ALJ Rogers has set the target date in Inv. No. 337-TA-729, Certain Semiconductor Products Made By Advanced Lithography Techniques And Products Containing Same. The initial determination will be due no later than July 26, 2011 and the target date for completion of the investigation is November 28, 2011.
On July 26, 2010, the Commission instituted an investigation entitled Certain Toner Cartridges And Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-731, based on a complaint filed July 15, 2010. The complainants are Canon, Inc.; Canon U.S.A., Inc.; and Canon Virginia, Inc. The respondents are Ninestar Image Int'l, Ltd.; Ninestar Technology Co., Ltd. (Zhuhai, China); Ninestar Management Co., Ltd; Zhuhai Seine Technology Co., Ltd.; Seine Image Int'l Co., Ltd.; Ninestar Image Co., Ltd.; Ziprint Image Corp.; Nano Pacific Corp.; Ninestar Tech., Co., Ltd. (City of Industry, California); Town Sky, Inc.; ACM Technologies, Inc.; LD Products, Inc.; Printer Essentials.com, Inc.; XSE Group, Inc. d/b/a Image Star; Copy Technologies, Inc. d/b/a ITM Corporation; Red Powers, Inc. d/b/a LaptopTraveller.com; Direct Billing Int'l, Inc. d/b/a OfficeSupplyOutfitters.com; Compu-Imaging, Inc.; EIS Office Solutions, Inc.; and 123 Refills, Inc. According to the notice, the complaint involves allegations of violations of section 337 based upon infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,903,803 and 6,128,454. The investigation has been assigned to ALJ Gildea, and the complaint should be available within the next few days.
The Commission has instituted an investigation entitled Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies And Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-730, based on a complaint filed June 25, 2010. The complainant is Hewlett-Packard Co. The respondents are Mipo International, Ltd.; Mextec Group d/b/a Mipo America Ltd.; Shanghai Angel Printer Supplies Co.; Shenzhen Print Media Co., Ltd.; Zhuhai National Resources & Jingjie Imaging Products Co., Ltd.; Tatrix International; and Ourway Image Co., Ltd. The complaint involves allegations of violations of section 337 based upon infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,959,985 and 7,104,630. A formal notice of investigation and assignment of an ALJ should be issued by the ITC within a few days.
JULY 29 UPDATE: The notice of investigation has been released by the Commission. The investigation has been assigned to ALJ Essex.
The Commission has issued a limited exclusion order and cease and desist order against the respondents in Inv. No. 337-TA-661, Certain Semiconductor Chips Having Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory Controllers And Products Containing Same. On January 22, 2010, ALJ Essex found that the respondents violated Section 337 by infringing three of the five remaining patents asserted by complainant Rambus, Inc. (U.S. Patent Nos. 6,470,405; 6,591,353; 7,287,109; 7,117,998; and 7,210,016). The Commission determined to review three issues: the obviousness and anticipation rulings on the '016 and '998 patents; the obviousness-type double patenting ruling on the '405, '353 and '109 patents; and the obviousness analysis of the '405, '353 and '109 patents. The Commission later asked for briefing on the issue of patent exhaustion. After review, the ALJ's ruling of a violation by infringement of the '405, '353, and '109 patents was affirmed.
Commission has issued a limited exclusion order and cease and desist order against the respondents, and set bond at 2.65% of the value of the products entering the country during the 60-day Presidential review period. The opinion itself is still unavailable to the public.
The Commission has followed ALJ Essex's initial determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-669, Certain Optoelectronic Devices, Components Thereof, and Products Containing The Same, and issued a limited exclusion order and cease and desist order against respondent Emcore Corporation's accused products. The Commission's opinion follows a May 13 decision by the Commission not to review the ALJ Essex's initial determination finding a Section 337 violation due to infringement of claims 1-3 and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 5,359,447 by Emcore. Bond during the 60-day Presidential review period has been set at 3% of the value of the products entering the US during the period.
On July 13, the Commission issued a notice instituting an investigation entitled Certain Semiconsuctor Products Made By Advanced Lithography Techniques And Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-729, based on a complaint filed June 23, 2010. The complainant is STC.UNM. The respondents are Taiwan Seminconductor Mfg. Co. Ltd. and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. The complaint involves allegations of violations of section 337 based upon infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,042,998. The investigation has been assigned to ALJ Charneski.
On July 22, the Commission issued notice of its decision to review an initial determination on claim construction issued by Chief ALJ Luckern in Inv. No. 337-TA-703, Certain Mobile Telephones and Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras, and Components Thereof. The ID to be reviewed was issued on June 22,and the public version became available on July 14. The Commission has requested briefing on whether there is legal authority for treating claim construction as a matter for summary determination, and whether the claim construction ruling is properly issued as an initial determination. The notice offers the following hypothetical:
"As used in Rule 210.18(a), the term "issues to be determined in the investigation" can be viewed as limited to claims and affirmative defenses; a "part" of such an issue includes an element (or subpart thereof) of a claim or affirmative defense. Thus, the following could be a non-exhaustive list of examples of issues or parts thereof that are covered by rule 210.18(a): violation, importation, infringement, domestic industry (technical or economic prong), invalidity on any basis (such as anticipation or obviousness), unenforceability. Claim construction may be a necessary underpinning to the resolution of certain claims or elements, and may be part of a summary determination that addresses an issue or element. On its own, however, claim construction might not be viewed as constituting such an issue or element."
The parties have been directed to file initial submissions by August 5, and reply submissions by August 16.
The Commission issued a notice today declining review of an initial determination terminating Inv. No. 337-TA-707, Certain Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors and Products Containing Same, Including Memory Modules as to the remaining respondents (Elpida Memory, Inc., Elpida Memory (USA) Inc., Rexchip Electronics Corporation, Kingston Technology Company, Kingston Technology (Shanghai) Co. Ltd., Kingston Technology Far East Co. Ltd., Kingston Technology Far East (M) Sdn. Bhd., Payton Technology Corp., Apacer Technology Inc., Apacer Memory America Inc., Corsair Memory, Corsair Memory (Taiwan), Mushkin Inc., Mushkin APAC, Transcend Information Inc., and Transcend USA) on the basis of a settlement agreement between the respondents and complainants Infineon Technologies AG and Infineon Technologies North America Corp. The initial determination on which the decision was based was issued by ALJ Essex on June 29, 2010.
ALJ Essex issued an Initial Determination today in Inv. No. 337-TA-688, Certain Hybrid Electric Vehicles and Components Thereof, granting complainant Paice LLC and respondents Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota North America and Toyota Motor Sales, Inc.'s joint motion to terminate . The parties filed the joint motion to terminate on the basis of a settlement agreement, and ALJ Essex determined that the settlement would be in the public interest.
ALJ Gildea issued an initial determination today granting an unopposed motion by complainant for partial termination of Inv. No. 337-TA-701, Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, and Computers, by withdrawing U.S. Patent No. 6,262,735 from the investigation. Complainants noted that removal of the '735 patent would streamline the investigation and reduce the number of claim terms to be construed.
The Commission has issued notice of its determination not to review an initial determination terminating Inv. No. 337-TA-706, Certain Wireless Communications System Server Software, Wireless Handheld Devices and Battery Packs on the basis of a settlement agreement reached between complainant Motorola, Inc. and respondents Research In Motion Ltd. and Research In Motion Corporation. The parties filed a joint motion on June 17, 2010 to terminate the investigation, and the ALJ issued an initial determination granting the motion to terminate on June 29.
ALJ Charneski has extended the target date in Inv. No. 337-TA-617, Certain Digital Televisions and Certain Products Containing Same and Methods of Using Same, until January 27, 2011. ALJ Charneski extended the target date for the enforcement investigation in light of the delay in the issuance of the Federal Circuit mandate. The Federal Circuit issued an opinion in Vizio, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n on May 26, 2010, affirming a Commission's finding of infringement as to respondent's older products, reversed the Commission's determination of infringement as to newer products at issue in the investigation and remanding for an order consistent with the Court's interpretation. The complainants, Funai Electric Co. Ltd. and Funai Corporation, moved to extend the target date by two months in light of the Federal Circuit's grant of additional time for the Commission to file a request for rehearing en banc, and the ALJ found the additional extension to be reasonable.
The Commission issued notice today of its final determination that no violation of section 337 occurred in Inv. No. 337-TA-501, Certain Encapsulated Circuit Devices and Products Containing Same, and terminated the investigation. This investigation, which has been active for almost seven years, was instituted based on a complaint by Amkor Technology, Inc., and named as respondents Carsem, Inc., Carsem (M) Sdn Bhd, and Carsem Semiconductor Sdn Bhd as respondents.
The investigation was delayed due to a three and a half year effort by the Commission to enforce a subpoena against a third party, ASAT, Inc., which the respondents claimed was critical to their defenses. This investigation has also been the subject of three remands from the Commission -- one resulting from a change in the ALJ's claim construction, one for the purpose of considering the documents and information obtained from the subpoena, and one reversing the ALJ's initial determination that certain inventions of a third party were not prior art. The combined result of these three remands were initial determinations that all of the patents asserted were either invalid or not infringed by Carsem's products. The Commission has now decided not to review ALJ Bullock's second supplemental determination that various claims of patents asserted by complainant Amkor Technologies were invalid as anticipated and obvious in light of third party ASAT, Inc.'s prior art.
On July 19, the Commission issued its final determination not to modify the limited exclusion order entered in Inv. No. 337-TA-564, Certain Voltage Regulators, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same. The original investigation, which began in March 2006, accused certain products of Advanced Analogic Technologies of infringing U.S. Patent Nos. 6,411,531 and 6,580,258. After an investigation, the Commission issued a limited exclusion order against certain of Advanced Analog's products that were found to infringe the '258 patent.
The current enforcement proceeding was begun in October 2008 based on a complaint filed by the original complainant, Linear Technology Corp. On March 18, 2010, the presiding ALJ found that Advanced Analogic's accused products violated the limited exclusion order in place. However, the Commission determined that the products at issue in the enforcement proceeding are already covered by the existing exclusion order, and therefore modification of the order was not necessary.
ALJ Bullock has issued an order setting the ground rules and a target date in Inv. No. 337-TA-727, Certain Underground Cable and Pipe Locators. October 19, 2011 has been set as the target date for completion of the investigation, with a hearing scheduled for approximately April 15, 2011. ALJ Bullock also required the parties to submit discovery statements by August 6, 2010.
On July 19, Chief ALJ Luckern issued an order requiring respondent VisionTek to show cause by July 27, 2010 why it should not be found in default for failing to answer the complaint or notice of investigation filed in Inv. No. 337-TA-698, Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing the Same. The ALJ added VisionTek as a respondent to the investigation on March 5, 2010 and notice of the investigation was served on April 2, 2010. The ALJ's show cause order noted that, since April 2, VisionTek had not responded to any of the correspondence or other documents forwarded to it.
A new complaint, 337-TA-2746, was filed on July 16, 2010 by Vizio Inc. While the complaint is not yet publicly available, the Complaint names LG Electronics Inc. and LG Electronics USA as the proposed respondents. The Complaint alleges that the respondents are engaged in unfair competition with regard to flat panel digital televisions and components thereof.
On July 19, the Commission issued the public version of its opinion affirming on modified grounds ALJ Gildea's finding that no violation of section 337 occurred in Inv. No. 337-TA-666, Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp Inverter Circuits and Products Containing the Same. ALJ Gildea's initial finding, released on April 19, 2010, found (1) that complainant O2 Micro had not satisfied the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement, (2) that none of the products manufactured by respondents Monolithic Power Systems, ASUSTeK Computer and Asus Computer International infringed U.S. Patent No. 7,417,382, (3) that respondent Microsemi's LX1691 and LX1693 products did infringe the '382 patent, and (4) that the '382 patent was valid and enforceable.
After deciding to review ALJ Gildea's initial determination, the Commission reversed the ALJ's finding that the complainants did not satisfy the domestic industry requirement. However, the Commission also reversed ALJ Gildea's finding that the LX1691 and LX1693 products of respondent Microsemi Corporation infringed the patent at issue, and left undisturbed his rulings as to the remaining respondents, finding that no Section 337 violation had occurred.
ALJ Essex issued an order staying the procedural schedule following complainants' and respondents' joint motion to terminate Inv. No. 337-TA-688, Certain Hybrid Vehicles and Components Thereof, on the basis of a settlement agreement and stay the procedural schedule pending the Commission's final ruling on the settlement agreement.
ALJ Charneski issued an order today granting complainant Chrysler Corp.'s motion requesting an order directing respondents Vehicles Online, Inc. and Boat NRV Supercenter to show cause why they should not be found to be in default for failure to respond to the complaint and notice of investigation in Inv. No. 337-TA-722, Certain Automotive Vehicles and Designs. ALJ Charneski ordered respondents to show cause by August 2, 2010.
ALJ Charneski has issued an initial determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-680, Certain Machine Vision Software, Machine Vision Systems, And Products Containing Same, in favor of the respondents. In a notice of the initial determination, issued July 16, the ALJ found that no accused product infringed the two patents at issue in the case, U.S. Patent Nos. 7,016,539 and 7,065,262. The ALJ further found that claims 1, 12, 13, 28 and 29 of the '262 patent were anticipated by the prior art, and that all of the asserted claims in both patents were invalid under 35 U.S.C. Section 101. A public version of the initial determination should be available within the next few days.
ALJ Essex has set the procedural schedule in Inv. No. 337-TA-719, Certain Lighting Products. The target date has been set for approximately October 3, 2011, and the date for the final initial determination is set for June 2, 2011. The parties have been ordered to submit proposed procedural schedules by July 23.
On July 13, the Commission issued a notice instituting an investigation entitled Certain Collaborative System Products and Components Thereof (II), Inv. No. 337-TA-728, based on a complaint filed June 15, 2010. The complainant is eInstruction Corporation. The respondents are Promethean Inc. and Promethean Technology Shenzhen Ltd. The complaint involves allegations of violations of section 337 based upon infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,930,673. This is the second investigation filed by eInstruction based on the '673 patent. The earlier investigation, 337-TA-682, Certain Collaborative System Products and Components Thereof, was terminated on December 16, 2009.
The investigation has been assigned to ALJ Charneski.
The Commission declined review today of a May 27, 2010 initial determination by ALJ Gildea, finding no violation of Section 337 with respect to one patent, and terminated Inv. No. 337-TA-650, Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors and Components Thereof and Products Containing Same. The complainant in the investigation is John Mezzalingua Associates, Inc. d/b/a PPC, Inc., and the respondents are Aska Communications Corp.; Edali Industrial Corp.; Fu Ching Technical Industrial Co., Ltd.; Gem Electronics; Hanjiang Fei Yu Electronics Equipment Factory; Zhongguang Electronics; Yangzhou Zhongguang Electronics Co.; and Yangzhou Zhongguang Foreign Trade Co. The patents asserted were U.S. Patent Nos. 5,470,257; 6,558,194; D440,539; and D519,076.
The ALJ's initial determination was the result of a March 31 remand from an earlier determination dated October 13, 2009. In the first determination, ALJ Gildea found that every patent asserted was infringed. The Commission's March 31 order affirmed the finding of a violation of the '076 and '194 patents, but reversed the finding of a violation of the '257 patent, and remanded for additional findings on the '539 patent and the issue of domestic industry. After remand, ALJ Gildea found that the domestic industry requirement had not been satisfied for the '539 patent, and the Commission declined review and terminated the investigation.
The Commission issued a notice today instituting an investigation entitled Certain Underground Cable and Pipe Locators, Inv. No. 337-TA-727, based on a complaint filed June 10, 2010. The complainant is Radiodetection, Ltd. The respondents are Vivax Metrotech Corp.; SebaKMT; and Leidi Utility Supply Ltd. The complaint involves allegations of violations of section 337 based upon infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,268,731. The investigation has been assigned to ALJ Bullock.
On July 12, the Commission declined review of an initial determination dated June 22, 2010 by Chief ALJ Luckern, terminating the investigation as to three respondents based on a settlement agreement, in Inv. No. 337-TA-698, Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing Same. The terminated respondents were Advanced Micro Devices, Diamond Multimedia, and XFX Technology USA. The investigation was instituted on December 29, 2009, on the basis of a complaint filed by Richtek Technology Corp. and Richtek USA, alleging violations of section 337 on the basis of importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after important of certain DC-DC controllers, by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,315,190; 6,414,470; 7,132,717; and trade secret misappropriation.
The Commission has found no violation of Section 337 in Inv. No. 337-TA-670, Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof, and terminated the investigation. The complainant in the case was Humanscale Corp., and the respondents were CompX International and Waterloo Furniture Components Ltd. On February 23, 2010, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding that the complainants' "Wedge-Brake" products did not infringe the asserted claims U.S. Patent No. 5,292,097, but that their "Brake-Shoe" products did infringe the asserted claims. However, the ALJ further found that the asserted claims of the patent were invalid. The Commission, after reviewing the parties submissions, agreed with the ALJ that the asserted claims were invalid, but found that both the "Wedge-Brake" and "Brake-Shoe" products also did not infringe the asserted claims.
The Commission has declined review of a June 18, 2010 initial determination terminating Inv. No. 337-TA-685, Certain Flash Memory and Products Containing Same, as to Appro International on the basis of a consent order, and issued the consent order. No petitions for review were filed by any party.
On July 8, 2010, the Commission issued a notice instituting a section 337 investigation entitled Certain Electronic Imaging Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-726, based on a complaint filed June 16, 2010. The complainant is FlashPoint Technology, Inc. The respondents are Nokia Corp.; Nokia, Inc.; Research in Motion Ltd.; Research in Motion Corp.; HTC Corp.; HTC America, Inc.; LG Electronics, Inc.; LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.; and LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc. The complaint involves allegations of violations of section 337 based upon infringement of U.S. Patent Nos.6,134,606; 6,163,816; and 6,262,769. The investigation has been assigned to Chief ALJ Luckern.
After remand from the Federal Circuit, Inv. No. 337-TA-567, Certain Foam Footwear, has been assigned to ALJ Bullock.
The Commission has declined review of ALJ Gildea's June 17, 2010 Order granting Complainant Murata Manufacturing's motion to terminate Inv. No. 337-TA-685, Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same, with respect to U.S. Patent No. 6,377,439. ALJ Gildea granted Murata's motion (filed just two days earlier on June 15, 2010) after concluding that there were no extraordinary circumstances which would prevent the partial withdrawal of the '439 patent and that such a withdrawal will result in the conservation of public and private resources, and the Commission's notice, dated July 7, states that no party requested review of the ALJ's initial determination.
On July 2, 2010, the Commission issued a Notice instituting a section 337 investigation entitled Certain Caskets, Inv. No. 337-TA-725, based on a complaint filed June 4, 2010. The complainant is Batesville Services, Inc., and the respondent is Ataudes Aguilares, S. de R.L., de C.V. The complaint involves allegations of violations of section 337 based upon infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,611,124; 5,727,291; 6,836,936; 6,976,294; and 7,340,810. The investigation has been assigned to ALJ Essex.
On July 6, 2010, ALJ Gildea set a date for final initial determination of July 1, 2011 and a target date of November 1, 2011 in Inv. No. 337-TA-724, Certain Electronic Devices with Image Processing Systems, Components Thereof, and Associated Software. The Complainants are S3 Graphics Co., Ltd. and S3 Graphics, Inc., and the Respondent is Apple, Inc.
A new complaint, 337-TA-2744, was filed on June 30, 2010 by Interactive Life Forms LLC. While the complaint is not yet publicly available, the Complaint names California Exotic Novelties, Inc.; Direct Advantage Values Enterprise, Inc.; Nanma Manufacturing Co., Ltd.; Shenzhen Shaki Industrial Co., Ltd.; Pipedream Products, Inc.; Tenga Co., Ltd.; Vast Resources, Inc.; Convergence Inc.; E.T.C., Inc., d/b/a Eldorado Trading; Gigglesworld Corporation; Honey's Place, Inc.; Joe Enterprises, Inc.; Liberator, Inc.; Nalpac Enterprises, Ltd. d/b/a Nalpac, Ltd.; Satistec, LLC; Universal Distributer; Williams Trading Co., Inc.; Barnaby Ltd, LLC; L.F.P., Inc.; LFP Internet Group, LLC; PHE, Inc.; Polydigitech Inc.; Sawhorse Enterprises, Inc.; TEG, LLC; and Web Merchants Inc. as the proposed respondents. The Complaint alleges that the respondents are engaged in unfair competition with regard to devices having elastomeric gel.
The Office of the Secretary issued a Notice in the Federal Register announcing that the Commission on June 25, 2010 declined to review ALJ Bullock's initial determination terminating Inv. No. 337-TA-693, Certain Foldable Stools, based on a withdrawal of the complaint. The investigation was instituted on December 9, 2009 based on a complaint by B&R Plastics, Inc., alleging violations of section 337 on the basis of infringement of U.S. Patent No. D460,566. The respondents were Amazon.com, Inc.; Bed Bath & Beyond Inc.; The Afternoon; QVC, Inc.; Kikkerland Design, Inc.; Buy.com; LTD Commodities, LLC, d/b/a abc Distributing; Euromarket Designs, Inc., d/b/a Crate & Barrel; The Container Store, Inc.; Home Depot USA Inc.; Ningbo ZhongTian Co., Ltd.; Ningbo Ningfeng Import and Export Co. Ltd.; and Always Something Brilliant.
On June 30, ALJ Charneski issued an initial determination terminating the investigation as to respondents Synology Inc. and Synology America Corporation in Inv. No. 337-TA-685, Certain Flash Memory and Products Containing Same. Complainant Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. filed a joint motion with Synology to terminate the investigation on the basis of a consent order, whereby Synology agrees not to sell for importation, import into the United States, sell or offer for sale in the United States after importation, or knowingly aid or abet importation into the United States for these purposes any accused Synology product until (a) the expiration, invalidation, and/or unenforceability of the asserted claims of the patents-in-suit, (b) Synology’s products are found to be non-infringing, or (c) Samsung licenses such Synology products to Synology. Synology was just one of numerous respondents in the investigation, which is ongoing.
Add this blog to your feeds or put your e-mail in the box below and hit GO to subscribe by e-mail.
Enter keywords: