ALJ Shaw

ALJ Shaw Terminates Investigation As To Sharp In Certain Digital Media Devices (337-TA-882)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
23
On October 21, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 23 in Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets and Mobile Phones, Components Thereof and Associated Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-882).

By way of background, this investigation was instituted on June 12, 2013 and is based on a May 13, 2013 complaint filed by Black Hills Media, LLC (“BHM”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain digital media devices that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,028,323; 8,214,873; 8,230,099; 8,045,952; 8,050,652 and 6,618,593.  See our May 16, 2013 and June 20, 2013 posts for more details on the complaint and the notice of investigation, respectively.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Sets Target Date And Orders Discovery Statements In Certain Point-To-Point Network Communication Devices (337-TA-892)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
24
On October 21, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order Nos. 6 and 7 setting the target date for completion of the investigation and ordering a discovery statement from the parties, respectively, in Certain Point-to-Point Network Communication Devices and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-892).

According to Order No. 6, the Initial Determination is due on September 9, 2014 and the target date for completion of the investigation is January 9, 2015 (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Point-To-Point Network Communication Devices (337-TA-892)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
29
On October 28, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 9 in Certain Point-to-Point Network Communication Devices and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-892).

In the Order, ALJ Shaw included provisions for the early exchange of claim terms and proposed constructions.  In addition, ALJ Shaw determined that the evidentiary hearing will commence on May 13, 2014; the Initial Determination is due on September 9, 2014; and the target date for completing the investigation is January 9, 2015 (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Motion To Declassify Identity Of Licensees In Certain Digital Media Devices (337-TA-882)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Oct
31
On October 28, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 26 in Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets and Mobile Phones, Components Thereof and Associated Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-882).

By way of background, this investigation was instituted on June 12, 2013 and is based on a May 13, 2013 complaint filed by Black Hills Media, LLC (“BHM”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain digital media devices that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,028,323; 8,214,873; 8,230,099; 8,045,952; 8,050,652 and 6,618,593.  See our May 16, 2013 and June 20, 2013 posts for more details on the complaint and the notice of investigation, respectively.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Grants Motion To Compel In Certain Crawler Cranes (337-TA-887)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
19
On November 15, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 8 granting Complainant Manitowoc Cranes, LLC’s (“Manitowoc”) motion to compel Respondents Sany Heavy Industry, Ltd. and Sany America, Inc. (collectively, “Sany”) to provide complete English translations of invalidity contentions and the foreign-language references identified therein in Certain Crawler Cranes and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-887).

According to the Order, Manitowoc argued that Sany “obfuscated” the substance of its invalidity contentions and was “attempting to require Manitowoc to incur the burden and expense of translating” those contentions “without Manitowoc knowing how Respondents will later contend that those references should be translated.”  Sany countered that it already provided the requested translations and would provide revised claim charts.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Motion To Exclude Prior Art In Certain Digital Media Devices (337-TA-882)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Nov
22
On November 19, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 28 denying Complainant Black Hills Media, LLC’s (“BHM”) motion to exclude prior art, compel (or strike) interrogatory responses, and compel submission of an amended notice of prior art by Respondents Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic Corporation of North America, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC, LG Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc., Toshiba Corporation, and Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. (collectively, “Respondents”), and Intervenor Google Inc. (“Google”) in Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets and Mobile Phones, Components Thereof and Associated Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-882).

According to the Order, BHM argued that Respondents and Google obstructed BHM’s ability to investigate the asserted prior art by (1) improperly objecting to discovery relating to prior art that Respondents intended to use to support their invalidity contentions; (2) failing to timely produce documents or respond meaningfully to interrogatories relating to same; and (3) serving an “overly-inclusive” notice of prior art.  BHM thus requested that the ALJ order Respondents and Google to (1) withdraw reliance on any prior art they were not aware of more than 15 days prior to its production; (2) amend their joint notice of prior art and invalidity contentions to identify only those references on which they reasonably intend to rely at the hearing, limited to five references and three prior art combinations per patent; and (3) preclude any combinations not specifically described in detail in Respondents’ initial invalidity contentions.  Respondents and Google countered that they complied with every deadline regarding prior art and their invalidity positions.  The Commission Investigative Staff (“OUII”) also opposed the motion for the same reasons, adding that the volume of prior art asserted by Respondents and Google “is not disproportionate to the number of asserted claims,” which came to 137 references and 80 asserted claims.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Discovery Motions In Certain Digital Media Devices (337-TA-882)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
04
On December 3, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 30 in Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets and Mobile Phones, Components Thereof and Associated Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-882).

According to the Order, Non-party Amazon Digital Services, Inc. (“Amazon”) filed a motion to quash the subpoena duces tecum and ad testificandum issued by Complainant Black Hills Media, LLC (“BHM”).  In addition to opposing the motion, BHM filed a cross-motion for a recommendation that the ALJ certify a request to the Commission for enforcement of the subpoena.  In support of its Motion to Quash, Amazon asserted that the identified Amazon Cloud Player software does not include the functionality required by the asserted patents.  In opposition, BHM argued that Amazon’s substantive argument is not relevant to the discovery dispute and is “simply wrong.”

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Grants Motion To Compel In Certain Crawler Cranes (337-TA-887)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
09
On December 4, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public version of Order No. 9 in Certain Crawler Cranes and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-887).

According to the Order, Complainant Manitowoc Cranes, LLC (“Manitowoc”) filed a motion to compel Respondents Sany Heavy Industry Co., Ltd. and Sany America, Inc. (collectively, “Sany”) to provide complete responses to certain interrogatories which Manitowoc alleged that Sany inappropriately refused to answer.  Manitowoc also asserted that many of Sany’s interrogatory responses failed to comply with Commission Rule 210.29(c) permitting interrogatories to be answered by specifying relevant records.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Motion For Leave To Late File Motions To Compel In Certain Digital Media Devices (337-TA-882)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
11
On December 6, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 31 denying Complainant Black Hills Media, LLC's ("BHM") motion for leave to file out of time various motions to compel in Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets and Mobile Phones, Components Thereof and Associated Software(Inv. No. 337-TA-882).

According to the Order, BHM had filed three motions to compel against Respondents Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Samsung Electronics America, Inc.; and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, "Samsung"); Respondents LG Electronics, Inc.; LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.; and LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc. (collectively, "LG"); and non-party Netflix, Inc. ("Netflix") 41 minutes after the deadline of 5:15 p.m. on November 1, 2013.  Soon after, BHM learned that the motions contained confidential business information of Samsung, LG and Netflix, and requested that the motions not be made available as public documents on EDIS.  BHM did not re-file the motions as confidential, and sent an email to Samsung, LG and Netflix on November 4, 5 and 11 regarding filing a motion for leave to late file the motions to compel.  The instant motion was filed on November 21.  BHM asserted that it "believed it had filed this motion for leave to file out of time on November 12, 2013, but due to internal miscommunication, it was not."  BHM argued that good cause exists to grant its motion for leave inasmuch as Samsung, LG and Netflix were not prejudiced by the late filing of the motions to compel, and because BHM spent significant time attempting to obtain the requested discovery through meet and confer efforts with Samsung, LG and Netflix.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Motion To Quash In Certain Digital Media Devices (337-TA-882)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
23
On December 13, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 33 in Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets and Mobile Phones, Components Thereof and Associated Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-882).  In the Order, ALJ Shaw denied non-party sMedio America Inc.’s (“SMA”) motion to quash a subpoena ad testificandum that had been issued based on the application of Complainant Black Hills Media, LLC (“BHM”).  ALJ Shaw also denied BHM’s cross-motion to certify a request to the Commission for enforcement of the subpoena ad testificandum, as well as for the enforcement of a subpoena duces tecum.

According to the Order, SMA argued that the subpoena ad testificandum should be quashed because the information sought by BHM relates to technologies developed and manufactured by SMA’s parent company sMedio Inc. and sister company sMedio Technology (Shanghai) Inc.  SMA argued that it does not control its parent and sister companies and that it has no knowledge concerning the documents, things, or information created by those companies that relate to BHM’s subpoena.  Accordingly, SMA argued that requiring it to provide a witness in response to BHM’s subpoena would be moot and unduly burdensome to SMA.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Motion To Prevent Disclosure Of Confidential Business Information To Expert In Certain Crawler Cranes (337-TA-887)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Dec
24
On December 18, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 11 in Certain Crawler Cranes and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-887).  In the Order, ALJ Shaw denied Complainant Manitowoc Cranes, LLC’s (“Manitowoc Cranes”) motion to prevent disclosure of its confidential business information to Mr. Thomas K. Becker.

According to the Order, Manitowoc Cranes argued that Respondents had identified Mr. Becker as an expert on Respondents’ behalf in the investigation, and that Mr. Becker had been previously employed by Manitowoc Cranes’ parent company for 25 years.  Manitowoc Cranes objected to Mr. Becker’s proposed role as an expert for three reasons.  First, Manitowoc Cranes argued that there was significant risk that Mr. Becker would disclose confidential information to which he had been exposed during his previous employment with the parent company.  Second, Manitowoc Cranes argued that Mr. Becker’s recent employment with a crane manufacturer that competes with Manitowoc Cranes should preclude him from receiving confidential information in the investigation.  Third, Manitowoc Cranes argued that Respondents appeared to be deliberately using Mr. Becker for his knowledge of confidential information from his previous employment with the parent company.  Respondents and the Commission Investigative Staff opposed the motion.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Sanctions Motion, But Orders Machine Inspections In Certain Crawler Cranes (337-TA-887)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
02
On December 23, 2013, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 12 in Certain Crawler Cranes and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-887).  In the Order, ALJ Shaw denied Complainant Manitowoc Cranes, LLC’s (“Manitowoc Cranes”) motion for sanctions.

According to the Order, Manitowoc Cranes argued that Respondents Sany Heavy Industry Co., Ltd. and Sany America, Inc. (collectively, “Sany”) should be sanctioned for failing to make certain accused cranes available for inspection in both Ohio and China.  ALJ Shaw determined that Manitowoc Cranes did not establish that Sany engaged in the type of discovery abuse justifying sanctions under Commission Rule 210.27 and thus denied Manitowoc Cranes’s motion.  ALJ Shaw also determined that Manitowoc Cranes was entitled to observe the subject crane “perform[ing] a pick, move and set operation” and thus ordered Sany to provide a firm inspection date for the two cranes at issue by December 31, 2013.  ALJ Shaw concluded the order by noting that “Sany raises the possibility that an inspection of the SC8500 crane may not be permissible in China.  The parties should not contravene Chinese law.  Sany has failed, however, to establish that any such prohibition exists under Chinese law.”

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Summary Determination Of Invalidity In Certain Digital Media Devices (337-TA-882)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
21
On January 15, 2014, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public versions of Order No. 36 (dated January 14, 2014) and Order No. 37 (dated January 14, 2014) in Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets and Mobile Phones, Components Thereof and Associated Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-882).

According to Order No. 36, Respondent LG Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., and LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc. (collectively, “LG”) moved for summary determination that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,045,952 (the ‘952 patent) and 8,050,652 (the ‘652 patent) are invalid due to improper inventorship.  Specifically, LG argued that the testimony of the two named inventors, as well as Complainant Black Hills Media LLC’s (“BHM”) interrogatory responses, showed that a third individual contributed to at least one asserted claim of each patent.  The Commission Investigative Staff (“OUII”) supported LG’s motion.  ALJ Shaw denied the motion, however, finding that the evidence showed only that the allegedly omitted inventor (1) had discussions with the named inventors regarding the general business goal of allowing immigrants to listen to radio stations from their homeland, and (2) worked on the initial business concept that led to the formation of company where all three individuals worked, neither of which demonstrated clearly and convincingly that the allegedly omitted inventor contributed significantly to the claimed inventions.  Likewise, the ALJ found that BHM’s interrogatory response relied on by LG merely identified the allegedly omitted inventor as a person with knowledge of the inventors of the ‘952 and ‘652 patents, and does not state that such person is himself an inventor.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Summary Determination Relating To Economic Prong Of The Domestic Industry Requirement In Certain Digital Media Devices (337-TA-882)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
27
On January 23, 2014, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public version of Order No. 38 in Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets and Mobile Phones, Components Thereof and Associated Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-882).

According to the Order, Complainant Black Hills Media, LLC (“BHM”) filed a Motion for Summary Determination of Compliance with the Economic Prong of the Domestic Industry Requirement.  Respondents Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America. Inc., Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC, LG Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc., Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic Corporation of North America, Toshiba Corporation, and Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. (collectively, “Respondents”) filed a joint opposition to the pending motion.  

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Motion To Quash Subpoena In Certain Point-To-Point Network Communication Devices (337-TA-892)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
28
On January 9, 2014, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 16 in Certain Point-to-Point Network Communication Devices and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-892).

According to the Order, non-party Netflix, Inc. (“Netflix”) filed a motion to quash the subpoena duces tecum and ad testificandum issued upon application by Complainant Straight Path IP Group, Inc. (“Straight Path”).  Netflix raised two main arguments: (1) that the subpoena was overly broad and unduly burdensome, and (2) that the subpoena sought information that was available from the named respondents in the investigation.  Netflix further argued that discovery responsive to many of the subpoenaed topics had been produced by respondents, thereby mooting the topics as to Netflix. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Grants Motion For Leave To Amend Invalidity Contentions in Certain Crawler Cranes (337-TA-887)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jan
29
On January 27, 2014, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public version of Order No. 13 in Certain Crawler Cranes and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-887). 

According to the Order, Respondents Sany Heavy Industry Co., Ltd and Sany America, Inc. (collectively, “Sany”) filed a motion for leave to amend their invalidity contentions.  Complainant Manitowoc Cranes, LLC (“Manitowoc”) filed a response supporting the motion in part. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Issues Notice Of Initial Determination In Certain Compact Fluorescent Reflector Lamps (337-TA-872)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
03
On February 3, 2014, ALJ David P. Shaw issued a notice of the Final Initial Determination (“ID”) in Certain Compact Fluorescent Reflector Lamps, Products Containing Same and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-872).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by Andrzej Bobel and Neptun Light, Inc. (collectively, “Neptun”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain compact fluorescent reflector lamps (“reflector CFLs”) and products and components containing same that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,053,540 (the ‘540 patent).  See our January 30, 2013 and March 1, 2013 posts for more details on Neptun’s complaint and the Notice of Investigation, respectively.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Terminates Investigation As To Sharp In Certain Point-To-Point Network Communication Devices (337-TA-892)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
07
On February 5, 2014, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 18 in Certain Point-to-Point Network Communication Devices and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-892).

According to the Order, ALJ Shaw granted a joint motion filed by Complainant Straight Path IP Group, Inc. and Respondents Sharp Corporation and Sharp Electronics Corporation based on a settlement and patent license agreement. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Grants Motions To Terminate Investigation In Certain Multiple Mode Outdoor Grills (337-TA-895)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
10
On February 6, 2014, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public versions of Order No. 19 and No. 20 in Certain Multiple Mode Outdoor Grills and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-895).

According to Order No. 19, ALJ Shaw granted Complainants A&J Manufacturing, LLC and A&J Manufacturing, Inc.'s (collectively, "A&J") motion to terminate the investigation as to Respondent Ningbo Spring Communication Technologies Co., Ltd. based on a consent order stipulation, proposed consent order, and confidential settlement agreement.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Summary Determination Of Invalidity In Certain Digital Media Devices (337-TA-882)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Feb
14
On February 5, 2014, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 39 in Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets and Mobile Phones, Components Thereof and Associated Software (Inv. No. 337-TA-882).

According to the Order, Respondents Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Samsung Electronics America, Inc.; and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Samsung”) moved for partial summary determination of invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 8,214,873 (the ‘873 patent).  Specifically, Samsung argued that the ‘873 patent specification fails to include the required written description support for the “without user input” limitation in the asserted claims.  Complainant Back Hills Media, LLC and the Commission Investigative Staff opposed the motion.

Share

Read More

www.xxx-clips-online.com