By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
16
On April 15, 2009, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 16 in Certain Automotive Multimedia Display and Navigation Systems, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (337-TA-657). 

In the Order, ALJ Essex determined that “the use of witness statements in lieu of live testimony for direct examination by all of the parties would be the most efficient use of the allotted hearing time.”  ALJ Essex thus ordered the parties to “submit witness statements in lieu of live direct testimony, except for those third party witnesses who object to providing written testimony.”  With respect to expert reports, ALJ Essex determined that “expert reports will not be admitted into evidence, but exhibits and attachments to the expert reports may be received into evidence if they are properly introduced at the hearing during the examination of the experts, subject to any objections and rulings.”


Share
By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
16
On April 15, 2009, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 4 in Certain Optoelectronic Devices, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same (337-TA-669).

In the Order, ALJ Essex set the procedural schedule for the investigation.  He included a provision for the early exchange of claim construction terms and proposed constructions, and scheduled the evidentiary hearing to begin on October 19, 2009.


Share
On April 9, 2009, the U.S. International Trade Commission issued a Notice determining to review in its entirety the Initial Determination (“ID”) (Order No. 19) issued by Administrative Law Judge E. James Gildea on February 3, 2009, in Certain Cigarettes and Packaging Thereof (337-TA-643). 

This investigation was instituted on April 4, 2008, based on the complaint of Philip Morris USA, Inc.  The respondents include Alcesia SRL; Emarket Systems Ltd. (d.b.a. all-discountcigarettes.com); Jamen Chong (d.b.a. asiadfs.com); Tri-kita (d.b.a.
cheapcigarettes4all.com); Mr. Eduard Lee (d.b.a. cigarettesonlineshop.com); Zonitech Properties Limited (d.b.a. cigline.net); Zonitech Properties Limited
(d.b.a. shopping-heaven.com); Cendano (d.b.a. galastore.com); Ms. Svetlana Trevinska (d.b.a. save-on-cigarettes.com); LMB Trading SA (d.b.a. k2smokes.ch); G.K.L. International SRL (d.b.a. allcigarettes-brandsxom); G.K.L. International SRL (d.b.a. smokerjim.net); and Best Product Solution Ltd. 


Share

Read More

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
15
On April 10, 2009, ALJ Carl C. Charneski issued Order No. 10 in Certain Voltage Regulators, Components Thereof and Products Containing Same (337-TA-564).  In the Order, ALJ Charneski granted, in part, Complainant Linear Technology Corporation’s (“Linear”) motion to strike certain affirmative defenses of respondent Advanced Analogic Technologies, Inc. (“AATI”).  Specifically, ALJ Charneski granted Linear’s motion to strike a number of AATI’s affirmative defenses, but denied Linear’s motion to strike AATI’s patent invalidity defense as premature. 

By way of background, on September 24, 2007, the Commission issued its Final Determination on the question of violation finding that certain AATI products infringed claims 2, 3, and 34 of U.S. Patent No. 6,580,258.  The Commission also issued a limited exclusion order directed toward AATI.  Linear thereafter filed a complaint requesting that the Commission institute a formal enforcement proceeding against AATI for alleged violation of the limited exclusion order.  On October 1, 2008, the Commission issued its Notice of Institution of Formal Enforcement Proceeding against AATI “to determine whether AATI is in violation of the Commission’s limited exclusion order issued in the investigation, and what, if any, enforcement measures are appropriate.”


Share

Read More

On April 13, 2009, the public version of Order No. 14 (which was issued by Chief ALJ Paul J. Luckern on February 27, 2009) was made available in Certain Video Game Machines and Related Three-Dimensional Pointing Devices (337-TA-658).  In the Order, ALJ Luckern denied third-party James D. Richards III’s motion for sanctions and for a new protective order, and denied his motion to quash a subpoena duces tecum and ad testificandum, ordering Richards to comply with the subpoena.

According to the 17-page order, Richards moved for sanctions against respondents Nintendo Co., Ltd. and Nintendo of America Inc. (“Nintendo”) because Nintendo violated the protective order by disclosing Richards’ confidential trade secrets by including information obtained from its expert witness, Donald Odell, and by retaining Odell as an expert.  Odell is the named inventor on a patent that Nintendo asserted as prior art.  Odell was formerly employed at Selectech, Inc. under the supervision of Richards.  Richards also requested removal of two Nintendo attorneys for their disclosure of this supposed confidential business information, which included customer identities.


Share

Read More

www.xxx-clips-online.com