09
Nov
By Eric Schweibenz
On November 5, 2010, United Technologies Corporation of Hartford, Connecticut (“UTC”) filed a complaint requesting that the ITC commence an investigation pursuant to Section 337.

The complaint alleges that Rolls-Royce Group plc and Rolls-Royce plc (collectively, “Rolls-Royce”), both of the United Kingdom, unlawfully import into the U.S., sell for importation, and sell within the U.S. after importation certain turbomachinery blades, engines, and components thereof that infringe U.S. Patent No. RE38,040 E (the ‘040 patent).

According to the complaint, the ‘040 patent generally relates to turbomachinery blades that reduce or minimize certain adverse effects of the shock waves formed in the intake section of a turbofan engine.  In particular, the invention of the ‘040 patent improves on prior turbomachinery blades by bringing the endwall and passage shock waves together so that air encounters only the passage shock, thereby reducing the adverse effects of encountering both the endwall and passage shocks.

In the complaint, UTC alleges that Rolls-Royce imports and sells products that infringe the ‘040 patent.  In particular, the complaint names the Trent 900 and Trent 1000 engines as infringing products.  According to the complaint, the Trent 1000 engine was developed to be used with the Boeing Company’s (“Boeing”) 787 “Dreamliner” aircraft, and Rolls-Royce first delivered a Trent 1000 engine to Boeing on June 4, 2007.

Regarding domestic industry, UTC states that its Pratt & Whitney division operates facilities in East Hartford, Connecticut and Middletown, Connecticut that are used for the research and development, assembly, and manufacture of turbomachinery blades, fans, and engines covered by the ‘040 patent.  The complaint specifically names the GP7200 series engines manufactured in part at Pratt & Whitney’s Connecticut facilities as products covered by at least one claim of the ‘040 patent.  According to the complaint, the GP7200 series engines are sold to Airbus S.A.S. (“Airbus”) for use on the Airbus A380 aircraft.

As to related litigation, UTC states that contemporaneously with the filing of the instant ITC complaint, UTC filed an amended complaint in its ongoing litigation against Rolls-Royce in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut asserting a cause of action for infringement of the ‘040 patent.  Additionally, UTC states that a continuation application of the parent of the patent from which the ’040 patent was reissued was involved in a patent interference with Rolls-Royce plc’s U.S. Patent No. 6,071,077.  The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) declared the interference on December 31, 2003 and initially awarded priority to UTC.  However, the PTO’s decision was later reversed by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.  The district court’s decision was affirmed by the Federal Circuit on May 5, 2010.

With respect to potential remedy, UTC requests that the Commission issue a permanent exclusion order and a permanent cease and desist order directed at Rolls-Royce.