ALJ Shaw

ALJ Shaw Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Audiovisual Components (337-TA-837)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
May
24
Further to our April 13, 2012 and May 11, 2012 posts, on May 22, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 4 in Certain Audiovisual Components and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-837).

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 January 7, 2013; the Initial Determination is due on April 19, 2013; and the target date for completing the investigation is August 19, 2013 (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Issues Public Version Of Initial Determination Finding A Violation Of Section 337 By Microsoft In Certain Gaming And Entertainment Consoles (337-TA-752)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
May
24
Further to our April 26, 2012 post, on May 11, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public version of his Initial Determination (“ID”), finding a violation of Section 337 in Certain Gaming and Entertainment Consoles, Related Software, and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-752).  Please note that due to the size of the ID, we have split the file into six parts which can be found here:  part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, part 5, and part 6.   

In the ID, ALJ Shaw determined that a violation of Section 337 occurred in this investigation by Microsoft by reason of infringement of certain valid claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,357,571 (the ‘571 patent); 6,069,896 (the ‘896 patent); 6,980,596 (the ‘596 patent); and 7,162,094 (the ‘094 patent).  ALJ Shaw further determined that the domestic industry requirement is satisfied with respect to all asserted patents. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Grants Motion Relating To Requests For Admissions In Certain Electric Fireplaces (337-TA-791/826)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
May
29
On May 25, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 16 in Certain Electric Fireplaces, Components Thereof, Manuals for Same, and Products Containing Same, Certain Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to Same, and Certain Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-791/826).

In the Order, ALJ Shaw granted a motion filed by Complainants Twin-Star International, Inc. and TS Investment Holding Corp. (collectively, “Twin-Star”) to deem as admitted Twin-Star’s Third Set of Requests for Admission (“RFA”) to Respondents Shenzhen Reliap Industrial Co., Ltd. (“Reliap”) and Yue Qiu Sheng, a.k.a Jason Yue (“Yue”).  According to the Order, Reliap and Yue failed to respond to the RFAs served on them and failed to respond to the instant motion.   ALJ Shaw therefore determined that (1) under Commission Rule 210.31(b), RFAs may be deemed admitted if the party to whom the requests are directed fails to respond to the requests; and (2) under Commission Rule 210.15(c), a party that fails to respond to a motion may be deemed to have consented to the granting of the relief asked for in the motion.  Accordingly, ALJ Shaw granted Twin-Star’s motion.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Issues Recommended Determination On Remedy And Bonding In Certain Gaming And Entertainment Consoles (337-TA-752)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
May
31
On May 18, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public version of the Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding (“RD”) (dated May 7, 2012) in Certain Gaming and Entertainment Consoles, Related Software, and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-745).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by Motorola Mobility, Inc. and General Instrument Corporation (collectively, “Motorola”) alleging violation of Section 337 by Respondent Microsoft Corp. (“Microsoft”) for its importation into the U.S. and sale of certain gaming and entertainment consoles, related software, and components thereof that infringe  certain U.S. Patents.  See our November 24, 2010 post for more details.  On April 23, 2012, ALJ Shaw issued the Initial Determination (“ID”) which found that a violation of Section 337 occurred in this investigation by Microsoft by reason of infringement of certain valid claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,357,571 (the ‘571 patent); 6,069,896 (the ‘896 patent); 6,980,596 (the ‘596 patent); and 7,162,094 (the ‘094 patent).  See our May 24, 2012 post for more details on the public version of the ID. 

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Motion To Postpone Evidentiary Hearing In Certain Microprocessors (337-TA-781)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jun
13
On June 12, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 34 in Certain Microprocessors, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-781).

According to the Order, Respondents moved to amend the procedural schedule governing the hearing dates and post-hearing submissions in this investigation to accommodate the schedule of Respondents’ lead trial counsel.  ALJ Shaw denied Respondents’ request because the proposed hearing dates conflicted with the ALJ’s hearing schedule in another investigation and the schedules of two of Complainant’s expert witnesses.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Integrated Solar Power Systems (337-TA-811)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jun
14
On June 13, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 11 in Certain Integrated Solar Power Systems and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-811).

In the Order, ALJ Shaw granted a joint motion filed by Complainants Westinghouse Solar, Inc. and Andalay Solar, Inc. and Respondents Zep Solar, Inc., Canadian Solar, Inc. and Canadian Solar (USA), Inc. to terminate the investigation based on settlement agreements.  After reviewing the confidential and non-confidential versions of the agreements, ALJ Shaw granted the joint motion.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Issues Recommendation On Modification Of Remedial Orders In Certain Ink Cartridges (337-TA-565)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jun
15
On May 22, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public version of his Recommendation on Modification of Remedial Orders (“RD”) (dated February 21, 2012) in the consolidated advisory opinion and modification proceedings in Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-565).

By way of background, on October 19, 2007, the Commission issued, inter alia, a general exclusion order (“GEO”) and cease and desist orders in the underlying investigation.  The GEO prohibits the unlicensed entry of ink cartridges covered by one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,615,957; 5,622,439; 5,158,377; 5,221,148; 5,488,401; 6,502,917; 6,550,902; 6,955,422; 7,008,053; and 7,011,397.  The cease and desist orders were directed toward certain domestic Respondents, including Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd. (“Ninestar US”).

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation As To Whalen Furniture In Certain Electric Fireplaces (337-TA-791/826)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jun
18
On June 1, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 18 in Certain Electric Fireplaces, Components Thereof, Manuals for Same, and Products Containing Same, Certain Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to Same, and Certain Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-791/826).

In the Order, ALJ Shaw granted a joint motion filed by Complainants Twin-Star International, Inc. and TS Investment Holding Corp. (collectively, “Twin-Star”) and Respondent Whalen Furniture Manufacturing, Inc. (“Whalen”) to terminate the investigation based on a consent order, settlement agreement, and withdrawal of allegations.  After reviewing the confidential and non-confidential versions of the agreement, ALJ Shaw granted the joint motion.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Compels Production Of Source Code In Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities (337-TA-800)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jun
19
On June 7, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public version of Order No. 24 (dated May 9, 2012) granting a motion by Complainants InterDigital Communications, LLC and InterDigital Technology Corporation, and IPR Licensing (collectively, “InterDigital”) to compel Respondents Nokia Corporation and Nokia Inc. (collectively, “Nokia”) to produce source code in Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-800).

By way of background, this investigation is based on a July 26, 2011 complaint filed on behalf of InterDigital alleging violation of Section 337 by named Respondents Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., FutureWei Technologies, Inc. d/b/a Huawei Technologies (USA),  ZTE Corp., ZTE (USA) Inc., and Nokia in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain wireless devices with 3G capabilities and components thereof that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,349,540; 7,502,406; 7,536,013; 7,616,970 (the ‘970 patent); 7,706,332; 7,706,830; and 7,970,127.  See our July 28, 2011 post for more details.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Toner Cartridges (337-TA-829)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jun
21
On June 19, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 8 in Certain Toner Cartridges and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-829).

In the Order, ALJ Shaw granted a joint motion filed by Complainants Canon Inc., Canon U.S.A., Inc., and Canon Virginia and Respondent Atman, Inc., d/b/a pcRush.com to terminate the investigation based on a consent order stipulation and proposed consent order.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Wireless Devices With 3G Capabilities (337-TA-800)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jun
25
On June 20, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued the public version of Order No. 29 (dated May 31, 2012) denying Respondents Nokia Corporation and Nokia Inc.’s (collectively, “Nokia”) motion to terminate the investigation in Certain Wireless Devices With 3G Capabilities and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-800).

According to the order, Nokia moved to terminate the investigation on the grounds that Complainants InterDigital Communications, LLC and InterDigital Technology Corporation, and IPR Licensing (collectively, “InterDigital”) are required to license each of the six patents asserted against Nokia on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (“FRAND”) terms due to InterDigital and Nokia’s participation in the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (“ETSI”).  Because InterDigital is required to license the asserted patents on FRAND terms to ETSI members, Nokia argues that InterDigital cannot seek to exclude Nokia from practicing the asserted patents.  Nokia also stated that it is willing to take a license from InterDigital, “and that the only dispute remaining between the parties is over the FRAND terms and conditions of a license for those asserted patents that would be valid, essential, and practiced by Nokia.”

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Sets Target Date In Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide And Parental Control Technology (337-TA-845)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jul
03
Further to our June 4, 2012 and June 11, 2012 posts, on June 28, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 6 in Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide And Parental Control Technology (Inv. No. 337-TA-845). 

According to the Order, ALJ Shaw set October 7, 2013 as the target date (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).  ALJ Shaw further indicated that the initial determination on alleged violation shall be due on June 7, 2013.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Sets Procedural Schedule In Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide And Parental Control Technology (337-TA-845)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jul
05
Further to our June 4, 2012, June 11, 2012, and July 3, 2012 posts, on June 29, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 7 in Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide And Parental Control Technology (Inv. No. 337-TA-845).

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 March 4, 2013; the Initial Determination is due on June 7, 2013; and the target date for completing the investigation is October 7, 2013 (which is approximately 16 months after institution of the investigation).

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Issues Initial Determination In Certain Light-Emitting Diodes (337-TA-784)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jul
12
On July 9, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued a notice regarding the Initial Determination (“ID”) in Certain Light-Emitting Diodes and Products Containing the Same(Inv. No. 337-TA-784).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a June 3, 2011 complaint filed by OSRAM GmbH (“OSRAM”) alleging that Respondents LG Electronics, Inc., LG Innotek Co., Ltd., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., and LG Innotek U.S.A., Inc. (collectively, “LG”) violated Section 337 by infringing various patents.   See our July 7, 2011 post for more details.  

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Rules On Various Motions In Certain Video Analytics Software (337-TA-795)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jul
17
ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 28, Order No. 29, and Order No. 30 in Certain Video Analytics Software, Systems, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-795).  First, on July 11, 2012, ALJ Shaw issued Order No. 28, in which he ruled on Respondents Robert Bosch GmbH and Bosch Security Systems, Inc.’s (collectively, “Bosch”) motion to compel Complainant ObjectVideo, Inc. (“ObjectVideo”) to produce certain non-privileged documents.  Additionally, on July 12, 2012, ALJ Shaw issued Order No. 29 and Order No. 30.  In Order No. 29, the ALJ granted one motion by Respondents Samsung Techwin Co., Ltd. and Samsung Opto-Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, “Samsung”) for leave to supplement their Notice of Prior Art, but denied a second motion by Samsung for leave to supplement its Notice of Prior Art.  In Order No. 30, ALJ Shaw denied Bosch and related entities’ motion for summary determination of invalidity of the asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,613,324 (the ‘324 patent), 7,932,923 (the ‘923 patent), and 7,868,912 (the ‘912 patent) under 35 U.S.C. § 101.

According to Order No. 28, Bosch moved to compel ObjectVideo to produce certain non-privileged documents.  ObjectVideo opposed the motion.  The Commission Investigative Staff supported the motion in part.  After considering the arguments, ALJ Shaw ordered ObjectVideo to provide one copy of each of the documents at issue to the ALJ for an in camerareview.  The ALJ further ordered that specific portions of each of the documents deemed to be protected by the attorney-client privilege should be highlighted in yellow.  Moreover, each document should include an identifying number.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Rules On Motions In Limine And To Strike In Certain Video Analytics Software (337-TA-795)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jul
19
On July 16, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 33 and Order No. 34 in Certain Video Analytics Software, Systems, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-795).  In Order No. 33, ALJ Shaw ruled on two motions in limine filed by Complainant ObjectVideo, Inc. (“ObjectVideo”) and one motion in limine filed by Respondents Bosch Security Systems, Inc., Robert Bosch GmbH, Bosch Sicherheitssysteme GmbH, Bosch Security Systems B.V., Bosch Sicherheitssysteme Engineering GmbH, Bosch Security Systems – Sistemas de Seguranca, S.A., Bosch (Zhuhai) Security Systems, Co., Ltd., and Extreme CCTV, Inc. (collectively, “Bosch”).  In Order No. 34, ALJ Shaw denied one motion to strike filed by Bosch and one motion to strike filed by ObjectVideo.

According to Order No. 33, ObjectVideo filed a motion to exclude certain testimony of Dr. Aggelos Katsaggelos as outside the scope of expert reports and deposition testimony.  Bosch opposed the motion.  The Commission Investigative Staff (“OUII”) supported the motion in part and opposed the motion in part.  After considering the arguments, ALJ Shaw determined to grant the motion in part.  In particular, the ALJ found that while it had not been shown that all of the testimony at issue should be stricken, certain portions of the testimony needed to be excluded.  Specifically, he found that the contested portions of the testimony pertaining to the Nasburg patents were not sufficiently supported by Dr. Katsaggelos’s prior opinions, particularly in his initial expert report, and should be excluded.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Grants Motion To Terminate Investigation In Certain Toner Cartridges (337-TA-829)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jul
25
On July 13, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 12 in Certain Toner Cartridges and Components Thereof(Inv. No. 337-TA-829).

In the Order, ALJ Shaw granted a joint motion filed by Complainants Canon Inc., Canon U.S.A., Inc., and Canon Virginia, Inc. and Respondent Virtual Imaging Products Inc. (“Virtual Imaging”) to terminate the investigation based on a consent order stipulation and proposed consent order, finding that the consent order stipulation complies with Commission Rule 210.21(c)(3), and that there is no evidence of record that terminating the investigation as to Virtual Imaging would be contrary to the public interest.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Denies Motion For Summary Determination In Certain Electric Fireplaces (337-TA-791/826)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jul
25
On July 13, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 19 denying Respondent Yue Qiu Sheng aka Jason Yue’s (“Yue”) motion for summary determination that Complainants Twin-Star International, Inc. and TS Investment Holding Corp.’s (collectively, “Complainants”) breach of stockholder agreement claim is outside the scope of the investigation in Certain Electric Fireplaces, Components Thereof, Manuals for Same, and Products Containing Same, Certain Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to Same, and Certain Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-791/826).

According to the Order, Yue argued that the notice of investigation does not include Complainants’ breach of contract claim, nor does that claim state a violation of Section 337.  The Commission Investigative Staff supported the motion.  Complainants opposed the motion.

Share

Read More

ALJ Shaw Grants Motion To Terminate In Certain Video Analytics Software (337-TA-795)

By Eric Schweibenz
|
Jul
25
On July 17, 2012, ALJ David P. Shaw issued Order No. 32 granting Complainant ObjectVideo, Inc.’s (“ObjectVideo”) motion to terminate the investigation as to Respondents Samsung Techwin Co., Ltd. and Samsung Opto-Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, “Samsung”) in Certain Video Analytics Software, Systems, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same(Inv. No. 337-TA-795).

According to the Order, ObjectVideo withdrew the complaint against Samsung and executed a covenant not to sue.  The Commission Investigative Staff supported the motion.  ALJ Shaw found that there were no extraordinary circumstances that warranted denying the motion.

Share

Read More

www.xxx-clips-online.com