By Eric Schweibenz
On October 1, 2010, Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, Washington (“Microsoft”) filed a complaint requesting that the ITC commence an investigation pursuant to Section 337.

The complaint alleges that Motorola, Inc. of Schaumburg, Illinois (“Motorola”) unlawfully and without authorization imports into the U.S., sells for importation, and/or sells within the U.S. after importation certain mobile devices, associated software, and components thereof that infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 5,579,517 (the ‘517 patent); 5,758,352 (the ‘352 patent); 6,621,746 (the ‘746 patent); 6,826,762 (the ‘762 patent); 6,909,910 (the ‘910 patent); 7,644,376 (the ‘376 patent); 5,664,133 (the ‘133 patent); 6,578,054 (the ‘054 patent); and 6,370,566 (the ‘566 patent) (collectively, the “asserted patents”).

According to the complaint, (1) the ‘517 and ‘352 patents “relate to the field of computer operating systems, file systems and file names,” specifically “implementing both long and short file names in the same file system,” (2) the ‘746 patent “relates to flash memory devices, and more particularly, monitoring when to perform an erase operation in a flash memory device,” (3) the ‘762 patent “relates to application programming  interfaces (APIs),” in particular “a Radio Interface Layer, comprising a set of APIs,” (4) the ‘910 patent relates “to updating a contact database within a mobile computing device,” (5) the ‘376 patent relates to an API “through which applications on a mobile device can learn about state changes to the mobile device,” (6)  the ‘133 patent relates “to graphical user interfaces wherein a user selects from a collection of graphical representations displayed upon a video screen,” (7) the ‘054 patent “relates to the support of on-line and off-line transmission and synchronization of data,” and (8) the ‘566 patent relates “to generating meeting requests and group scheduling from a mobile device.”

The accused products identified in the complaint include the Motorola Droid 2, the Motorola Droid X, the Motorola i1, the Motorola Cliq XT, the Motorola Devour, the Motorola Backflip, the Motorola Charm, and the Motorola Cliq.

Regarding domestic industry, Microsoft asserts that its “domestic activities in connection with Windows Mobile 6 and Windows Phone 7 include significant investment in plant and equipment, significant employment of labor and capital, and substantial investment in engineering and research and development related to products employing the [asserted patents].”

With respect to related litigation, Microsoft identifies in the complaint various proceedings regarding certain of the asserted patents, including another ITC complaint, a number of district court actions, reexaminations before the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, and actions in Germany and Canada regarding foreign counterparts to certain of the asserted patents.

As to potential remedy, Microsoft requests that the Commission issue a permanent exclusion order pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1337(d) and a permanent cease-and-desist order pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1337(f).