim limitations.  Hitachi Metals further asserted that Earth Panda has control over Baotuo’s documents.

Share

Read More