By John Presper

On August 17, 2021, ALJ Clark S. Cheney issued a notice of his initial determination (“ID”) finding a violation of section 337 in Certain Light-Emitting Diode Products, Fixtures, and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-1213).

By way of background, the Commission instituted this investigation based on a July 15, 2020 complaint filed by IDEAL INDUSTRIES LIGHTING LLC d/b/a Cree Lighting of Durham, North Carolina (“Cree”) alleging violations of section 337 by Respondent RAB Lighting Inc. of Northvale, New Jersey (“RAB”) through the importation and/or sale of certain light-emitting diode products, fixtures, and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,403,531; U.S. Patent No. 8,596,819; U.S. Patent No. 8,777,449; U.S. Patent No. 9,261,270 (“the ’270 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 9,476,570 (“the ’570 patent”).  The accused products are lamps and other devices alleged to infringe Cree’s patents related to LED light bulbs.

According to the notice, ALJ Cheney found that RAB violated section 337 by importing and/or selling products that infringe the ’270 and ’570 patents.  ALJ Cheney also issued a recommended determination on remedy and bond if the Commission finds a violation. We will post the public version of the ID when it becomes available.

On August 18, 2021, the Commission issued a notice of its request for submissions from the public on public interest issues raised by the recommended relief should the Commission find a violation.  According to the notice, “[t]he Commission is soliciting submissions on public interest issues raised by the recommended relief should the Commission find a violation, specifically:  a limited exclusion order directed to certain light-emitting diode products, fixtures, and components thereof imported, sold for importation, and/or sold after importation by respondent RAB Lighting Inc. . . . and a cease and desist order directed to RAB.”  The notice indicates that the Commission is particularly interested in comments that:

  1. explain how the articles potentially subject to the recommended remedial orders are used in the United States;
  2. identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the recommended orders;
  3. identify like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees, or third parties make in the United States which would replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;
  4. indicate whether complainant, complainant’s licensees, and/or third-party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the recommend orders within a commercially reasonable time; and
  5. explain how the recommended orders would impact consumers in the United States.

UPDATE:  On August 25, 2021, ALJ Cheney issued the public version (Part I, Part II, Part III) of the ID.

Copyright © 2022 Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P.