ALJ Pender

ALJ Pender Grants Motion For Termination In Certain Food Waste Disposers (337-TA-838)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
14
On December 11, 2012, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 8 granting Complainant Emerson Electric Co.'s ("Emerson") motion for termination of the investigation as to each of the Respondents based upon withdrawal of the remaining allegations of the second amended complaint in Certain Food Waste Disposers and Components and Packaging Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-838).

According to the Order, neither the Respondents nor the Commission Investigative Staff opposed Emerson's motion.  Finding that the motion complied with the requirements of Commission Rule 210.21(a)(1), ALJ Pender granted the motion, thus terminating the investigation in its entirety.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Electronic Devices With Communication Capabilities (337-TA-808)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
18
On December 14, 2012, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 26 in Certain Electronic Devices with Communication Capabilities, Components Thereof, and Related Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-808). 

In the Order, ALJ Pender granted Complainant HTC Corp. (“HTC”) and Respondent Apple Inc.’s (“Apple”) joint motion to terminate the investigation in its entirety without prejudice on the basis of a settlement agreement between HTC and Apple.  As required by Commission Rule 210.50(b)(2), ALJ Pender determined that the settlement agreement between HTC and Apple did not impose any undue burdens on the public health and welfare, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, and United States consumers.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Issues Remand Determination Finding No Violation Of Section 337 By Apple In Certain Wireless Communication Devices (337-TA-745)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
02
On December 18, 2012, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued a notice regarding the Initial Determination on Remand (the “Remand ID”) in Certain Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, Computers and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-745).

By way of background, the Complainant in this investigation is Motorola Mobility, Inc. (“Motorola”) and the Respondent is Apple Inc. (“Apple”).  On May 16, 2012, ALJ Pender issued an initial determination (“ID”) finding that a violation of Section 337 had occurred by Apple regarding U.S. Patent No. 6,246,697.  However, ALJ Pender found no violation of Section 337 with respect to U.S. Patent Nos. 6,272,333, 6,246,862 (the ‘862 patent), and 5,636,223.  See our May 31, 2012 post for more details on the ID.  On September 17, 2012, the Commission issued a notice determining to affirm-in-part, reverse-in-part, and remand-in-part the findings in the ID.  Specifically, the Commission remanded the case to the ALJ for further proceedings on claim construction, the remaining invalidity challenges, infringement, and domestic industry in relation to the ‘862 patent.  See our September 20, 2012 post for more details on the Commission's decision. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Issues Public Version Of Initial Determination In Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices (337-TA-796)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
22
On December 28, 2012, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued the public version (dated October 24, 2012) of the Initial Determination (“ID”) finding a violation of Section 337 in Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-796).  Due to its size, we have split the ID in four parts here: part 1, part 2, part 3, and part 4.

By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by Apple, Inc. (“Apple”).  The Respondents in this investigation are:  Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”).  See our August 2, 2011 post for more details about this investigation.  

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Issues Recommended Determination On Remedy And Bonding In Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices (337-TA-796)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
22
On December 28, 2012, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued the public version (dated November 7, 2012) of the Recommended Determination On Remedy And Bonding (“RD”) in Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-796). 

By way of background, ALJ Pender determined that a violation of Section 337 has occurred in this investigation by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) by reason of infringement of certain valid claims of U.S. Patent Nos. D618,678 (the ‘678 patent), 7,479,949 (the ‘949 patent), RE 41,922 (the ‘922 patent), and 7,912,501 (the ‘501 patent).  See October 26, 2012 and January 22, 2013 posts for more details on the initial determination in this investigation.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Sets 16-Month Target Date In Certain Paper Shredders (337-TA-863)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
05
Further to our January 28, 2013 post, on February 4, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 3 in Certain Paper Shredders, Certain Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to Same and Certain Products Containing Same and Certain Parts Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-863).

According to the Order, ALJ Pender set May 27, 2014 as the target date (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).  ALJ Pender further indicated that the evidentiary hearing will commence on November 4, 2013, and any final initial determination will be due by January 27, 2014.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Sets 16-Month Target Date In Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices (337-TA-861/867)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
06
Further to our November 16, 2012 and January 29, 2013 posts, on February 4, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 3 in Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices (Inv. No. 337-TA-861/867).

According to the Order, ALJ Pender set June 2, 2014 as the target date (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).  ALJ Pender further indicated that the evidentiary hearing will commence on October 21, 2013, and any final initial determination in this matter will be due by January 31, 2014.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Sets Remand Target Date In Certain Electronic Media Devices (337-TA-796)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
07
Further to our January 24, 2013 post, on February 5, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 28 in Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-796). 

By way of background, ALJ Pender determined that a violation of Section 337 has occurred in this investigation by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) by reason of infringement of certain valid claims of U.S. Patent Nos. D618,678, 7,479,949, RE 41,922 (the ‘922 patent), and 7,912,501 (the ‘501 patent).  See our October 26, 2012 and January 22, 2013 posts for more details on the initial determination (“ID”) in this investigation.  On January 23, 2013, the Commission determined to review ALJ Pender’s October 24, 2012 initial determination (“ID”) which found no violation of Section 337.  Further, the Commission issued an order remanding the investigation back to ALJ Pender.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Issues Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond in Certain Kinesiotherapy Devices (337-TA-823)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
07
On February 1, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued the public version (dated January 22, 2013) of the Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond (“RD”) in Certain Kinesiotherapy Devices and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-823).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a December 2, 2011 complaint filed by Standard Innovation Corporation and Standard Innovation (US) Corp. (collectively, “Standard Innovation”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain kinesiotherapy devices and components thereof that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,931,605 and D605,779.  See our December 6, 2011 post for more details on the complaint.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Issues Public Version of Initial Determination in Certain Kinesiotherapy Devices (337-TA-823)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
11
On February 8, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued the public version (dated January 8, 2013) of the Initial Determination (“ID”) finding no violation of Section 337 in Certain Kinesiotherapy Devices and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-823).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a December 2, 2011 complaint filed by Standard Innovation Corporation and Standard Innovation (US) Corp. (collectively, “Standard Innovation”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain kinesiotherapy devices and components thereof that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,931,605 (the ‘605 patent) and D605,779.  See our December 6, 2011 post for more details on Standard Innovation’s complaint.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices (337-TA-861/867)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
06
On March 1, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 6 in Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices (Inv. No. 337-TA-861/867).

According to the Order, ALJ Pender granted a motion filed by Complainant Speculative Product Design, LLC to terminate the investigation as to Respondent Project Horizon d/b/a InMotion Entertainment based upon a Stipulation and Consent Order.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Issues Notice Regarding Initial Determination In Certain Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Lamps (337-TA-830)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
07
On February 27, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued a notice regarding the Initial Determination (“ID”) in Certain Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Lamps and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-830). 

By way of background, the International Trade Commission instituted this investigation on February 22, 2012 based on a complaint filed by Complainants Neptun Light, Inc. and Andrzej Bobel’s (collectively, “Neptun”).  See our February 23, 2012 post for more details about this investigation. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Paper Shredders (337-TA-863)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
11
Further to our January 28, 2013 and February 5, 2013 posts, on March 5, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 4 in Certain Paper Shredders, Certain Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to Same and Certain Products Containing Same and Certain Parts Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-863).

In the Order, ALJ Pender set the procedural schedule for the investigation.  The ALJ determined that the evidentiary hearing will commence on November 4, 2013, any final initial determination will issue no later than January 27, 2014, and the target date for completion of the investigation is May 27, 2014 (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices (337-TA-861/867)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
12
Further to our January 29, 2013 and February 6, 2013 posts, on March 5, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 7 in Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices (Inv. No. 337-TA-861/867).

In the Order, ALJ Pender set the procedural schedule for the investigation and included provisions for the early exchange of proposed claim terms and constructions.  The ALJ determined that the evidentiary hearing will commence on October 21, 2013, any final initial determination will issue no later than January 31, 2014, and the target date for completion of the investigation is June 2, 2014 (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Silicon Microphones Packages (337-TA-825)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Mar
13
On March 12, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 21 in Certain Silicon Microphone Packages and Products Containing Same(Inv. No. 337-TA-825).

In the Order, ALJ Pender granted a joint motion filed by Complainant Knowles Electronics, LLC (“Knowles”) and Respondents Analog Device, Inc. ("ADI"), Avnet, Inc., and Amkor Technology, Inc. (collectively, “Respondents”) to terminate the investigation in its entirety based on a settlement agreement between Knowles and ADI.  The parties noted that the agreement between Knowles and ADI completely resolves the dispute between Knowles and Respondents.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Issues Claim Construction Order In Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones And Tablet Computers (337-TA-847)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
01
On March 21, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 8 construing the disputed terms of the asserted patent claims in Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones and Tablet Computers, and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-847).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by Nokia; Nokia, Inc.; and Intellisync Corporation (collectively, “Nokia”) alleging violation of Section 337 by HTC; HTC America, Inc.; and Exedea, Inc. (collectively, “HTC”) in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain electronic devices that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,570,369; 5,884,190 (the ‘190 patent); 6,141,664 the ‘664 patent); 6,393,260; 6,728,530; 7,106,293 (the ‘293 patent); 7,209,911 (the ‘911 patent); 7,366,529; and 7,415,247 (the ‘247 patent).  See our June 7, 2012 post for more details on this investigation.  On August 7, 2012, Google, Inc. (“Google”) was granted status as an Intervenor, but denied status as a respondent.  See our August 10, 2012 post for more details.  A Markman hearing was held on January 22–23, 2013.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Issues Public Version Of Recommended Determination On Remedy And Bond In Certain Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Lamps (337-TA-830)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
03
On March 26, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued the public version (dated March 1, 2013) of the Recommended Determination On Remedy And Bond (“RD”) in Certain Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Lamps and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-830).

By way of background, ALJ Pender determined that no violation of Section 337 has occurred in this investigation by Respondents Technical Consumer Products, Inc.; TCP (Shanghai) Tiancanbao Lighting Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd.; Shanghai Qiangling Electronics Co. Ltd.; Zhejiang Qiang Ling Electronic Co. Ltd.; U Lighting America Inc.; and Golden U Lighting Manufacturing (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Respondents”).   See our March 7, 2013 post for more details on the initial determination in this investigation.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Issues Remand Initial Determination In Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices (337-TA-796)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
08
On April 4, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued the public version of the Remand Initial Determination (“RID”) (dated March 26, 2013) in Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-796).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) alleging a violation of Section 337 by Respondents Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Samsung Electronics America, Inc.; and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) for importation into the U.S. and sale of certain electronic digital media devices.  See our August 2, 2011 post for more details on the Notice of Investigation in this matter.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Issues Public Version Of Initial Determination In Certain Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Lamps (337-TA-830)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Apr
12
On April 5, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued the public version of the Initial Determination (“ID,” dated February 27, 2013) finding no violation of Section 337 in Certain Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Lamps and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-830).

By way of background, the International Trade Commission instituted this investigation on February 22, 2012 based on a complaint filed by Complainants Neptun Light, Inc. and Andrzej Bobel’s (collectively, “Neptun”).  Neptun alleged that the named Respondents violated Section 337 by importing into the United States, selling for importation, and selling within the United States after importation certain dimmable compact fluorescent lamps (“CFLs”) that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,434,480 (the ‘480 patent) and 8,035,318 (the ‘318 patent).  Specifically, Neptun alleged that U Lighting America Inc.’s (“ULA”) CFLs infringe claim 9 of the ‘480 patent and Technical Consumer Products, Inc.; Shanghai Qiangling Electronics Co. Ltd.; and Zhejiang Qiang Ling Electronic Co. Ltd.’s (collectively, “TCP”) CFLs infringe claims 1 and 12 of the ‘318 patent.   See our February 23, 2012 post for more details about this investigation.

The ‘480 Patent


According to the ID, the parties disputed the meaning of the phrase “a resonant boosting circuit integrates into the power line rectifier.” ALJ Pender determined that the phrase should be given its plain and ordinary meaning.  ALJ Pender based his determination on the intrinsic record and the uncontroverted testimony of Neptun’s expert witness.  ALJ Pender noted that the majority of ULA’s claim construction arguments were purely attorney arguments without evidentiary support.


As to infringement, ALJ Pender held that ULA’s CFLs do not infringe claim 9 of the ‘480 patent.  ALJ Pender rejected ULA’s arguments because ULA failed to present any evidence in support of its contentions.  Further, ALJ Pender pointed to testimony given by Neptun’s expert witness that refuted all of ULA’s non-infringement arguments.

Share

Read More

ALJ Pender Denies Motion For Summary Determination Of Non-Infringement In Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones And Tablet Computers (337-TA-847)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
May
07
On April 15, 2013, ALJ Thomas B. Pender issued Order No. 11 denying Respondents HTC America, Inc. and HTC Corporation's (collectively, "HTC") motion seeking summary determination of non-infringement of certain method claims of the asserted patents in Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones and Tablet Computers, and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-847).

According to the Order, HTC argued that such a finding was required because Complainants Nokia, Nokia, Inc., and Intellisync Corporation (collectively, “Nokia”) "wholly failed to demonstrate that the direct infringement of any of these method claims occurs with respect to the HTC products, at the time of importation, as is required for a finding of a violation of Section 337."  ALJ Pender found this to be "an incorrect tautology," as Nokia's failure to demonstrate direct infringement of the accused products at the time of importation "does not prevent a finding of direct infringement of the method claims, it only prevents a finding that the direct infringement constitutes, in and of itself, a violation of Section 337."  Because HTC provided no other basis for its motion for summary determination, the motion was denied.

Share

Read More

www.xxx-clips-online.com