Final Determinations
By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
30
On December 23, 2014, the International Trade Commission (the "Commission") issued a notice determining that a Section 337 violation has occurred in Certain Sleep-Disordered Breathing Treatment Systems and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-890). The Commission also issued a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders directed to domestic respondents.
Share

Read More

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
16
On January 15, 2014, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice determining to affirm in part and reverse in part the initial determination (“ID”) issued by ALJ Robert K. Rogers, Jr., and terminating the Investigation with a finding of violation in Certain Rubber Resins and Processes for Manufacturing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-849).

By way of background, this Investigation is based on a May 21, 2012 complaint filed on behalf of SI Group, Inc. (“SI Group”) alleging violation of Section 337 by a number of Respondents in the importation into the United States, sale for importation, or sale after importation of certain rubber resins by reason of misappropriation of trade secrets.  See our May 22, 2012 and June 22, 2012 posts for more details on SI’s complaint and Notice of Investigation, respectively.  On June 17, 2013 ALJ Rogers issued his ID finding a violation of Section 337.  See our June 28, 2013 post for more details on the notice of ID issued by ALJ Rogers.   


Share

Read More

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
03
On December 2, 2013, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice regarding the issuance of cease and desist orders and termination of the investigation in Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-739).

By way of background, the Commission issued its final determination on April 27, 2012 finding a violation of Section 337 with respect to U.S. Patent No. 7,737,809 (the ‘809 patent).  Regarding remedy, the Commission issued a general exclusion order and a cease and desist order.  See our February 27, 2013 post for more details.  On August 29, 2012, Complainant Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc. (“Leviton”) filed a complaint to institute enforcement proceedings.  Following settlement by several respondents, Respondents American Electric Depot Inc. (“AED”); Shanghai ELE Manufacturing Corp. (“Shanghai ELE”); and Shanghai Jia AO Electrical Co., Ltd. (“Shanghai Jia AO”) (collectively, the “Defaulting Respondents”) remained in the proceeding.  On May 22, 2013, ALJ Bullock issued a recommended determination on remedy, which recommended that the Commission issue a cease and desist order prohibiting AED from selling or distributing infringing articles in the U.S.  See our July 9, 2013 post for more details.


Share

Read More

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
03
On December 2, 2013, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice in Certain Electronic Devices Having Placeshifting or Display Replication Functionality and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-878).

By way of background, this investigation is based on a March 12, 2013 complaint filed by Complainant Sling Media, Inc. (“Sling Media”).  The respondents in the investigation were Monsoon Multimedia, Inc. (“Monsoon”); C2 Microsystems, Inc. (“C2 Microsystems”) (collectively “the Defaulting Respondents”); and Belkin International, Inc. (“Belkin”).  See our April 15, 2013 post for more details on this investigation.  On June 5, 2013, ALJ Pender issued an initial determination terminating the investigation as to Belkin based on a settlement agreement.  See our June 7, 2013 post for more details.  In response to a show cause order, Monsoon moved to terminate the investigation based on a consent order.  ALJ Pender rejected this motion and found Monsoon in default.  See our July 16, 2013 post for more details.  C2 Microsystems did not respond to their show cause order and, likewise, were found in default. 


Share

Read More

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
13
On November 1, 2013, the International Trade Commission (the “ITC” or the “Commission”) issued a notice in Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide and Parental Control Technology (Inv. No. 337-TA-845).  In the notice, the Commission determined to affirm with modified reasoning the ALJ’s finding of no violation of Section 337.

By way of background, the investigation is based on a May 1, 2012 complaint filed by Rovi Corporation; Rovi Guides, Inc.; Rovi Technologies Corporation; Starsight Telecast, Inc.; United Video Properties, Inc.; and Index Systems, Inc. (collectively, “Rovi”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain products containing interactive program guide and parental control technology that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,701,523; 6,898,762; 7,065,709; 7,103,906; 7,225,455; 7,493,643; and 8,112,776.  See our May 3, 2012 and June 4, 2012 posts for more details on the complaint and notice of investigation, respectively.  Numerous Respondents have been terminated from the investigation, and only Netflix Inc. (“Netflix”) and Roku, Inc. (“Roku”) remain. 


Share

Read More

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jun
27
On June 17, 2013, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice in Certain Kinesiotherapy Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-823).  In the notice, the Commission determined that Respondents LELO Inc.; PHE, Inc. d/b/a Adam & Eve; Nalpac Enterprises, Ltd.; E.T.C. Inc.; Honey’s Place Inc.; and Lover’s Lane & Co. violated Section 337 in connection with the importation and sale of kinesiotherapy devices that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,931,605 (the ‘605 patent).  The Commission issued a general exclusion order, cease and desist orders against Respondents, and terminated the investigation.

By way of background, the investigation is based on a December 2, 2011 complaint filed by Standard Innovation Corporation and Standard Innovation (US) Corp. (collectively, “Standard Innovation”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain kinesiotherapy devices and components thereof that infringe one or more claims of the ‘605 patent and U.S. Patent No. D605,779 (the D‘779 patent).  Standard Innovation withdrew the D‘779 patent from the investigation.  An evidentiary hearing was held in August 2012.  On February 8, 2013, ALJ Pender issued an Initial Determination (“ID”) construing the terms of the asserted claims and finding the ‘605 patent valid and infringed, but finding no violation of Section 337 on the grounds that Standard Innovation did not satisfy the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement.  See our February 11, 2013 post for more details.


Share

Read More

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
22
On January 17, 2013, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice in Certain LED Photographic Lighting Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-804).  In the notice, the Commission found a violation of Section 337 and issued a general exclusion order (“GEO”) prohibiting importation of infringing LED photographic lighting devices and components thereof.

By way of background, the Commission instituted this investigation on September 7, 2011 based on a complaint filed by Litepanels, Inc. and Litepanels, Ltd. (collectively, “Litepanels”) alleging a violation of Section 337 by a number of respondents for the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain LED photographic lighting devices and components thereof.  Litepanels alleged that the Respondents violated Section 337 with respect to U.S. Patent Nos. 7,429,117 (terminated from investigation); 7,510,290 (terminated from investigation); 7,972,022 (the ‘022 patent); 7,318,652 (the ‘652 patent); and 6,948,823 (the ‘823 patent).  See our September 3, 2011 post for more details on this investigation.  On September 7, 2012, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued the initial determination (“ID”) finding that that there has been a violation of Section 337 by the remaining Respondents in this investigation with respect to certain claims of the ‘022 patent; certain claims of the ‘652 patent; and claim 19 of the ‘823 patent.  ALJ Essex also determined that no violation of Section 337 occurred by the remaining Respondents with respect to claims 17 and 28 of the ‘823 patent.  See our September 13, 2012 post for more details on the ID.  On November 13, 2012, the Commission determined to review in part the ID.  See our November 15, 2012 post for more details on the scope of the Commission’s review.


Share

Read More

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
17
On September 13, 2012, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a corrected notice in Certain Integrated Circuits, Chipsets, and Products Containing Same Including Televisions (Inv. No. 337-TA-786).  In the notice, the Commission determined to review ALJ Robert K. Rogers, Jr.’s July 12, 2012 Initial Determination on Violation (“ID”), affirm the ultimate finding of no violation, and terminate the investigation.

By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by Complainant Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. (“Freescale”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S., sale for importation, and/or sale within the U.S. after importation of certain integrated circuits, integrated circuit chipsets, and products containing the same, including televisions, that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,467,455.  See our December 2, 2011 post for more details on Freescale's complaint.  The remaining respondents in this investigation are MediaTek Inc. and Zoran Corp.  On July 12, 2012, ALJ Rogers issued his final ID, finding no violation of Section 337 with respect to U.S. Patent No. 5,467,455 (the ‘455 patent).  More specifically, ALJ Rogers found that an industry does not exist in the U.S. that exploits the ‘455 patent.  ALJ Rogers also found claims 9 and 10 of the ‘455 patent to be invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 103.  See our July 16, 2012 post for more details.


Share

Read More

By Alex Gasser
|
Jun
13
On May 30, 2012, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice finding a violation of Section 337, and determining that a general exclusion order should issue in Certain Handbags and Luggage, Accessories, and Packaging Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-754).

By way of background, Louis Vuitton filed a complaint requesting the ITC to commence an investigation pursuant to Section 337 against a host of respondents from Guangzhou China, Texas and California, for the unlawful import into the U.S., sale for importation, and/or sale within the U.S. after importation of certain handbags, luggage, accessories and packaging thereof that infringe U.S. Trademark Registration Nos. 297,594; 1,643,625; 1,653,663; 2,773,107; 2,177,828; 2,181,753; and 1,519,828.  In effect, the respondents were alleged to be in the business of manufacturing, and/or purchasing counterfeit or trademark-infringing Louis Vuitton bags and accessories from China and selling them in the United States.  See our December 8, 2010 post for more details.  On June 10, 2011, former Chief ALJ Luckern issued an initial determination finding that Louis Vuitton satisfied the domestic industry requirement. See our July 27, 2011 post for more details.  During the course of this Investigation, all respondents either settled or were found in default.  The defaulting respondents were identified as House of Bags, Ronett Trading, Inc., EZ Shine Group, Inc., Master of Handbags, Choice Handbags, Handbag Warehouse, T&T, and The Inspired Bagger (collectively, “the Defaulting Respondents”).  On March 5, 2012, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock granted Louis Vuitton’s motion for summary determination that the Defaulting Respondents violated section 337, and further recommended a general exclusion order (GEO) and a bond in the amount of 100% of the value of imported products. See our March 20, 2012 post for more details.


Share

Read More

By Alex Gasser
|
May
03
On April 27, 2012, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice determining that a violation of Section 337 exists, and that the Commission has issued a general exclusion order and cease and desist orders in Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-739).

By way of background, the Complainant in this investigation is Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc. (“Leviton”), which alleges violation of Section 337 with respect to certain ground fault circuit interrupters and products containing the same that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,463,124 (the ‘124 patent), 7,737,809 (the ‘809 patent), and 7,764,151 (the ‘151 patent).  Although the Notice of Investigation named numerous respondents, several were found in default or were terminated due to settlement, consent orders, or withdrawn allegations.  The seven remaining respondents were Zhejiang Trimone Electric Science & Technology Co. Ltd. (“Trimone”), Fujian Hongan Electric Co, Ltd. (“Hongan”), TDE, Inc. (“TDE”), Shanghai ELE Manufacturing Corp., Orbit Industries, Inc., American Electric Depot Inc., and Shanghai Jia AO Electrical Co.


Share

Read More

Next Page