How to Search
ALJ Gildea

ALJ Gildea Denies Third Parties’ Motion To Quash Subpoena And For Sanctions In Certain CCFL Inverter Circuits (337-TA-666)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
02
On September 1, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 21 (dated August 18, 2009) in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-666).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea denied a motion brought by third parties WorldGate Communications, Inc. and Senior Vice President of Engineering for WorldGate, Whitney Blackmon (collectively, “WorldGate”), seeking to quash or limit certain subpoenas served by Respondent Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (“MPS”), and for attorneys’ fees and costs.

In support of its motion, WorldGate argued that the document and deposition subpoena directed to WorldGate (1) failed to provide sufficient time to comply; (2) exceeded the scope of permissible discovery since the subpoenas sought privileged information; (3) were overly broad and unduly burdensome; and (4) sought documents that could be obtained from parties in the Investigation.  The Commission Investigative Staff opposed WorldGate’s motion arguing that (1) it was not unreasonable for WorldGate to create a privilege log in connection with its response to MPS’ subpoenas; (2) the parties and WorldGate should work together to schedule a deposition for Mr. Blackmon and agree on a reasonable scope of searches for further document production; (3) MPS should assume the reasonable costs for any unusually burdensome document searches; and (4) WorldGate’s request for sanctions should be denied.  For its part, MPS opposed WorldGate’s motion arguing that (1) discovery from WorldGate was necessary since, in response to a subpoena from Complainants, WorldGate produced an unsolicited declaration from Mr. Blackmon relating to the functionality of an accused product; (2) its discovery requests relating to WorldGate are limited to the Blackmon Declaration and thus are not overly broad; (3) WorldGate’s prior production of materials was limited to a search for e-mail, and did not include paper documents; and (4) MPS’s discovery requests relating to WorldGate were relevant to the issue of potential patent misuse.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Motion to Terminate the Investigation with Respect to LG in Certain CCFL Inverter Circuits (337-TA-666)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
02
On August 31, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued an initial determination (Order No. 24) in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp ("CCFL") Inverter Circuits and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-666).  In the ID, ALJ Gildea granted the August 14, 2009 motion of Complainants O2 Micro International Ltd. and O2 Micro Inc. (collectively “O2 Micro”) and Respondents LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics USA (collectively “LG”), seeking termination of the investigation with respect to LG.  The motion was based on a settlement agreement between O2 Micro and LG that apparently settled all of the existing disputes between O2 Micro and LG. 

According to the ID, O2 Micro and LG executed a Memorandum of Understanding between them on July 30, 2009.  They represented in their joint motion that there were no other agreements between O2 Micro and LG concerning the subject matter of the investigation.  O2 Micro and LG asserted that termination of the investigation “would pose no threat to the public interest” and would result in “conservation of the parties’ time and resources.”
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Motion To Terminate The Investigation With Respect To LGD In Certain CCFL Inverter Circuits (337-TA-666)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
11
On September 9, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 25 in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp Inverter Circuits and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-666).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted Complainants’ O2 Micro International Ltd. and O2 Micro Inc. (collectively, “O2 Micro”) and Respondents’ LG Display Co., Ltd. and LG Display America, Inc.’s (collectively, “LGD”) joint motion seeking termination of the investigation with respect to LGD.  The motion was based on a consent order stipulation (“Stipulation”).

According to the Order, O2 Micro and LGD stated that there were no other agreements between O2 Micro and LGD concerning the subject matter of the investigation and argued that termination “would pose no threat to the public interest” and would result in “conservation of the parties’ time and resources.”  The Commission Investigative Staff supported the motion stating that the stipulation “provides an acceptable basis on which to terminate this investigation…” and that the termination “would not be contrary to the public interest.”
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Continues His Practice Of Not Using Witness Statements In Lieu of Live Testimony In Certain CCFL Inverter Circuits (337-TA-666)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
11
On September 9, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 26 in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp Inverter Circuits and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-666).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea determined that witness statements in lieu of live testimony would not be accepted.  In addition, ALJ Gildea ordered that “expert reports may be used for impeachment purposes, but would not be admitted into evidence.”  Further, ALJ Gildea set forth certain instructions intended to clarify, and in some instances supersede, the Ground Rules with respect to post-hearing exhibits.
Share

Read More

Update Regarding Certain Collaborative System Products (337-TA-682)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
14
Further to our August 4 post, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 4: Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Collaborative System Products and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-682).

According to the Order, ALJ Gildea has provided dates in the procedural schedule for submission of proposed claim constructions for disputed claim terms and noted that “absent a showing of good cause, the parties will be bound by their proposed constructions for disputed claim terms on the date the joint submission of disputed claim terms is due.”
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Target Date In Certain Video Displays (337-TA-687)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Sep
21
Further to our September 14 and September 17 posts, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 1: Protective Order; and Order No. 2: Notice of Ground Rules and Setting Target Date and Date for Submission of Proposed Procedural Schedule in Certain Video Displays, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-687).

In Order No. 2, ALJ Gildea set January 18, 2011 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 to be issued no later than September 18, 2010.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Denies Three Motions in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits (337-TA-666)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
02
On September 30, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 29 in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-666).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea denied: (1) respondents Asustek Computer, Inc.’s, Asus Computer International’s, and Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.’s (collectively, “Respondents”) motion to strike the rebuttal expert report of complainants O2 Micro International Ltd.’s and O2 Micro Inc.’s  (collectively, “O2 Micro”) expert witness and prevent him from testifying at the evidentiary hearing about the contents of his report; (2) O2 Micro’s motion to strike the expert report of Respondents’ expert witness and prevent him from testifying at the evidentiary hearing about the contents of his report; and (3) O2 Micro’s motion for summary determination as to the invention date of one of the asserted patents in the investigation and to strike any portions of any expert reports that challenge that invention date.

As to the first motion, Respondents argued that O2 Micro’s expert report should be stricken because O2 Micro had failed to disclose its expert at the time set forth in the Ground Rules.  O2 Micro responded that its expert report was a timely opposition to an expert report submitted by Respondents’ expert.  According to O2 Micro, Respondents’ expert report contained unanticipated arguments and therefore O2 Micro could not have disclosed its rebuttal expert at the time set forth in the Ground Rules.  O2 Micro argued that it promptly disclosed its expert as soon as it was aware that his testimony would be needed to refute the unanticipated arguments in Respondents’ expert report.  The Commission Investigative Staff (“the Staff”) agreed with O2 Micro that Respondents’ expert report covered “unexpectedly raised” topics that merited a rebuttal expert report, and therefore opposed Respondents’ motion.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Denies Motion To Compel In Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits (337-TA-666)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
05
On September 30, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 28 (dated September 16, 2009) in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-666).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea denied a motion to compel filed by Complainants O2 Micro International Ltd. and O2 Micro Inc.  (collectively, “O2 Micro”) seeking sales and/or importation data stored in the electronic systems of Respondents Asustek Computer, Inc. and Asus Computer International (collectively, “ASUS”).

In support of its motion, O2 Micro argued that (1) ASUS did not provide an export of sales and/or importation data that is stored on ASUS’s electronic systems, including order management systems referred to as “TipTop”; (2) ASUS provided only a partial list of the fields of the data stored on ASUS’s electronic systems, rather than a full identification of the fields of data; and (3) ASUS did not supplement its document productions to include recent sales or importation data.  In response, ASUS argued that (1) ASUS complied with its discovery obligations and responded to all of O2 Micro’s discovery requests, including its production of “over three million pages of documents (as well as nearly one million additional pages from a subsidiary)”; (2) none of O2 Micro’s discovery requests sought the “export” of sales and importation data; and (3) “O2 Micro possesses current sales data through June 30, 2009 and ‘a complete set of sales data for the time period of August 26, 2008, through June 30, 2009.’”
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Suspends Procedural Schedule In Certain Collaborative System Products (337-TA-682)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
15
Further to our September 14 post, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 6:  Suspension of Procedural Schedule in Certain Collaborative System Products and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-682).

According to the Order, the procedural schedule has been suspended in view of the fact that the Complainant eInstruction Corporation and Respondent Qomo HiteVision, LLC “have reached a tentative settlement.”  Additionally, ALJ Gildea orders the parties to report back to the ALJ no later than October 30, 2009 regarding their settlement status.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Issues Initial Determination In Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors (337-TA-650)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
15
On October 13, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued a notice regarding the Final Initial Determination and Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond (“ID”) in Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors and Components Thereof and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-650).

The Complainant in this investigation is John Mezzalingua Associates, Inc. d/b/a PPC, Inc. (“PPC”) and the Respondents are Fu Ching Technical Industry Co. Ltd. and Gem Electronics, Inc. (“Respondents”).
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants In Part Motion For Summary Determination Of Importation In Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits (337-TA-666)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
22
On October 21, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 31 (dated September 24, 2009) in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-666).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted in part Complainants O2 Micro International Ltd. and O2 Micro Inc.’s (collectively, “O2 Micro”) motion for summary determination that the activities of Respondent ASUSTeK Computer Inc. (“ASUSTeK”) satisfy the importation requirement of Section 337 and constitute one or more “territorial acts” proscribed under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).

In the motion, O2 Micro alleged that ASUSTeK sells its accused products for importation into the United States, imports its accused products into the United States, and sells its accused products within the United States after importation.  Further, O2 Micro contended that the latter two activities, i.e., importing accused products into and selling accused products in the United States, are “predicate elements of infringement” under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a).
Share

Read More

Update Regarding Certain Ceramic Capacitors (337-TA-692)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
30
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Video Displays (337-TA-687)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
05
On November 3, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 6: Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Video Displays, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-687).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea noted that he “set the deadlines for construction of claim terms relatively early in the Investigation…[so as] to avoid a shifting sands approach to claim construction.”
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Target Date In Certain Ceramic Capacitors (337-TA-692)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
06
Further to our October 29 and October 30 posts, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 1: Protective Order; and Order No. 2: Notice of Ground Rules and Setting Target Date and Date for Submission of Proposed Procedural Schedule in Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-692).

In Order No. 2, ALJ Gildea set March 4, 2011 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 to be issued in the investigation no later than November 4, 2010.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Modifies Target Date In Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits (337-TA-666)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
10
On November 6, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 42: Initial Determination Modifying Target Date Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.51(a) in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-666).

According to the Order, “[g]iven the breadth of the hearing record and the complexity of the issues raised by the parties therein, the Administrative Law Judge has determined that there is good cause to extend the target date in order to provide time for meaningful consideration of the parties’ positions.”  Accordingly, ALJ Gildea extended the target date to June 21, 2010, with the final initial determination due on February 19, 2010.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Issues Public Version of Initial Determination In Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors (337-TA-650)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
10
Further to our October 15 post, on November 4, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of the October 13, 2009 Initial Determination (“ID”) in Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors and Components Thereof and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-650).

The Complainant in this investigation was John Mezzalingua Associates, Inc. d/b/a PPC, Inc. (“PPC”).  PPC alleged that Fu Ching Technical Industry Co. Ltd. and Gem Electronics, Inc. (collectively, “Respondents”) were engaged in the manufacture and sale for importation, and the importation and sale after importation of coaxial cable connectors that infringed claims of United States Patent No. 5,470,257 (the ‘257 patent).  Four other respondents, Hanjiang Fei Yu Electronics Equipment Factory, Zhongguang Electronics, Yangzhou Zhongguang Electronics Co., Ltd., and Yangzhou Zhongguang Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. (collectively, the “Defaulting Respondents”), were previously found to be in default and were alleged to be in violation of Section 337 for reasons of infringement of the ‘257 patent, as well as U.S. Patent Nos. 6,558,194 (the ‘194 patent); D440,539 (the ‘539 patent); and D519,076 (the ‘076 patent).
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Motion To Terminate The Investigation In Certain Collaborative System Products (337-TA-682)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
04
On December 2, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 7 in Certain Collaborative System Products and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-682).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted Complainant eInstruction Corporation’s (“eInstruction”) motion seeking termination of the investigation in its entirety by reason of a settlement agreement with Respondent Qomo HiteVision, LLC.

According to the Order, eInstruction stated in its motion that there were no other agreements between the parties concerning the subject matter of this investigation.  Additionally, the Commission Investigative Staff (the “Staff”) filed a response supporting the motion and indicating that it complies with the Commission requirements for termination.  The Staff further noted in its response to the motion that termination of this investigation would not have any adverse impact on the public interest.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Ceramic Capacitors (337-TA-692)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
04
On January 4, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 4:  Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-692).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea sets the procedural schedule for the investigation and includes provisions for the early exchange of claim construction terms and proposed constructions and also includes a deadline for proposals requesting a Markman hearing.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Target Date In Certain Restraining Systems For Transport Containers (337-TA-696)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
04
On January 4, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 1: Protective Order; and Order No. 2: Notice of Ground Rules and Setting Target Date and Date for Submission of Proposed Procedural Schedule in Certain Restraining Systems For Transport Containers, Components Thereof, and Methods of Using Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-696).

In Order No. 2, ALJ Gildea set April 29, 2011 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 to be issued in the investigation no later than December 29, 2010.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Modifies Target Date And Calls For Additional Briefing In Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits (337-TA-666)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
21
On January 15, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 45 in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-666).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea “determined that is necessary for additional briefing by the parties” regarding “construction of the claim language ‘when said first voltage signal exceeds a predetermined threshold for said predetermined duration’” as set forth in claims 1 and 8 “of the ‘382 patent.”  Specifically, ALJ Gildea listed seven questions in the Order and requested that the parties answer the questions “giving your detailed and clearly explained reasons, including citations to the language of the patent claims themselves, the specification, the patent history, the testimony of the witnesses, and legal precedent.”

In light of the additional briefing, ALJ Gildea also determined in the Order that good cause existed to extend the target date by two months.  Accordingly, the new target date in the investigation is August 20, 2010, with the final determination due on April 20, 2010.
Share

Read More

Copyright © Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. | Disclaimer
The opinions, commentary and characterizations provided to this online forum by the authors and moderators are provided for encouraging discussion, thought and debate on important ITC issues. These postings are in no way representative of the opinions of the Oblon firm, or its clients, but rather the personal views of the individual authors.