ITC Blog: ITC 337 Update

On September 30, 2010, ALJ Rogers denied complainant’s motion to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to add new parties in Certain Flash Memory Chips and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-735. Complainant alleged amendment was appropriate in light of new evidence of infringement obtained subsequent to filing its complaint. ALJ Rogers denied the motion, stating that complainant failed to show good cause why it could not have obtained the evidence prior to filing its original complaint.

• Print
• Share Link

On September 24, 2010, in Inv. No. 337-TA-686, Certain Bulk Welding Wire Containers and Components Thereof and Welding Wire, the Commission determined to affirm ALJ Rogers’s determination of no infringement of the asserted claims, but to review and take no position on certain claim construction, priority date, and validity issues. The complainant was Lincoln Electric Company of Ohio and the remaining respondents were The ESAB Group, Inc. of Italy and Sidergas SpA of Italy.

• Print
• Share Link

On September 23, 2010, ALJ Essex issued an Initial Determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-719, Certain Lighting Products, granting a joint motion to terminate the investigation as to respondent Lights & More based on a settlement agreement and consent order. The complainant is Blumberg Industries, Inc. d/b/a Fine Art Lamps. Pursuant to the consent order, Lights and More agrees not to “import into the United States or sell in the United States after importation, or knowingly aid, abet, encourage, participate in or induce the sale for importation, importation into the United States or sale in the United States after importation of certain lighting products that infringe any of Fine Art Lamps’ United States Patent No. D570,038S; Copyright Registration Nos. VA 1-399-618 and VA 1-415-353; and U.S. Trademark Registration Nos. 3,703,710; 3,703,711; 3,700,479; and 3,700,480.”

• Print
• Share Link

On September 22, 2010, ALJ Charneski granted complainant Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.’s unopposed motion for partial termination as to all asserted claims of U.S. Pat. No. 6,930,050 without prejudice, in Inv. No. 337-TA-685, Certain Flash Memory and Products Containing Same. The respondents are Spansion, Inc., Spansion, LLC, Spansion Japan Limited, D-Link Corp., D-Link Systems, Inc., Alpine Electronics, Inc., and Alpine Electronics of America, Inc.

• Print
• Share Link

On September 22, 2010, the Commission instituted Inv. No. 337-TA-738, Certain Components for Installation of Marine Autopilots with GPS or IMU. The complainant is American GNC of California. The respondents are Furuno Electronics Co., Ltd. of Japan, Furuno U.S.A. Inc. of Washington, Navico Holdings AS of Norway, Navico UK, Ltd. of the United Kingdom, Navico, Inc. of New Hampshire, Flir Systems, Inc. of Oregon, Raymarine UK Ltd. of the United Kingdom, and Raymarine Inc. of New Hampshire. The patent at issue is U.S. Pat. No. 6,596,976.

• Print
• Share Link

On September 22, 2010, ALJ Charneski set a target date of February 7, 2012 for completion of Inv. No. 337-TA-734, Certain Adjustable-Height Beds and Components Thereof, which is approximately 17 months after institution. The complainant is Invacare Corp. of Ohio, and the respondents are Medical Depot, Inc. of New York and Shanghai Shunlong Physical Therapy Equipment Co., Ltd of China.

• Print
• Share Link

On September 21, 2010, the Commission instituted Inv. No. 337-TA-736, Certain Wind and Solar-Powered Light Posts and Street Lamps. The Complainants are Duggal Dimensions LLC, Duggal Energy Solutions, LLC, and Duggal Visual Solutions, Inc. of New York. The respondents are Gus Power Incorporated of Canada, Efston Science Inc. of Canada, King Luminaire, Inc. of Ohio, and The StressCrete Group of Canada. The patent at issue is U.S. Pat. No. D610,732.

On the same date, the Commission also instituted Inv. No. 337-TA-737, Certain Liquid Crystal Display Devices and Products Interoperable with the Same. The Complainants are Chimei Innolux Corporation of Taiwan, Chi Mei Optoelectronics U.S.A., Inc. of California, and Innolux Corp. of Texas. The respondents are Sony Corp. of Japan, Sony Corp. of America of New York, Sony Electronics Corp. of California, and Sony Computer Entertainment America, LLC of California. The patents at issue are U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,134,092, 6,671,019, and 5,732,241.

• Print
• Share Link

On September 21, 2010, ALJ Luckern terminated Inv. No. 337-TA-732, Certain Devices Having Elastomeric Gel and Components Thereof, as to respondents Convergence, Inc., Honey’s Place, Inc., Pipedream Products, Inc., and Williams Trading Company based upon Consent Order Stipulations with complainant Interactive Life Forms, LLC. The proposed Consent Orders state that the respondents shall cease and desist from selling for importation, importing into the United States, and/or selling in the United States after importation certain devices having elastomeric gel that infringe certain claims of U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,782,818 and 5,807,360.

• Print
• Share Link

Administrative Law Judge Gildea today ordered Respondents Stefco Industries and Cellynne Corporation to show cause by October 12, 2010 why they should not be found in default in Inv. No. 337-TA-718, Certain Electronic Paper Towel Dispensing Devices and Components Thereof. While the record indicates that Stefco has made an appearance in this investigation, the Staff and Complainant argue that neither Stefco nor Cellynne's have answered the Complaint or provided any response to discovery requests. Based on this failure, ALJ Gildea granted Complainant's motion and ordered that Stefco and Cellynne show cause, via written submission, as to why they should not be held in default no later than October 12, 2010.

• Print
• Share Link

MIPO Science and Technology Co., Ltd. and MIPO Technology Limited (collectively "MIPO") filed a unilateral motion to terminate the investigation based on a consent order in Inv. No. 337-TA-723, Certain Inkjet Ink Cartridges with Printheads and Components Thereof. In its stipulation and consent order Mipo agrees to not directly or indirectly sell for importation, import into the United States, or sell or offer for sale in the United States after importation inkjet cartridges with printheads that infringe any claim of the Asserted Patents.

• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Bullock has set the procedural schedule in 337-TA-733, Certain Flat Panel Digital Televisions And Components Thereof.   A claim construction order is scheduled to issue on March 25, 2011, and an initial determination is due no later than October 19, 2011.  The target date has been previously set for February 19, 2012.

• Print
• Share Link

The Commission has determined not to review an initial determination terminating Investigation No. 337-TA-698, Certain DC-DC Controllers And Products Containing Same.  The subject ID was granted by Chief ALJ Luckern on August 17, 2010, based on a settlement agreement between complainants Richtek Technology Corporation and Richtek U.S.A., Inc. and the final remaining respondent, VisionTek Products LLC.

• Print
• Share Link

The Commission has issued a general exclusion order in 337-TA-678, Certain Energy Drink Products.  After settlement agreements were reached and the investigation terminated as to four respondents on January 20, 2010, the remaining respondents defaulted, and complainants Red Bull GmbH and Red Bull North America sought summary determination and a general exclusion order. The Commission's ruling prohibits the unlicensed entry into the U.S. of energy drink products that infringe Trademark Registration Nos. 3,092,197; 2,946,045; 2,994,429; 3,479,607; Copyright Registration No. VA0001410959; or any marks or designs that are confusingly similar or misleading as to source or origin.  The Commission also terminated the investigation.

• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Bullock has extended the target date one month, to October 22, 2010, in 337-TA-664, Certain Flash Memory Chips And Products Containing Same, due to the complexity of the investigation and current workload.

• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Gildea has set the procedural schedule in 337-TA-731, Certain Toner Cartridges And Components Thereof.  The target date has been set for no later than November 30, 2011, and the date for issuance of the final initial determination has been set for no later than July 29, 2011.

• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Gildea has ordered a Markman hearing in 337-TA-724, Certain Electronic Devices With Image Processing Systems, Components Thereof, And Associated Software.  After hearing from the parties, the ALJ set the hearing for November 9, 2010.  The target date and date for final initial determination remain unchanged.

• Print
• Share Link

On September 7, 2010, ALJ Essex issued an initial determination terminating eight respondents related to Top Victory Electronics Co. of Taiwan from 337-TA-713, Certain Display Devices Including Digital Televisions and Monitors, on the basis of a settlement agreement.  The ID, based on a motion filed August 24, finds that the settlement agreement between complainant Sony Corporation and the TPV parties will not have an adverse effect on the public interest.

• Print
• Share Link

Administrative Law Judge Robert Rogers, Jr. ordered Micro Jet Technology Co., Ltd. to show cause as to why it should not be found in default for failing to respond to the Complaint and Notice of Investigation in Inv. No. 337-TA-723, Certain Ink Jet Cartridges With Printheads and Components Thereof. ALJ Roger's order found that MicroJet is aware of the ongoing investigation as evidenced by the entry of an appearance by counsel for MicroJet and MicroJet's filing of a motion to terminate based on the entry of a consent order (which was denied). However, the ALJ also found that MicroJet has not filed a response to the Complaint and Notice of Investigation, nor responded to discovery requests. MicroJet has until September 17, 2010 to show cause why MicroJet should not be found in default.

• Print
• Share Link

Citing scheduling concerns and the complexity of the issues, Administrative Law Judge E. James Gildea ordered that the target date be extended from March 4, 2011 to April 22, 2011 in Inv. No. 337-TA-692, Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same.

• Print
• Share Link

Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc. ("Leviton") filed a complaint in the ITC on September 3, 2010, naming 30 different proposed respondents. The complaint alleges infringement of three different patents, U.S. Patent No. 7,463,124; 7,737,809; and 7,764,151. The three patents cover technology related to ground fault interrupters which are designed to prevent shock or electrocution in cases where the path to ground is broken.

• Print
• Share Link

The International Trade Commission instituted Inv. No. 337-TA-734, Certain Adjustable-Height Beds and Components Thereof, on September 2, 2010. The scope of the investigation will cover whether products manufactured by Medical Depot, Inc. and Shanghai Shunlong Physical Therapy Equipment Co., Ltd. infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 6,983,495; 6,997,082; 7,302,716; and 7,441,289.

• Print
• Share Link

On September 2, 2010 Interactive Life Forms, LLC filed unopposed motions to terminate Web Merchants, Inc. and Nanma Manufacturing Co., Ltd. from Inv. No. 337-TA-732, Certain Devices Having Elastomeric Gel and Components Thereof. The motions, based on consent orders, were unopposed and would remove Web Merchants. and Nanma Manufacturing from the investigation.

• Print
• Share Link

On August 31, 2010, ALJ Rogers issued a lengthy Final Initial Determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-686, Certain Bulk Welding Wire Containers and Components Thereof and Welding Wire, finding that respondents ESAB AB of Sweden and Sidergas SpA of Italy do not infringe complainants Lincoln Electric Company and Lincoln Global, Inc.’s U.S. Pat. No. 6,708,864. In addition, the ALJ found that complainants satisfy the domestic industry requirement with respect to the ‘864 patent.
 

• Print
• Share Link

On August 30, 2010, the en banc Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the ITC in Inv. No. 337-TA-474 (Princo Corp, et al. v. International Trade Commission, et al., Fed. Cir. 2007-1386). The opinion dealt with the doctrine of patent misuse, and the Court sustained the decision of the ITC that the doctrine does not bar the intervenor, U.S. Philips Corporation, from enforcing its patent rights against appellants Princo Corp. and Princo America Corp.  Judge Bryson authored the Opinion, in which Chief Judge Rader and Judges Newman, Lourie, Linn, and Moore joined. Judge Dyk authored a dissent in which Judge Gajarsa joined.
 

• Print
• Share Link