How to Search
ALJ Gildea

Update Regarding Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, And Computers (337-TA-701)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
26
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Samsung Request To Depose Murata Employees In Japan In Certain Ceramic Capacitors (337-TA-692)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
27
On January 21, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 6: Granting Application for Recommendation to the U.S. District Court Requiring Depositions of Complainant Employees in Japan in Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-692).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted an application filed by Respondents Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electro-Mechanics America, Inc. (collectively, “Samsung”).  Samsung’s application sought a recommendation to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to order depositions of five employees of Complainant Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. to proceed at the U.S. Consulate in Osaka, Japan.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Motion For Leave To File A Second Amended Complaint And Amend Notice Of Investigation In Certain Video Displays (337-TA-687)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
01
On January 28, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 12 (dated January 8, 2010) in Certain Video Displays, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-687) granting Complainant LG Electronics, Inc.’s (“LGE”) motion for leave to file a second amended complaint and amend the Notice of Investigation.  Through its motion, LGE sought to add two additional respondents to the Investigation, AmTran Technology Co. Ltd. and AmTran Logistics, Inc. (collectively “AmTran”).

In support of its motion, LGE asserted that good cause existed to grant its motion because “through discovery conducted in this Investigation [LGE] has gained new knowledge and confirmed information about AmTran’s involvement with the importation, sale for importation, and sale within the United States after importation of products accused in this Investigation.”  Additionally, LGE asserted that adding AmTran as respondents “would reduce the need to conduct third-party discovery, aid in developing a more complete record, and afford it effective relief.”  The Commission Investigative Staff (“Staff”) filed a response in support of LGE’s motion citing the same reasons as LGE, including the assertion that AmTran “appears to have the most detailed technical understanding of the Vizio accused products.”
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Target Date In Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, And Computers (337-TA-701)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
01
On February 1, 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 Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, And Computers (Inv. No. 337-TA-701).

In Order No. 2, ALJ Gildea set May 31, 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 January 31, 2011.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation As To Funai In Certain Video Displays (337-TA-687)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
19
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Target Date In Certain Wireless Communication System Server Software, Wireless Handheld Devices And Battery Packs (337-TA-706)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
02
On March 1, 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 Wireless Communication System Server Software, Wireless Handheld Devices And Battery Packs (Inv. No. 337-TA-706).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea set June 24, 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 February 24, 2011.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Denies Motion For Leave To Supplement Notice Of Prior Art In Certain Ceramic Capacitors (337-TA-692)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
04
On March 3, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 11 in Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-692) denying Respondents Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electro-Mechanics America, Inc.’s (collectively “Samsung”) motion for leave to supplement their notice of prior art.

According to the Order, Samsung’s motion sought to add 57 additional prior art references that “it was unable to timely identify…because they were in obscure journals that took additional time to locate.”  Complainants Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. and Murata Electronics North America, Inc. (collectively “Murata”) opposed Samsung’s motion on the grounds that Samsung failed to explain why it could not have located the additional references prior to the February 4, 2010 deadline.  The Commission Investigative Staff did not oppose Samsung’s motion for leave.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, And Computers (337-TA-701)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
10
On March 9, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 3:  Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, And Computers (Inv. No. 337-TA-701).

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 Issues Recommendation For Samsung To Depose Additional Murata Employee In Japan In Certain Ceramic Capacitors (337-TA-692)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
19
On March 18, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No.13: Recommendation to The United States District Court For The District Of Columbia To Issue An Order/Commission For The Taking Of The Deposition Of Mr. Harunobu Sano in Japan in Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-692).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted an application filed by Respondents Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electro-Mechanics America, Inc. (collectively, “Samsung”).  Further to our January 27, 2010 post, Samsung’s application sought a recommendation to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to order the deposition of an additional employee of Complainant Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd. to proceed at the U.S. Consulate in Osaka, Japan.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Grants Motion to Depose Japanese Employees Outside Of Japan In Certain Ceramic Capacitors (337-TA-692)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
22
On March 19, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 12 in Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-692) granting a motion filed by Respondents to compel deposition of Complainants’ Japanese employees outside of Japan.

According to the Order, Respondents Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electro-Mechanics America, Inc. (collectively, "Samsung") moved for an order compelling Complainants Murata Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and Murata Electronics North America, Inc. (collectively, "Murata") to provide their Japanese employees for deposition outside of Japan, preferably in the United States.  Samsung argued that “Murata faces almost no restrictions in obtaining discovery from Samsung, while Samsung is ‘saddled with an unreasonable number of procedural hurdles, space and facility limitations, and time constraints.’”  Specifically, Samsung raised apparent difficulties in planning and deposing Murata’s witnesses in the U.S. Consulate in Osaka and that such difficulties would not permit sufficient time to conclude depositions prior to the deadline for expert reports on April 9, 2010.  Samsung further asserted that “because Murata chose to litigate this case in the United States, it should play by the rules that apply in its chosen forum, the United States, as opposed to hiding behind the rules applicable to depositions taken in Japan.”
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Rules On Motion to Compel in Certain Electronic Devices (337-TA-701)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
30
On March 29, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 4 in Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, and Computers (Inv. No. 337-TA-701).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted in part the motion of Complainants Nokia Corp. and Nokia, Inc. (collectively “Nokia”), seeking to compel Respondent Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) to produce certain documents and witnesses.

According to the Order, Nokia served document requests on January 26 and February 11, 2010.  Nokia served its Notice of Examination of Apple’s corporate witnesses on February 15, 2010.  Apple did not produce any documents or identify any witnesses.  On March 15, 2010, Nokia filed its motion, seeking an order compelling Apple to (1) produce responsive documents within ten days, and (2) make corporate-designee witnesses available for deposition no later than March 31, 2010.  Nokia also asked ALJ Gildea to order Apple to produce those corporate witnesses without the condition that Nokia take the deposition of those witnesses in their individual capacities at the same time.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Remand Target Date In Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors (337-TA-650)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
02
Further to our April 1, 2010 post, on April 1, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 29 in Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors and Components Thereof and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-650).

According to the Order, the Commission determined in its March 31, 2010 Opinion and Remand Order that ALJ Gildea must make a determination on the question of “whether PPC has made a substantial investment in the exploitation of [U.S. Patent No. D440,539] in a manner consistent with the principles set forth in the Commission’s Opinion.”  Accordingly, in the Order, ALJ Gildea set August 30, 2010 as the target date for the remand investigation and May 28, 2010 as the deadline for the issuance of the remand initial determination.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Wireless Communication System Server Software, Wireless Handheld Devices And Battery Packs (337-TA-706)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
07
On April 6, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 3:  Setting Procedural Schedule in Certain Wireless Communication System Server Software, Wireless Handheld Devices And Battery Packs (Inv. No. 337-TA-706).

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 June 24, 2010 date for a Markman hearing and an August 6, 2010 estimated date for a Markmanruling.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Extends Target Date And Sets Date For Markman Hearing In Certain Electronic Devices (337-TA-701)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
08
On April 5, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 7 in Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, and Computers (Inv. No. 337-TA-701).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea moved the target date for this investigation from May 31, 2011 to August 1, 2011 and the deadline for final initial determination from January 31, 2011 to April 1, 2011.  ALJ Gildea also revised the procedural schedule to include an August 11, 2010 date for a Markman hearing and a September 10, 2010 estimated date for a Markman ruling.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Rules on Motions to Amend Ground Rules and Protective Order In Certain Wireless Communication System Server Software, Wireless Handheld Devices And Battery Packs (337-TA-706)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
21
On April 20, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 4, denying a joint motion for addendum to the Ground Rules, and granting a joint motion for an addendum to the Protective Order in Certain Wireless Communication System Server Software, Wireless Handheld Devices And Battery Packs (Inv. No. 337-TA-706).

According to the Order, the parties jointly moved for an addendum to the Ground Rules to permit a “clawback” provision regarding inadvertently disclosed privileged documents or materials.  In the Order, ALJ Gildea determined that he “does not incorporate ‘claw back’ procedures into the ground rules or protective order of an investigation” because the “Federal Circuit has held en banc that ‘[t]he attorney-client privilege evaporates upon any voluntary disclosure of confidential information to a third party’ and that it ‘is irrelevant whether the [disclosure] was inadvertent.’”
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Issues Initial Determination In Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp ("CCFL") Inverter Circuits (337-TA-666)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
22
On April 19, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued a notice regarding the Initial Determination and Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond (“ID”) in Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (“CCFL”) Inverter Circuits and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-666).

The Complainants in this investigation are O2 Micro International Ltd. and O2 Micro Inc.  The Respondents are Monolithic Power Systems Inc., Microsemi Corporation, ASUSTek Computer Inc. and ASUS Computer International America (collectively, the “Respondents”).
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Sets Target Date In Certain Digital Set-Top Boxes (337-TA-712)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
22
On April 21, 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 Digital Set-Top Boxes and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-712).

In the Order, ALJ Gildea set August 22, 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 April 22, 2011.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Issues Order Regarding Contacts With Agency Staff In Certain Ceramic Capacitors (337-TA-692)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
27
On April 20, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 19 in Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-692) providing guidance regarding the appropriate contact for the parties if they should have questions or concerns over the status of a pending motion or order.

According to the Order, on April 13, 2010, ALJ Gildea sent a message to the parties through his Attorney Advisor regarding their multiple contacts with his Attorney Advisor, Secretary, and Docket Manager over the status of a pending motion relating to depositions of Complainants' employees.  The message stated:  “While the parties have the right, and are welcome, to notify me, through my Attorney Advisor, that certain matters are of pressing importance or urgency, once is enough to register the point…. With that in mind, the parties are requested to direct all future inquiries or concerns to my Attorney Advisor only.”  Due to continuing contacts with the Docket Manager, and other staff in Docket Services relating to the status and details of orders relating to this case, the Order reinforced ALJ Gildea’s earlier instruction “to direct all future inquiries or concerns relating to this Investigation to my Attorney Advisor only,” and that “[t]he parties should note that inquiries should be made one time, by email or phone.”
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Rules On Motion To Reconsider Order Setting Markman Hearing and Revised Procedural Schedule In Certain Electronic Devices (337-TA-701)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
27
On April 26, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 8:  Denying Complainants’ Motion to Reconsider Order Setting Markman Hearing and Revised Procedural Schedule in Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, And Computers (Inv. No. 337-TA-701).

By way of background, Complainants Nokia Corporation and Nokia Inc. (collectively, "Nokia") asserted over fifty claims of seven patents against Respondent Apple Inc. (“Apple”) in this Investigation.  ALJ Gildea decided that “an early Markman hearing would assist in streamlining the issues for the evidentiary hearing and final initial determination in this Investigation.” And “[t]o accommodate the parties' concerns about scheduling, the target date and schedule were extended by two months.”  See our April 8, 2010 post for more details.
Share

Read More

ALJ Gildea Denies Nonparties’ Motion For Leave To Participate In Remand In Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors (337-TA-650)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
28
On April 26, 2010, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 33 denying a motion brought by nonparties Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC, Hewlett-Packard Company, and Transcend Information, Inc. (collectively, the “Nonparties”) requesting permission to participate as amicus curiae in the remanded portion of the investigation in Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors and Components Thereof and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-650).

By way of background, the ITC issued a notice on December 14, 2009 determining to review a portion of ALJ Gildea’s October 13, 2009 final initial determination (“ID”) finding that no violation of Section 337 had occurred in connection with the non-defaulting respondents’ importation into the U.S., the sale for importation, or the sale within the U.S. after importation of certain coaxial cable connectors by reason of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,470,257, and asking the parties and members of the public to comment on “the interpretation of section 337(a)(3) as it pertains to licensing.”  See our December 16, 2009 post for more details.  On April 14, the Commission issued the public version of its opinion vacating the ID insofar as ALJ Gildea found that a domestic industry exists under section 337(a)(3)(C), and affirming in part, reversing in part, and remanding on a number of other issues included in the ID.  See our April 16, 2010 post for more details.
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.