ALJ Essex

ALJ Essex Rules On Motion To Strike Affirmative Defenses In Certain Game Devices (337-TA-757)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jul
28
On July 26, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 8 in Certain Game Devices, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same(Inv. No. 337-TA-757).

In the Order, ALJ Essex granted-in-part and denied-in-part a motion filed by Complainant Microsoft Corp. (“Microsoft”) to strike certain affirmative defenses asserted by Respondents Datel Design & Development, Inc., Datel Design & Development, Ltd., Datel Direct Ltd., Datel Holdings Ltd., and Datel Electronics Ltd. (collectively, “Datel”).

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Denies Motion To Compel In Certain Semiconductor Chips (337-TA-753)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
01
On July 28, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 37 in Certain Semiconductor Chips and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-753).

In the Order, ALJ Essex denied a motion filed by Respondents Broadcom Corp. and MediaTek, Inc. (collectively, “Respondents”) to compel Complainant Rambus Inc. and third party Massachusetts Institute of Technology to produce certain licensing documents withheld on the grounds of privilege.  According to the Order, Respondents’ motion failed to comply with Ground Rule 3.2 by not including a certification that reasonable, good faith efforts were made to resolve the matter with the other parties at least two business days prior to filing the motion.  Because Respondents did not provide the required certification, ALJ Essex denied Respondents’ motion.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Denies Motion To Compel In Certain Mobile Devices (337-TA-744)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
01
On July 26, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued the public version of Order No. 11 (dated July 12, 2011) in Certain Mobile Devices, Associated Software, and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-744).

In the Order, ALJ Essex denied a motion filed by Complainant Microsoft Corp. (“Microsoft”) to compel Respondents Motorola Solutions, Inc. and Motorola Mobility, Inc. (collectively, “Motorola") to produce source code and supplement responses to certain interrogatories.  According to the Order, ALJ Essex determined that Microsoft’s motion failed to comply with Ground Rule 3.2 by not including a certification that reasonable, good faith efforts were made to resolve the matter with the other parties at least two business days prior to filing the motion.  In addition, Microsoft’s motion did not explain why it failed to participate in a telephone conference with the ALJ to attempt to resolve this dispute as required by Ground Rule 3.5.   

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Sets Target Date In Certain Protective Cases (337-TA-780)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
08
Further to our June 27, 2011 and June 28, 2011 posts, on August 4, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 4:  Setting the Target Date and Date for Submission of Proposed Procedural Schedule in Certain Protective Cases and Components Thereof  (Inv. No. 337-TA-780).

In the Order, ALJ Essex set October 30, 2012 as the target date for completing the investigation (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).  Therefore, any final initial determination is due no later than June 30, 2012.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Lighting Control Devices (337-TA-776)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
10
Further to our June 13, 2011 and July 27, 2011 posts, on August 9, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 7: Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Lighting Control Devices Including Dimmer Switches and Parts Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-776).

In the Order, ALJ Essex set the procedural schedule for the investigation and indicated that the evidentiary hearing will commence on March 21, 2012.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Rules on Motion to Declassify Names and Roles of Entities in Certain Handheld Electronic Computing Devices (337-TA-769)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
16
On August 12, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued the public version of Order No. 5 (dated July 7, 2011) in Certain Handheld Electronic Computing Devices, Related Software, And Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-769).  In the Order, ALJ Essex granted-in-part and denied-in-part Complainant Microsoft Corporation’s (“Microsoft”) motion to declassify the names and roles of particular entities designated as confidential by Respondents Barnes & Noble, Inc. and barnesandnoble.com (collectively, “Barnes & Noble”) and requested a shortened response time.

By way of background, Microsoft initiated this investigation by filing a complaint alleging that Respondents Barnes & Noble; Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd. (“Hon Hai”); Foxconn Electronics, Inc., Foxconn Precision Component (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd., Foxconn International Holdings Ltd. (collectively, “Foxconn”); and Inventec Corporation (“Inventec”) violated Section 337 by importing into the U.S. and selling certain handheld electronic computing devices (including the Nook and Nook Color), related software, and components thereof that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,778,372, 5,889,522, 6,339,780, 6,891,551, and 6,957,233.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Protective Cases (337-TA-780)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
28
Further to our August 8, 2011 post, on August 23, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 7: Setting the Procedural Schedule in Certain Protective Cases and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-780).

Complainant Otter Products LLC, together with several respondents, including Alibaba.com Hong Kong Ltd. (“Alibaba”) submitted a joint proposed procedural schedule.  Alibaba additionally submitted alternative dates for certain submissions, without providing argument why it preferred its alternative dates to those in the joint proposed procedural schedule.  According to the Order, ALJ Essex did not adopt any alternative dates submitted by Alibaba and set the procedural schedule for the investigation and indicated that the evidentiary hearing will commence on April 6, 2012.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Grants Summary Determination Of Violation And Recommends General Exclusion Order In Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies (337-TA-730)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
30
On August 26, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued the public version of Order No. 14, an Initial Determination (“ID”) (dated August 3, 2011) granting Complainants Hewlett-Packard Company and Hewlett-Packard Development Company’s (collectively, “HP”) motion for summary determination that HP has satisfied the domestic industry requirement and that defaulting Respondents Shanghai Angel Printer Supplies Co., Ltd., Zhuhai National Resources & Jingjie Imaging Products Co., Ltd., Tatrix International, and Ourway Image Co. Ltd. (collectively, the “Defaulting Respondents”) have violated Section 337 in Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-730).  The ALJ also recommended that the Commission issue a general exclusion order and a cease and desist order and impose a bond of 100 percent on the Defaulting Respondents.

By way of background, the Commission instituted this investigation on July 26, 2010 based on HP’s complaint of June 25, 2010 and subsequent filings.  See our July 28, 2010 post for more details.  On March 7, 2011, HP filed a motion for summary determination that a domestic industry exists and that the Defaulting Respondents have violated Section 337 in connection with the importation, sale for importation, or sale within the U.S. after importation of certain inkjet ink supplies and components thereof that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,959,985 (the ‘985 patent) and 7,104,630 (the ‘630 patent) (collectively, the “asserted patents”).  HP also requested that the Commission issue a general exclusion order.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex and ALJ Bullock Deny Motions to Consolidate Investigations 337-TA-784 and 337-TA-785 and ALJ Essex Sets Target Date In Certain Light Emitting Diodes (337-TA-784)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Aug
30
On August 23, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex and Acting Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued Order No. 3 and Order No. 4, respectively, both denying motions filed by Respondents LG Electronics, Inc., LG Innotek Co., Ltd., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., and LG Innotek U.S.A., Inc (collectively “LG”) to fully consolidate Inv. Nos. 337-TA-784 and 337-TA-785.  ALJ Essex’s Order No. 3 further set the target date in Certain Light Emitting Diodes and Products Containing the Same(Inv. No. 337-TA-784). 

Consolidation of 784 and 785 Investigations

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Sets Target Date In Certain Universal Serial Bus (“USB”) Portable Storage Devices, Including USB Flash Drives (337-TA-788)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
06
Further to our July 15, 2011 post, on September 1, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 4:  Setting the Target Date and Date for Submission of Proposed Procedural Schedule in Certain Universal Serial Bus (“USB”) Portable Storage Devices, Including USB Flash Drives and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-788).

In the Order, ALJ Essex set November 19, 2012 as the target date for completing the investigation (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).  Therefore, any final initial determination is due no later than July 19, 2012.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Issues Notice Regarding Confidential Business Information In Certain Mobile Devices (337-TA-744)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
15
On September 6, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued a notice regarding the public version of certain orders in Certain Mobile Devices, Associated Software, and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-744).

In the Order, ALJ Essex noted that Complainant Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”) submitted proposed redactions to Order Nos. 24, 25, and 26 and “many of the proposed redactions are inappropriate.”  Specifically, ALJ Essex noted that 19 C.F.R. § 201.6(a)(1) specifically defines confidential business information (“CBI”) and the “types of information that clearly do not fit into the [ ] category of Microsoft CBI include, inter alia, the identity of prior art references, the identity of a subpoenaed third party, and information regarding source code produced by respondent Motorola Mobility, Inc. and third party Google, Inc.”  Accordingly, ALJ Essex ordered that Microsoft resubmit its proposed redactions along with a detailed explanation as to why the proposed redaction fits within the definition of CBI.  Lastly, ALJ Essex noted that any redactions not found to fit within the definition of CBI will be released to the public.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Grants-In-Part Broadcom and Mediatek’s Motion to Compel in Certain Semiconductor Chips (337-TA-753)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
19
On September 1, 2011, ALJ Theodore Essex issued Order No. 50 in Certain Semiconductor Chips and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-753).  In the Order, ALJ Essex granted-in-part a motion to compel filed by Respondents Broadcom and Mediatek (“Respondents”). 

The motion, filed on July 22, 2011, sought an order compelling Complainant Rambus to: (i) complete its production of prior litigation materials by a date certain; (ii) provide a comprehensive list of prior litigation documents withheld on the basis of third-party confidentiality; (iii) provide a list, identifying by production number, all prior litigation trial transcripts and exhibits; and (iv) provide a list, identifying by production number, all prior litigation deposition transcripts and exhibits.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Light-Emitting Diodes (337-TA-784)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
19
Further to our July 7 and August 31, 2011 posts, on September 15, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 5: Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Light-Emitting Diodes and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-784).

In the Order, ALJ Essex set the procedural schedule for the investigation and indicated that the evidentiary hearing will commence on April 26, 2012, any final initial determination will issue no later than July 9, 2012, and the target date for completion of the investigation is November 9, 2012.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Protective Cases (337-TA-780)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
20
On September 14, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 11 in Certain Protective Cases and Components Thereof  (Inv. No. 337-TA-780).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a joint motion filed by Complainant Otter Products, LLC and Respondent Hard Candy Cases LLC d/b/a Gumdrop LLC to terminate the Investigation based on a consent order stipulation.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Universal Serial Bus (“USB”) Portable Storage Devices, Including USB Flash Drives (337-TA-788)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
21
Further to our July 15 and September 6, 2011 posts, on September 20, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 5:  Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Universal Serial Bus (“USB”) Portable Storage Devices, Including USB Flash Drives and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-788).

In the Order, ALJ Essex set the procedural schedule for the investigation and indicated that the evidentiary hearing will commence on May 9, 2012, any final initial determination will issue no later than July 19, 2012, and the target date for completion of the investigation is November 19, 2012.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Rules On Motion To Compel In Certain Protective Cases (337-TA-780)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
22
On September 14, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 10 in Certain Protective Cases and Components Thereof  (Inv. No. 337-TA-780).

In the Order, ALJ Bullock granted a motion filed by Complainant Otter Products, LLC (“Otter”) to compel Respondent Cellairis Franchise, Inc. (“Cellairis”) to respond to certain discovery requests.  In support of its motion, Otter argued that Cellairis undermined its efforts to obtain relevant discovery necessary to prove its case.  Specifically, Otter noted that it served discovery requests on Cellairis on July 6, 2011, but Cellairis neither provided responses to the requests nor participated in conference calls with counsel for Otter or the ALJ regarding such discovery requests.  Otter further argued that with the exception of filing a response to the Complaint and participating in the first discovery committee meeting on July 27, 2011, Cellairis has failed to participate in the investigation.  In this respect, Cellairis did not respond to the instant motion to compel. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation As To Ritek In Certain Universal Serial Bus (“USB”) Portable Storage Devices, Including USB Flash Drives (337-TA-788)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
17
On October 14, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 9 in Certain Universal Serial Bus (“USB”) Portable Storage Devices, Including USB Flash Drives and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-788).

In the Order, ALJ Essex granted a motion filed by Respondents RITEK Corporation and Advanced Media, Inc./RITEK USA (collectively “Ritek”) to terminate the investigation based on entry of a consent order.

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Sets 18-Month Target Date In Certain Wireless Devices With 3G Capabilities (337-TA-800)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
17
Further to our August 29, 2011 post, on October 14, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 6:  Setting the Target Date and Date for Submission of Proposed Procedural Schedule in Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-800).

In the Order, ALJ Essex set February 28, 2013 as the target date for completing the investigation (which is approximately 18 months after institution of the investigation).  Therefore, any final initial determination is due no later than October 28, 2012.  ALJ Essex determined that there is good cause for setting an 18-month target date in this investigation in light of, inter alia, the seven patents and over 130 claims at issue. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Essex Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation As To Verbatim In Certain Universal Serial Bus (“USB”) Portable Storage Devices, Including USB Flash Drives (337-TA-788)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
20
On October 18, 2011, ALJ Theodore R. Essex issued Order No. 10 in Certain Universal Serial Bus (“USB”) Portable Storage Devices, Including USB Flash Drives and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-788).

In the Order, ALJ Essex granted a joint motion filed by Complainants Trek Technology and S-Com (collectively, “Trek”) and Respondents Verbatim Corporation and Verbatim Americas, LLC (collectively, “Verbatim”) to terminate the investigation based on a settlement agreement.  After reviewing the confidential and non-confidential versions of the agreement, ALJ Gildea granted the joint motion filed by Trek and Verbatim.

Share

Read More

www.xxx-clips-online.com