ALJ Gildea

ALJ Gildea Sets Markman Hearing And Revised Procedural Schedule In Certain Electronic Devices With Image Processing Systems (337-TA-724)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
15
On September 7, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 5 in Certain Electronic Devices With Image Processing Systems, Components Thereof, and Associated Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-724).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea set November 9, 2010 as the date for the Markman hearing determining that “an early Markman hearing will assist in streamlining the issues for the evidentiary hearing and final initial determination in this Investigation.”  ALJ Gildea further determined that since the schedule for the investigation requires rapid preparation, “[t]he parties should meet and confer in an effort to resolve the meaning of as much of the claim language at issue as possible, as the number of disputed patent claim terms to be addressed at the Markman hearing will not exceed 16 terms.”  (Emphasis in original).  ALJ Gildea’s Order also included a revised procedural schedule and the rules governing the Markman hearing.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Issues Initial Determination In Certain Video Displays (337-TA-687)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
20
On September 17, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued a notice regarding issuance of the Final Initial Determination and Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond (“ID”) in Certain Video Displays, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-687).

The Complainant in this investigation is LG Electronics, Inc.  The Respondents are Vizio, Inc., AmTran Technology Co., Ltd., and AmTran Logistics, Inc. (collectively the “Respondents”).

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Issues Initial Determination In Certain Video Displays (337-TA-687)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
05
Further to our September 20, 2010 post, on September 29, 2010 ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of the Final Initial Determination and Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond (“ID”) (dated September 17, 2010) in Certain Video Displays, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-687).

According to the ID, ALJ Gildea determined that no violation of Section 337 had occurred by Vizio, Inc. (“Vizio”), AmTran Technology Co., Ltd., and AmTran Logistics, Inc. (“AmTran”) (collectively, the “Respondents”) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain liquid crystal display (“LCD”) and plasma flat screen televisions by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 24 and 25 of U.S. Patent No. 5,790,096 (the ‘096 patent), claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 5,459,522 (the ‘522 patent), and claims 1, 4, 5 and 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 7,154,564 (the ‘564 patent).  However, ALJ Gildea found that a violation had occurred with respect to infringement of claims 4, 6 and 7 of U.S. Patent No. 5,537,612 (the ‘612 patent), and that a domestic industry exists that practices the ‘612 patent, the ‘522 patent and the ‘564 patent, but not the ‘096 patent.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Wind and Solar-Powered Light Posts and Street Lamps (337-TA-736)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
26
On October 26, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 3: Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Wind and Solar-Powered Light Posts and Street Lamps (Inv. No. 337-TA-736).

According to the Order, the evidentiary hearing in this matter will commence on June 14, 2011, the Initial Determination is due on September 27, 2011, and the target date for completion of this investigation is January 27, 2012.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Denies Motion to Compel In Certain Electronic Devices (337-TA-701)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
03
On October 29, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 51 in Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, and Computers (Inv. No. 337-TA-701).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea denied Respondent Apple, Inc.’s (“Apple”) motion to compel production of certain documents related to the ‘256 patent and additional 30(b)(6) testimony regarding the same from Complainants Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc. (collectively “Nokia”).

According to the Order, Apple argued that it sought information regarding communications between the named inventors and certain other Nokia personnel to determine when the invention of the ‘256 patent was conceived and whether the inventors committed inequitable conduct by failing to disclose to the PTO prior art they learned about from other Nokia personnel.  In response, Nokia asserted that Apple violated the Ground Rules by not previously making a document request for the subject documents.  The Commission Investigative Staff did not file a response.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Motion To Remove Markman Hearing From Calendar In Certain Electronic Paper Towel Dispensing Devices (337-TA-718)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
16
On November 15, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 24 granting a joint and unopposed motion to remove the Markman hearing and all related dates from the procedural schedule in Certain Electronic Paper Towel Dispensing Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-718).   The motion was jointly filed by Complainant Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP (“Georgia-Pacific”), Respondents Draco Hygienic Products, Inc., Kruger Products LP, KTG USA LP, New Choice (H.K.) Ltd., and Vida International Inc. (collectively, “Draco Respondents”), and the Commission Investigative Staff (collectively, the “Movants”).  Additional Respondents not a party to the motion were Jet Power International Ltd., Natury S.A. de C.V., Stefco Industries, Inc., Cellynne Corporation, NetPak Elektronik Plastik ve Kozmetik Sanayi, Ve Ticaret Ltd., WINCO Industries Co., DWL International Trading Inc., and Franklin Financial Management, Inc. d/b/a Update International (collectively, the “Non-moving Respondents”).

In support of the motion, the Movants asserted, inter alia, that (1) with respect to the Movants, “all asserted patent claims can be understood with reference to their plain and ordinary meaning”; (2) “[t]he only parties to identify any claim terms in dispute in this investigation are parties that have now entered into a settlement agreement with Georgia-Pacific”; and (3) the Non-moving Respondents either have not filed appearances in the investigation, have not shown cause why they should not be held in default, or have not identified any claims terms in dispute.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Digital Televisions (337-TA-742)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
22
Further to our October 14, 2010 post, on November 17, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 3: Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Digital Televisions and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-742).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea set the procedural schedule for the investigation and included provisions for the early exchange of claim construction terms and proposed constructions.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Electronic Paper Towel Dispensing Devices (337-TA-718)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
02
On December 1, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 25 in Certain Electronic Paper Towel Dispensing Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-718).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted a joint motion filed by Complainant Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP and Respondents Draco Hygienic Products, Inc., Kruger Products LP, KTG USA LP, New Choice (H.K.) Ltd., and Vida International Inc. to terminate the investigation based on a consent order stipulation.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Target Date In Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide And Parental Controls Technology (337-TA-747)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
02
Further to our November 23, 2010 post, on November 30, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 2: Notice of Ground Rules and Setting Target Date and Date for Submission of Proposed Procedural Schedule in Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide And Parental Controls Technology (Inv. No. 337-TA-747).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea set March 26, 2012 as the target date for completion of the investigation (which is 16 months after institution of the investigation).  Also, any final initial determination is due no later than November 23, 2011.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Rules on Motions In Limine and Motions to Strike In Certain Electronic Devices (337-TA-701)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
06
On November 30, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public versions of Order Nos. 64, 65, 66, and 67 in Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, and Computers (Inv. No. 337-TA-701).

In Order No. 64 (dated November 19, 2010), ALJ Gildea denied Complainants Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc.’s (collectively “Nokia”) motion in limine to exclude the testimony of two persons associated with non-party Broadcom Corporation ("Broadcom") who had been identified by Respondent, Apple Inc. (“Apple”) as hearing witnesses.  According to the Order, Nokia argued that a subpoena issued to Broadcom to produce documents relevant to whether certain Broadcom transceivers infringe U.S. Patent No. 6,714,091, but Broadcom over the following three months produced only a small number of materials, preventing Nokia from taking a meaningful deposition of Broadcom representatives prior to the July 2, 2010 deadline for fact discovery.  Nokia failed to obtain Apple’s agreement to jointly seek leave to take the belated deposition of a Broadcom representative, and Nokia’s motion to seek the belated deposition was denied on the basis that Nokia failed to show it diligently pursued discovery with respect to Broadcom.  Nokia further argued that Apple’s counsel worked with Broadcom to actively oppose Nokia’s efforts to seek belated discovery from Broadcom, and that to permit Broadcom’s testimony on behalf of Apple would be prejudicial as a form of “trial by ambush” in view of Apple’s opposition to Nokia’s efforts to obtain depositions of Broadcom.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Summary Determination Motion Regarding The Economic Prong Of The Domestic Industry Requirement In Certain Electronic Devices (337-TA-701)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
07
On December 1, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 58 (dated November 18, 2010) in Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, and Computers (Inv. No. 337-TA-701).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea made an Initial Determination (“ID”) granting Complainants Nokia Corporation and Nokia, Inc.’s (collectively “Nokia”) motion for summary determination that the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement has been satisfied.

According to the Order, Nokia argued that a number of demonstrative products practice the six asserted patents in this Investigation.  Respondent Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) opposed the motion, arguing that (1) for at least three of the six asserted patents, Nokia discontinued sales of its products and was no longer carrying on any substantial domestic activities related thereto; (2) genuine issues of material fact, a failure evidence, and/or credibility concerns existed regarding each of the domestic investments claimed by Nokia for each of the asserted patents; (3) Nokia asserted new contentions regarding previously undisclosed research and development expenditures for one of its products and the number of units held in inventory; and (4) Nokia’s claimed expenditures on the payment of warranty claims, including service and repair, were without merit because Nokia’s research and development expenditures should be disregarded.  The Commission Investigative Staff supported Nokia’s motion.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Issues Initial Determination In Certain Ceramic Capacitors (337-TA-692)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
22
On December 22, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued a notice regarding the Final Initial Determination and Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond (“ID”) in Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-692).

By way of background, the Complainants in this investigation are Murata Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and Murata Electronics North America, Inc. (collectively, “Murata”).  The Respondents are Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electro-Mechanics America, Inc. (collectively, “Samsung”).

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Rules On Motion To Add Prosecution Bar To Protective Order In Certain Electronic Devices With Image Processing Systems (337-TA-724)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
30
On December 29, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 12 (dated December 3, 2010), denying Respondent Apple Inc.’s (“Apple”) motion to amend the Protective Order by adding a prosecution bar in Certain Electronic Devices With Image Processing Systems, Components Thereof, and Associated Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-724).

According to the Order, Apple asserted that a prosecution bar was necessary because attorneys and experts retained by Complainants S3 Graphics Co., Ltd. and S3 Graphics, Inc. (collectively, “S3G”) “work directly for Apple’s fierce competitors,” and that even though the protective order presently limited use of information to the current litigation, it “may not prevent inadvertent compromise,” of Apple’s sensitive information, citing In re Deutsche Bank Trust Co Americas, 605 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (“Deutsche Bank”).

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide And Parental Controls Technology (337-TA-747)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
06
Further to our December 2, 2010 post, on January 5, 2011, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 3: Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide And Parental Controls Technology (Inv. No. 337-TA-747).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea set the procedural schedule for the investigation and provided for the early exchange of claim terms for construction, as well as a January 19, 2011 deadline for the parties to submit proposals as to whether a Markman hearing would be useful in resolving disputed claim terms.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Rules On Motions For Summary Determination In Certain Digital Set-Top Boxes (337-TA-712)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
19
On January 14, 2011, ALJ E. James Gildea. issued the public versions of Order No. 29 and Order No. 30 (both dated January 4, 2011) in Certain Digital Set-Top Boxes and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-712).  In Order No. 29, ALJ Gildea denied Respondent Cablevision Systems Corporation’s (“Cablevision”) motion for summary determination of invalidity of claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,381,748 (the ‘748 patent).  In Order No. 30, ALJ Gildea denied Cablevision’s motion for summary determination of no violation of Section 337 based on Complainants Verizon Communications, Inc. and Verizon Services Corp.’s (collectively, “Verizon”) alleged failure to satisfy the importation requirement and failure to show a nexus between the importation of the accused products and Cablevision’s allegedly infringing acts.

According to Order No. 29, Cablevision argued in its motion that claim 13 of the ‘748 patent is invalid as anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 6,034,689 (the ‘689 patent).  Cablevision argued that a “transforming” step recited in claim 13 of the ‘748 patent could be performed by either a gateway server or the set-top box.  According to Cablevision, the ‘689 patent discloses every element of claim 13, including a set-top box that performs the “transforming” step.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Target Date In Certain Reduced Ignition Proclivity Cigarette Paper Wrappers (337-TA-756)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
27
Further to our January 14, 2011 post, on January 27, 2011, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 2: Notice of Ground Rules and Setting Target Date and Date for Submission of Proposed Procedural Schedule in Certain Reduced Ignition Proclivity Cigarette Paper Wrappers and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-756).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea set May 29, 2012 as the target date for completion of the investigation (which is 16 months after institution of the investigation).  Also, any final initial determination is due no later than January 27, 2012.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Digital Televisions (337-TA-742)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
28
On January 28, 2011, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 7 in Certain Digital Televisions and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-742).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted a joint motion filed by Complainant LG Electronics, Inc. and Respondents Vizio, Inc., AmTran Technology Co., Ltd., and AmTran Logistics, Inc. to terminate the investigation based on the parties’ statement that “they have entered into a Settlement Agreement and some Patent Cross License Agreements.”

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Rules On Motion for Summary Determination Regarding Domestic Industry In Certain Digital Set-Top Boxes (Inv. No. 337-TA-712)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
03
On January 27, 2011, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 33 (dated January 11, 2011) in Certain Digital Set-Top Boxes and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-712) granting Complainants Verizon Communications Inc. and Verizon Services Corp.’s (collectively, “Verizon”) motion for summary determination that Verizon satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement under 19 U.S.C. § 1337(a)(3).

In support of its motion, Verizon asserted that the domestic industry requirement was satisfied in view of the fact that, inter alia, (1) “the technologies in the Verizon patents are embodied in set-top boxes, software, and network equipment used to provide Verizon’s FiOS TV services,” (2) Verizon employees “were involved in the design, development and creation of the first FiOS TV service offering,” (3) “Verizon has now deployed FiOS TV services in 14 states and the District of Columbia,” (4) “FiOS TV video services cannot operate without set-top boxes,” (5) “software programs on FiOS set-top boxes . . . ‘are critical elements in Verizon’s FiOS TV services,’” (6) “Verizon is investing $23 billion to deploy a fiber-optic network through which it provides FiOS TV video services,” (7) “employees have been involved in the ‘development, deployment, and enhancement of FiOS TV services,” (8) “Verizon ‘devotes substantial resources’ to testing, installing, supporting, and marketing these set-top boxes,” and (9) “Verizon’s software investment enables it to exploit [the patents-in-suit].”

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Orders Markman Hearing In Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guides (337-TA-747)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
07
Further to our January 6, 2011 post, on February 4, 2011, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 4: Ordering Markman Hearing and Setting Markman Procedure; Requiring Technology Stipulation; and Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide And Parental Controls Technology (Inv. No. 337-TA-747).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea amended the procedural schedule to accomodate a one-day Markman hearing and any relevant technology tutorial, to commence on April 20, 2011.  ALJ Gildea further ordered the private parties to meet and confer with the Commission Investigative Staff and submit to the ALJ no later than March 14, 2011, a joint technology stipulation that, at a minimum, should provide sufficient background information to understand the disputed claim constructions of each of the asserted claims.  ALJ Gildea stated that any facts listed in said stipulation may be used and relied upon throughout the remainder of the Investigation, inter alia, in the Administrative Law Judge's final initial determination on violation.  The Order further included rules governing the Markman hearing.

Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Electronic Paper Towel Dispensing Devices (337-TA-718)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
15
On February 10, 2011, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 32 in Certain Electronic Paper Towel Dispensing Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-718).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted a joint motion filed by Complainant Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP and Respondents Winco Industries Co. and DWL International Trading Inc. to terminate the investigation based on a consent order stipulation.

Share

Read More

www.xxx-clips-online.com