Court Rejects Toyota's Motion for Leave to File Interlocutory Appeal
ALJ Essex denied Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota Motor North America, Inc., and Toyota Motor Sales USA, Inc.'s ("Toyota") Motion for Leave to File an Application for Interlocutory Review of the Court's Order finding that Complainant Paice LLC's claims were not barred under the doctrine of claim preclusion in Inv. No. 337-TA-688, Certain Hybrid Electric Vehicles and Components Thereof. The ALJ's previous order held that the doctrine of claim preclusion did not apply because Paice was unable to seek an exclusion order as a form of relief in the previous district court proceedings. ALJ Essex rejected Toyota's policy argument questioning "whether a patentee that fails to secure an injunction in district court should automatically be permitted to try to secure that same relief at the ITC of the same claim." The Court, instead, held that Toyota's characterization of the Court's Order "improperly . . .broadened the scope of the decision." The Court further found that given the established procedural schedule, the grant of an interlocutory appeal would, in all likelihood, not materially advance the ultimate completion of the investigation.
