ITC Blog: ITC 337 Update

On November 10, the Commission issued the public version of an opinion modifying in part former Chief ALJ Luckern’s ID in Inv. No. 337-TA-720, Certain Biometric Scanning Devices, Components Thereof Associated Software and Products Containing the Same. The investigation was instituted by a complaint filed by Cross Match Technologies, Inc. (“Cross Match”). The complaint alleged that respondents Suprema, Inc. and Mentalix infringed certain claims of four patents.

The former Chief ALJ issued an ID finding infringement of two patents, including Claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 7,203,344 (“the ’344 patent”), which was the subject of the Commission’s review. The ALJ found that certain Suprema products infringe claim 19 of the ’344 patent when integrated with Mentalix’s software, but did not name the infringer or state whether infringement was direct and/or indirect. The Commission modified-in-part the ALJ’s finding to include the specific determinations that Mentalix directly infringes claim 19 of the ’344 patent, and that Suprema indirectly infringes claim 19 via induced infringement, but not contributory infringement. The Commission also adopted the ALJ’s recommended determination on remedy and bonding.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On October 18, complainant Cross Match Technologies filed a notice of appeal with the Federal Circuit of the Commission's decision in Inv. No. 337-TA-720, Certain Biometric Scanning Devices, Components Thereof, Associated Software, and Products Containing the Same.  Cross Match appeals the decision of the Commission to decline review of former Chief ALJ Luckern's finding of no violation with respect to U.S. Patent No. 7,277,562.  The Commission also declined review of U.S. Patent No. 5,990,993, and is currently reviewing the former Chief ALJ's decision of a violation with respect to claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 7,203,344.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On October 17, 2011 the International Trade Commission announced that it had appointed two new administrative law judges to fill the vacancies created by the retirement of ALJ Carl Charneski and Chief ALJ Paul Luckern.  Judges David P. Shaw and Thomas B. Pender will become Administrative Law Judges effective October 24, 2011. 

ALJ Shaw holds a bachelor's degree from George Washington University and a law degree from American University's Washington College of Law.  From 1987 to 2010, ALJ Shaw served as an Attorney-Advisor in the ITC's Office of Administrative Law Judges.  Immediately prior to his appointment, ALJ Shaw served as an administrative law judge with the Social Security Administration's Office of Disability Adjudication and Review. 

ALJ Pender hold a bachelor's degree from the Virginia Military Institute and a law degree from Emory University.  Immediately prior to his appointment, ALJ Pender also served as an administrative law judge with the Social Security Administration's Office of Disability Adjudication and Review. 

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On October 17, the Commission issued a notice extending the target date in Inv. No. 337-TA-720, Certain Biometric Scanning Devices, Components Thereof, Associated Software, and Products Containing the Same, by one week to October 24, 2011.  No reason was given, although the Commission noted that it had determined to review former Chief ALJ Luckern's initial determination finding a violation of claim 19 of U.S. Patent No. 7,203,344 and that it had received briefing from the parties on this issue.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Chief Administrative Law Judge Paul J. Luckern has announced he will retire. Chief Judge Luckern has served as an ALJ since 1984 and Chief ALJ since 2008, making him the longest-serving ALJ at the International Trade Commission, with deep technical knowledge as well as expertise in Section 337 investigations. ALJ Luckern has over the years provided strong administrative guidance and leadership at the ITC.  ALJ Bullock has been appointed Acting Chief Administrative Law Judge until a permanent replacement can be named.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On July 18, 2011, ALJ Luckern set a procedural schedule based on a proposed schedule jointly submitted by the parties in Certain Electronic Devices Having A Digital Television Receiver and Components Thereof, 337-TA-774.  The evidentiary hearing is set for January 9-13, 2012, with a target date of August 6, 2012.  The complainant is Zenith Electronics LLC, and the respondents are Sony Corporation, Sony Corporation of America, and Sony Electronics, Inc.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Complainant Femina Pharma Inc. moved for entry of an Initial Determination finding 14 Respondents in default in Inv. No. 337-TA-768, Certain Vaginal Ring Birth Control Devices. Complainant's motion requested that the ALJ find 14 "nonparticipating" respondents in default. The identified respondents included: The Canamerican Drugs Inc.; The Canamerican Global Inc.; Canadian Med Service; Panther Meds Inc.; Canada Drugs Online; Drug World Canada; CanDrug Health Solutions Inc.; Big Mountain Drugs; BestBuyRx.com; Blue Sky Drugs; ABC Online Pharmacy; Canadadrugs.com LP; North Drug Store; and Canada Pharmacy. The Staff opposed the motion on the grounds that Rule 210.16 requires an order to show cause before an initial determination of default be entered. In his order, Chief Judge Luckern, rather than grant the motion for default, ordered that the fourteen named "nonparticipating respondents" show cause as to why they should not found to be in default.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On May 31, 2011, the International Trade Commission agreed to institute an investigation regarding Certain Electronics Devices Having a Digital Television Receiver and Components Thereof. The complainant Zenith Electronics, LLC claims that three Sony respondents are violating section 337 by importing devices that infringe claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,598,220, 5,629,958, and 5,636,251. The investigation is number 337-TA-774 and has been assigned to Chief ALJ Luckern.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Chief ALJ Luckern denied Complainant American GNC's motion for sanctions in Inv. No. 337-TA-738, Certain Components For Installation of Marine Autopilots With GPS or IMU.  American GNC sought sanctions against Respondent Navico for its alleged failure to provide discovery ordered by the ALJ in response to certain interrogatories.  The ALJ found that there was no prejudice to complainant, and that respondent had provided to requested for discovery, and complainant had received an opportunity to take discovery relevant to the information produced by Navico.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Chief ALJ Luckern issued an order to show cause why two respondents, Koko Technology Ltd. and Cyclone Toy & Hobby, should not be found in default in Inv. No. 337-TA-763, Certain Radio Control Hobby Transmitters and Receivers and Products Containing Same.  The respondents failed to respond to the complaint by April 4, 2011 and the Chief ALJ has required both respondents to respond to the show cause order by May 12, 2011.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On April 6, 2011, ALJ Paul J. Luckern set a target date of April 9, 2012 to conclude Inv. No. 337-TA-763, Certain Radio Control Hobby Transmitters and Receivers and Products Containing the Same. The Complainant in this investigation is Horizon Hobby, Inc. and the Respondents include Koko Technology Ltd. and Cyclone Toy & Hobby.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Paul J. Luckern issued an Initial Determination on April 4, 2011 terminating Respondents Nokia Corp., Nokia, Inc., Research In Motion, Ltd. and Research In Motion Corp. from Inv. No. 337-TA-726, Certain Electronic Imaging Devices. This dismissal resulted from patent licensing and settlement agreements between the dismissed Respondents and Complainant FlashPoint Technology, Inc. The remaining Respondents in this investigation include HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc., LG Electronics, LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., and LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

In Inv. No. 337-TA-709, Certain Integrated Circuits, Chipsets, and Products Containing Same Including Televisions, Media Players, and Cameras, ALJ Paul.J. Luckern issued the conclusions of law and order of his final initial determination finding no violation of Section 337. The initial determination, issued on April 4, 2011, concluded that Complainant Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. failed to show that the asserted claims of its patent were infringed by Respondents Funai Electric Co., Funai Corporation, Inc., Best Buy Purchasing, LLC, BestBuy.com, Inc., Best Buy Stores, L.P., and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On April 1, 2011, ALJ Paul J. Luckern adopted the parties’ proposed procedural schedule in Inv. No. 337-TA-565, Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof. This schedule sets the hearing to occur on November 14th through 17th of 2011. The Complainants in this investigation are Epson Portland Inc., Epson America, Inc., and Seiko Epson Corporation. The Respondents are Ninestar Technology Co., Ltd. and Nine Star Technology Company, Ltd.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On March 25, 2011, the Commission gave notice that it will review ALJ Paul J. Luckern’s January 24th final initial determination of no violation in Inv. No. 337-TA-703, Certain Mobile Telephones and Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras, and Components Thereof. The ALJ had found that none of the accused Apple and RIM products infringes claim 15 of U.S. Pat. No. 6,292,218, and that claim 15 is invalid for obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The complainant is Eastman Kodak Company of New York. The Commission determined to review the final ID in its entirety, and requested further briefing by the parties regarding five discrete issues.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On February 14, 2011 Chief ALJ Luckern issued an order rescheduling the hearing in Inv. No. 337-TA-739, Certain Components for Installation of Marine Autopilots with GPS or IMU, for July 12-15 and 18, 2011, with a pre-hearing conference to take place on July 12.

The complainant is American GNC. Respondents are Furuno Electronics Co., Furuno USA, Inc., Navico Holding AS, Navico UK, Ltd., Navico Inc., Flir Systems Inc., Raymarine UK Ltd., and Raymarine Inc.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern set the target date for Investigation No. 337-TA-754, In the Matter of Certain Handbags, Luggage, Accessories and Packaging Thereof.  In his order, Judge Luckern set February 20, 2012 as the target date for the investigation, with a final initial determination due by October 19, 2011 and the hearing scheduled for August 15 through 19.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On January 28, 2011, Chief ALJ Paul J. Luckern issued an order granting a motion to suspend the procedural schedule and evidentiary hearing indefinitely as to certain respondents in Inv. No. 337-TA-709, Certain Integrated Circuits, Chipsets, and Products Containing Same Including Televisions, Media Players, and Cameras. The complainant is Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. and the respondents are Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic Corporation of North America, Funai Electric Co., Ltd, Funai Corporation, Inc., Victor Company of Japan Limited & JVC Americas Corp., Best Buy Co., Inc, B & H Foto & Electronics Corp, Huppin's Hi-fi Photo & Video, Inc., BestBuy.com LLC., Qvc. Inc., Crutchfield Corporation, Computer Nerds International, Inc., and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. The order has been sealed as confidential.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern granted respondents Panasonic Corporation, Panasonic of North America, Victor Company of Japan Limited, JVC America Corp., Best Buy Purchasing, LLC, BestBuy.com, LLC, and Best Buy Stores, L.P., B & H Foto & Electronics Corp., Buy.com Inc., QVC, Inc. Crutchfield Corporation, and Computer Nerds International, Inc. motion finding non-infringement of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 7,199,306 (‘306 patent). The commission investigative staff supported this motion. ALJ Luckern held that under the correct construction of “thickness,” there can be no literal infringement of claim 1 of the '306 patent and that complainant Freescale Semiconductor’s criticisms of the prior art printed circuit boards that were thinner than 0.35 mm during prosecution amounted to a legal disclaimer of a scope of equivalents encompassing those prior art PCBs. Accordingly, ALJ Luckern found that there can be no infringement of claim 1 of the '306 patent under the doctrine of equivalents because the Panasonic accused products fall within the scope of the disclaimer. 

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On December 27, 2010, the Commission declined review of ALJ Luckern's initial determination terminating certain patent claims from Inv. No. 337-TA-720, Certain Biometric Scanning Devices, Components Thereof, Associated Software, and Products Containing the Same.  The seventeen patent claims were terminated at the request of the complainant, Cross Match Technologies, Inc.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On December 22, 2010, ALJ Paul J. Luckern granted complainant Elan Microelectronics Corporation’s motion to terminate Inv. No. 337-TA-714, Certain Electronic Devices with Multi-Touch Enabled Touchpads and Touchscreens, with respect to claim 10 of U.S. Pat. No. 5,825,352, due to Elan’s desire to “streamline and simplify” the issues in the Investigation. The respondent is Apple, Inc.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On December 15, Chief ALJ Luckern issued an initial determination terminating Inv. No. 337-TA-732, Certain Devices Having Elastomeric Gel and Components Thereof, as to respondents TENGA and One Up, based upon consent order stipulations and proposed consent orders agreed upon with complainant Interactive Life Forms, LLC.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On December 15, Chief ALJ Luckern set a target date of March 8, 2012 in Inv. No. 337-TA-745, Certain Wireless Communications Devices, Portable Music Data Processing Devices, and Components Thereof. Following submissions by complainant Motorola Mobility, Inc., respondent Apple, Inc. and staff attorneys, Chief ALJ Luckern determined that a sixteenth-month target date would be appropriate, given the number of patents and complexity of the technology involved.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Chief ALJ Luckern held that respondent Satistec, LLC failed to show cause for its failure to respond to the notice of investigation and, thus, issued an Initial Determination finding Satistec in default in Inv. No. 337-TA-732, In the Matter of Certain Devices Having Elastomeric Gel and Components Thereof.  Previously, on September 15, 2010, complainant Interactive Life Form, LLC moved for an order directing Satistec to show cause why it should not be held in default for failing to respond to the amended complaint and notice of investigation.  On September 29, 2010, Chief ALJ Luckern ordered respondent Satistec to show cause, no later than the close of business on October 13, 2010, why it should not be found in default.  Satistec failed to respond.  As a result, Chief ALJ Luckern found Satistec in default pursuant to Commission Rule 210.16.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Interactive Life Forms, LLC ("ILF") filed a motion to terminate the investigation as to Easybuy, Inc. d/b/a/ Blush Novelties based on a consent order in Inv. No. 337-TA-732, In the Matter of Certain Devices Having Elastomeric Gel and Components Thereof.  The consent order states that Easybuy Inc. will not import, sell or offer for sale after importation, or knowingly aid, abet, encourage, participate in or induce importatation of any accused product or product which infringes U.S. Patent Nos. 5,782,818 or 5,807,360.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 3, 2010, the Commission instituted Inv. No. 337-TA-745, Certain Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, Computers, and Components Thereof.  The investigation is based on a complaint filed October 6, 2010, alleging violations of Section 337 based upon infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,272,333; 6,246,862; 6,246,697; 5,359,317; 5,636,223; and 7,751,826. The Complainant is Motorola Mobility, Inc., and the respondent is Apple, Inc.  The investigation has been assigned to Chief ALJ Luckern.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On October 28, 2010, the ITC released the public version of Chief ALJ Luckern’s October 14 order in Inv. No. 337-TA-720, granting complainant Cross Match Technologies, Inc.’s motion to amend the complaint to add allegations of infringement for claims 5, 6, 12, and 30 of U.S. Patent No. 7,277,562, and claims 7, 15, 19, and 45 of U.S. Patent No. 7,203,344. Judge Luckern found “good cause” to amend as required by Commission rule 210.14(b) because Cross Match discovered the alleged infringement from source code obtained during discovery. In addition, Judge Luckern held that the amendment was allowed under Ground Rule 1(I) of the investigation because it had been made over sixty days before the cut-off date for completion of expert discovery as required. The investigation is Certain Biometric Scanning Devices, Components Thereof, Associated Software, and Products Containing the Same.

• Email This
• 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.

• Email This
• 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.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Chief ALJ Luckern issued an order setting a 16-month target date of December 4, 2011 for completion of Inv. No. 337-TA-732, Certain Elastomeric Gel and Components Thereof. Complainant Interactive Life Forms requested a 16-month target date, while respondents California Exotic Novelties, Inc., Nanma Mfg. Co., Tenga Co. Ltd. and WES Consulting argued for an earlier target date given the related nature of the two asserted patents. Chief ALJ Luckern further ordered the parties to submit revised procedural schedules.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Chief ALJ Luckern issued a confidential initial determination terminating Inv. No. 337-TA-698, Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing the Same, as to the sole remaining respondent VisionTek Products LLC.  The investigation was instituted on December 29, 2009, on the basis of a complaint filed by Richtek Technology Corp. and Richtek USA.  Chief ALJ Luckern’s determination follows a joint motion to terminate the investigation based on settlement filed by Richtek and Respondent VisionTek on August 5, 2010.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On August 5, 2010 Chief ALJ Luckern issued an initial determination granting uPI Semiconductor (uPI) and Sapphire Technology Ltd.'s (Sapphire) opposed motion to terminate the investigation via consent order in Inv. No. 337-TA-698, Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing the Same. In its proposed consent order stipulations uPI and Sapphire, while not admitting to infringement, agreed not to import any DC-DC controllers or products containing the same which infringe the patents asserted by complainants Richtek Technology Corporation and Richtek USA, Inc. Chief ALJ Luckern went on to hold that there is no "customary language" required for consent orders and dismissed Richtek's arguments that the motion to terminate should be denied for failing to include such language.

On the same day, Richtek and respondent VisionTek Products LLC (VisionTek) filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation as to VisionTek based on a settlement agreement. The public version of the settlement agreement, executed August 5, 2010, includes a covenant that Richtek will not "assert any cause of action, claim or demand against VisionTek under any of the [patents and trade secrets in suit] for infringement or misappropriation based on the [importation, sale for importation, and sale, or offer for sale, after importation into the United States] any of the Authorized Products." The definition of 'authorized products' was redacted in the public copy.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

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.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

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. 

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

The International Trade Commission issued a notice of investigation on Friday, June 11, 2010 in Inv. No. 337-TA-720, In the Matter of Certain Biometric Scanning Devices, Components Thereof, Associated Software, and Products Containing the Same. The notice is in response to a Complaint filed by Cross Match Technologies, Inc. on May 11, 2010, as amended on May 26, 2010. The Complaint alleges that proposed respondents, Suprema, Inc. (Korea), and Mentalix, Inc. (Plano, TX) infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 5,900,993; 6,483,932; 7,203,344; and 7,277,562. In a separate notice, Chief Judge Luckern was named the preciding administrative judge for the investigation.

Notice of Investigation (.PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On May 7, 2010, the Commission published a notice in the Federal Register announcing that it had determined not to review an initial determination granting motions for summary determination of non-infringement and finding no violation of Section 337 in Inv. No. 337-TA-689, In the Matter of Certain Dual Access Locks and Products Containing Same. The petitioners in the case were Safe Skies, LLC and David Tropp. The respondents were C&C Luggage Manufacturing Co., Ltd.; Formosa Tai Ran Industrial Corp.; Hangzhou Gema Suitcases & Bags Co., Ltd.; La Pearl Luggage and Leather Goods Co., Ltd.; Hinomoto Jomae, Ltd.; Sinox Company, Ltd.; Yi Feng Manufacturing, Co., Ltd.; Jin Tay Industries Co., Ltd.; FULLYEAR-Brother Enterprise, Co., Ltd.; Zhuhai SkyGood Tech. Industrial Corp., Ltd.; Ningbo Xianfeng Art & Craft Co., Ltd.; Paloma Enterprises Co., Ltd.; Tekraft Industrial Co., Ltd.; Hangzhou Travelsky Co., Ltd.; The Sun Lock Company Ltd.; Alloy Metal Manufactory, Ltd.; Cometform, Ltd.; Design Go Ltd.; Franzen International; and M-Power Lock Manufactory. The complainant alleged violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, sale for important, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain dual access locks and product containing same that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,021,537 and 7,036,728. Nineteen of the respondents filed a motion for summary determination of non-infringement of all asserted claims, which was granted. Only Formosa Tai Ran Industrial Corp. did not join the motion. The Commission determined not to review the initial determination of Chief ALJ Luckern, and to terminate the investigation.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On May 4, 2010, the Office of the Secretary issued a Notice in the Federal Register announcing a review by the Commission of a portion of the final initial determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-670, In the Matter of Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof.  Chief ALJ Luckern issued a final initial determination on February 23, 2010, finding that respondents CompX International, Inc. and Waterloo Furniture Components Ltd. did not violate section 337 by infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,292,097 with respect to their “Wedge-Brake” products, but did violate section 337 with respect to their “Brake-Shoe” products.  Complainants Humanscale Corporation, the respondents, and the Commission investigative attorney filed petitions for review of the ALJ’s final initial determination on March 9, 2010.  The Commission determined to review certain claim constructions, the infringement determination concerning the “Brake-Shoe” products, the invalidity determination for anticipation and obviousness of claim 7 of the patent, and the denied defense of intervening rights.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On May 4, 2010, the Office of the Secretary issued a Notice in the Federal Register announcing Inv. No. 337-TA-714, In the Matter of Certain Electronic Devices with Multi-Touch Enabled Touchpads and Touchscreens.  The complainant, Elan Microelectronics Corporation, alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation and sale within the United States after importation of certain electronic devices with multi-touch enabled touchpads and touchscreens by reason of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5, 825, 352.  The respondent is Apple Inc. Chief ALJ Luckern will preside over the investigation.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

In the Matter of Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing the Same, denied Complainants request for Respondent to produce and search the personal computers and electronic storage devices of employees formerly employed by Complainants but now employed by Respondent in an investigation involving trade secret misappropriation allegations. Such searching was found to be somewhat redundant of previous discovery requests and suggestive of an intent to harass. In addition, Complainant made no showing of any discrepancies or insufficiencies in Respondent’s document production nor any showing that it will be unable to get the sought-after information from other sources.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

APJ Luckern denied Richtek’s request to compel more specific responses in the Respondents’ affirmative defenses and interrogatory responses. APJ Luckern noted that the Commission Rules encourage but do not require Respondents to provide a showing of how the prior art renders a claim invalid or unenforceable. In addition, the Respondents identified certain prior art that it contended invalidated the asserted patents. The Respondents did not rely on bald assertions of invalidity unlike other cases where the ITC previously ordered supplementation. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern found that Red Bull GmbH and Red Bull North America, Inc. (“Red Bull”) satisfied the technical and economic prongs of the domestic industry requirement. The Red Bull energy drinks distributed in the U.S. featured registered trademarks, copyrights, and derivative works owned by Red Bull. Further, it was determined that Red Bull had expended significant investments facilities and equipment, significant employment of labor and capital, and significant exploitation investments. ALJ Luckern’s decision factored in, among other things, Red Bull’s warehouse and storage space housing Red Bull energy drinks, marketing and point-of-sale materials and event logistics infrastructure inventory, Red Bull’s expenditures on corporate and promotional vehicles, Red Bull’s contracts with U.S.-based third party manufactures, and Red Bull’s large workforce involved in the licensing, enforcement, marketing and promoting of Red Bull energy drinks.

ALJ Luckern found that the unauthorized importation of gray market products violated the Lanham for all remaining Respondents except one (where ALJ Luckern found the evidence of importation lacking because it evidenced an offer for sale not a sale). ALJ Luckern found that material differences existed between U.S. authorized products and unauthorized gray market products. Such differences included a lack of batch code, expiration date, UPC code, nutritional information, volumetric information, deposit information, proper complaint contact information, and other quality control mechanisms.

ALJ Luckern further found that the importation of the unauthorized Red Bull energy drinks constituted copyright infringement in violation of 19 U.S.C. §1337.

ALJ Luckern also recommended the entry of a general exclusion order and posting of 100% bond should any Respondent continue to import and support the gray market products through any Presidential review period.  (PDF)
 

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On March 31, 2010 Chief ALJ Luckern issued an post-preliminary conference order setting the procedural schedule in Inv. No. 337-TA-703, In the Matter of Certain Mobile Telephones and Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras, and Components Thereof. ALJ Luckern set September 1, 2010 as the date for a pre-hearing conference and September 1, 2 and 3 as the dates for the hearing. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On March 30, 2010, Chief ALJ Luckern issued notice of ground rules and dates for submission of discovery statements in Inv. No. 337-TA-708, In the Matter of Certain Stringed Instruments and Components. Chief ALJ Luckern directed complainants and respondents to submit a discovery statement on or before April 30, 2010 and put the parties on notice that a preliminary conference will be held on May 25, 2010. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On March 22, 2010 ALJ Luckern granted respondents’ motion for summary determination of non infringement if all claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,021,537 and 7,036,728 in Inv. No. 337-TA-689, In the Matter of Certain Dual Access Locks and Products Containing the Same. Chief ALJ Luckern found, as a matter of law, that no respondent in the investigation could be held liable for direct infringement of any of the asserted and independent methods claims, as no respondent practiced all of the elements of said claims, and terminated the investigation. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Chief ALJ Luckern issued an order setting a target date in Inv. No. 337-TA-703, In the Matter of Certain Mobile Telephones and Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras, and Components Thereof. ALJ Luckern set a fifteen month target date for completion of the investigation, May 23 ,2011, with the final initial determine filed no later than January 24, 2011. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On March 5, 2010 Chief ALJ Luckern issued his Final Initial and Recommended Determinations in Inv. No. 337-TA-670, In the Matter of Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof. ALJ Luckern issued his Final Initial Determination, finding that a violation of section 337 occurred in the importation, or sale within the United States after importation of certain adjustable keyboard support systems or components thereof that infringe one or more of claims 7, 10, 26, 27, 34, 37, 38 and 44 of U.S. Patent No. 5,292,097. ALJ Luckern issued his Recommended Determination that, should the Commission find a violation, a limited exclusion order, barring entry of the infringing products into the United States and a cease and desist order against respondent Waterloo Furniture Components, Ltd., should issue.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On February 23, 2010 Chief ALJ Luckern issued notice to complainant Humanscale Corp. and respondents CompX International, Inc. and Waterloo Furniture Companies, Ltd. containing his final initial determination and recommendation in Inv. No. 337-TA-670, In the Matter of Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof. Chief ALJ Luckern’s initial determination found that a violation of section 337 occurred in the importation and sale of the adjustable keyboard support systems at issue, and recommended that if the Commission determined a violation occurred that a limited exclusion order barring entry of items at issue into the U.S. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On February 18, 2010 Inv. No. 337-TA-705, In the Matter of Certain Notebook Computer Products and Components Thereof, was assigned to Administrative Judge Paul Luckern.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern extended the target date in Investigation No. 337-TA-670, Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof, by one week to June 23, 2010 due to the severe weather conditions affecting Washingtion, DC last week.  A final ID will be issued in teh investigation by February 23, 2010.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern issued an initial determination finding Respondent Central Supply in default in Inv. No. 337-TA-678, In the matter of Certain Energy Drink Products.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern issued an ID terminating Respondent Wheeler From The Investigation Based On A Settlement Agreement in Inv. No. 337-TA-678, In the Matter of Certain Energy Drink Products.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern issued an ID finding Respondent Chicago Import Inc. in Default in Inv. No. 337-TA-678, In the Matter of Certain Energy Drink Products (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern issued an ID terminating Respondent Vending Plus from the investigation based on a settlement agreement in Inv. No. 337-TA-678, In the Matter of Certain Energy Drink Products (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern issued an ID terminating Respondent India Imports from the investigation based on a settlement agreement in Inv. No. 337-TA-678, In the Matter of Certain Energy Drink Products  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern issued an ID finding Respondents Posh Nosh, Greenwich and Advantage in Default in Inv. No. 337-TA-678, In the Matter of Certain Energy Drink Products.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 30, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern granted the order sought by complainants Red Bull Gmbh and Red Bull North America, Inc.directing each of the respondents to show cause why each should not be found in default for failure to respond to the complaint and notice of investigation in Inv. No. 337-TA-678, In the Matter of Certain Energy Products.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 19, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern granted complainants Red Bull Gmbh and Red Bull North America, Inc. motion for an order directing respondent Avalon International General Trading, LLC to show cause why it should not be found in default for failure to respond to the complaint and notice of investigation in the matter of Certain Energy Drink Products, Inv. No. 337-TA-678. ALJ Luckern ordered respondents to show cause by December 7, 2009. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Chief ALJ Luckern issued an initial determination removing claims no longer asserted by complainant Humanscale Corporation from the investigation In the Matter of Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-670. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 16, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern issued the public version of his November 4, 2009 order denying respondents CompX International, Inc. and Waterloo Furniture Components Ltd.’s motion for summary determination of invalidity on all claims asserted by complainant Humanscale Corporation on grounds of anticipation and/or obviousness in Inv. No. 337-TA-670, In the Matter of Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof.

Chief ALJ Luckern issued the public versions of two additional November 4, 2009 orders, denying respondents’ motion for summary determination on infringement grounds, and motion for summary determination regarding invalidity due to improper broadening and declaration regarding intervening rights. Chief ALJ Luckern granted complainant’s motion for summary determination that it satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 13, 2009 Chief ALJ Luckern issued the public versions of his October 29, 2009 and November 2, 2009 orders granting complainant Gertrude Neumark Rothschild’s motions to terminate respondents Toshiba Corporation and Panasonic from the investigation based on the withdrawal of the complaints against Toshiba and Panasonic in Inv. No. 337-TA-674, In the Matter of Certain Light Emitting Diode Chips, Laser Diode Chips and Products Containing Same. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 13, 2009 Chief ALJ Luckern issued the public version of his October 19, 2009 initial determination granting complainant Humanscale Corporation’s motion that respondents CompX International Inc. and Waterloo Furniture Components Ltd. d/b/a CompX Waterloo have engaged in activities satisfying the importation requirement of section 337 in Inv. No. 337-TA-670, In the Matter of Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

Chief ALJ Luckern issued an order in Inv. No. 337-TA-689, In the Matter of Certain Dual Access Locks and Products Containing the Same, setting a 14 month target date, December 21, 2010 for completion of the investigation and August 23, 2010 as the date for filing a final initial determination. ALJ Luckern also required the complainants, Safe Skies LLC, and David Tropp, respondents, C &C Luggage Manufacturing Co., La Pearl Luggage and Leather Goods Co., Ltd et al and Commission staff to provide proposed procedural schedules by November 20, 2009. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 9, 2009, ALJ Essex set a target date of November 9, 2010 in Inv. No. 337-TA-688, In the Matter of Certain Hybrid Electric Vehicles and Components Thereof. Complainant Paice LLC and respondents Toyota Motor North America, and Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc. were ordered to produce procedural schedules no later than November 19, 2009. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On October 16, 2009, the Commission terminated Inv. No. 337-TA-613, In the Matter of Certain 3G Mobile Handsets and Components Thereof by affirming ALJ Luckern’s determination of no violation, because although the Commission modified ALJ Luckern’s claim construction, that modified construction did not necessitate a finding of no violation. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On October 13, 2009, ALJ Luckern found respondent UniLite Corporation of Taiwan in default for failure to respond to the second and third amended complaints and notice of investigation, and for failure to respond to a previous order demanding good cause why respondent should not be found in default. Inv. No. 337-TA-674, In the Matter of Certain Light Emitting Diode Chips, Laser Diode Chips and Products Containing Same.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On October 5, 2009, ALJ Luckern granted a joint motion to terminate based on a settlement between the parties in Inv. No. 337-TA-658, In the Matter of Certain Video Game Machines and Related Three-Dimensional Pointing Devices, U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,139,983, 7,158,118, 7,262,760, 7,414,611.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On September 29, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern granted third party Alston & Bird, LLP’s motion to quash the subpoena served on it by respondents CompX International, Inc. and Waterloo Furniture Corporation Ltd. in Inv. No. 337-TA-670, In the Matter of Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof. Chief ALJ Luckern found that the discovery sought was not relevant, that the potential hardship to the third party was significant, and that respondents failed to show sufficient need for the discovery request. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On September 22, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern issued the public versions of his August 25, 2009 Initial Determinations terminating respondents Tyntek Corporation, Tekcore Co., Ltd. and Arima Optoelectronics Corp. from Inv. No. 337-TA-674, In the Matter of Certain Light Emitting Diode Chips, Laser Diode Chips and Products Containing Same. The respondents each moved to be terminated from the investigation in July based upon a proposed consent order. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On September 17, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern issued the public version of his August 14, 2009 Final Initial and Recommended Determinations in Inv. No. 337-TA-613, In the Matter of Certain 3G Mobile Handsets and Components. Chief ALJ Luckern concluded that there was jurisdiction, but there was no violation of section 337 due to infringement of claims 1, 2, 31, and 59 of U.S. Patent No. 7,117,004, claims 1, 3, 8, 9, and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 7,190,966, claims 5, 6, 9, and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 7,286,847, and claims 1, 3, and 4 of U.S. Patent No. 6,973,579. Furthermore, Chief ALJ Luckern found that not only were the asserted patent claims not infringed, but the claims of the asserted patents were also invalid. Should the Commission find a violation, Chief ALJ Luckern recommended the issuance of a limited exclusion order barring entry into the United States of infringing 3G mobile handsets and components thereof, as well as the issuance of appropriate cease and desist orders. The imposition of any bond during the Presidential Review period was not recommended. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On September 10, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern issued an Initial Determination finding Toyolite Technologies Corp. in default in Inv. No. 337-TA-674, In the Matter of Certain Light Emitting Diode Chips, Laser Diode Chips and Products Containing Same. Respondent was issued an order to show cause in July, but after being notified that the letter in response to that order did not comply with procedural requirements of the Code of Federal Regulations, there was no further response.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On September 8, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern issued an Initial Determination granting the complainants’ motion to amend the complaint and giving notice of investigation to add six additional respondents in Inv. No. 337-TA-678, In the Matter of Certain Energy Drinks. The six respondents are Posh Nosh Imports, Greenwich, Inc., Advantage Food Distributors, Ltd., Wheeler Trading, Inc., Avalon International General Trading, LLC, and Central Supply, Inc. Accordingly, Chief ALJ Luckern extended the fact discovery request and discovery completion dates for an additional month. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Luckern issued an initial determination terminating Sony Ericsson Mobil Communications AB from Inv. No. 337-TA-674, In the Matter of Certain Light Emitting Diode Chips, Laser Diode Chips and Products Containing Same. Complainant Gertrude Neumark Rothschild and Respondent Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications AB filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation as to Sony Ericsson based on a settlement agreement. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On August 12, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern granted complainant’s motion to amend the procedural schedule in Inv. No. 337-TA-670, In the Matter of Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof. The schedule was amended to allow complainant to obtain any additional follow-up discovery generated from depositions that are scheduled to take place the day before the close of fact discovery. In addition, Chief ALJ Luckern pointed to the fact that respondents provided document discovery after the deadline for such discovery and a week before the close of fact discovery. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On August 5, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern issued a public version of his June 12, 2009, Final Initial and Recommended Determinations for Inv. No. 337-TA-634, In the Matter of Certain Liquid Crystal Display Modules, Products Containing Same, and Methods for Using the Same. Judge Luckern concluded that there was jurisdiction and that there was a violation of section 337. ALJ Luckern recommended the issuance of a limited exclusion order barring entry into the United States of infringing products, including downstream products of named respondent, and a cease and desist order.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On July 27, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern issued the public version of his March 10, 2009, ruling granting complainant’s motion for summary determination that a domestic industry based on licensing activities existed in the United States in Inv. No. 337-TA-613, In the Matter of Certain 3G Mobile Handsets and Components Thereof. ALJ Luckern concluded that complainant’s existing licenses of patent portfolios related to and including the patent-at-issue to companies located throughout the world satisfied the licensing element of the domestic industry requirement. ALJ Luckern found no Commission precedent that required a complainant to establish that each of the asserted patents is more “important” than any others in the portfolio, so long as the licensing activities are substantial and connected to the asserted patents. In any event, the ALJ noted that the asserted patents must be important parts of the licensed patent portfolios as complainant’s are enforcing them in the instant investigation. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On July 27, 2009, the Commission Ordered that Inv. No. 337-TA-556, In the Matter of Certain High-Brightness Light Emitting Diodes and Products Containing Same, be remanded to Chief ALJ Luckern for proceedings consistent with the May 22, 2009 judgment of the Federal Circuit in Epistar Corp. v. United States Int’l Trade Comm’n, 566 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2009), including issuance of a final initial determination on violation and a recommended determination on remedy and bonding. The investigation was appealed to the Federal Circuit after the Commission found infringement and issued a limited exclusion order. The Federal Circuit vacated the limited exclusion order and vacated and remanded the Commission’s final determination.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On July 13, 2009, Chief ALJ Luckern issued the public version of his April 17, 2009, Enforcement Initial Determination (ED) in Inv. No. 337-TA-565, In the Matter of Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof. The enforcement proceeding was initiated on February 8, 2008 when complainants filed two complaints alleging violations of general exclusion orders and cease and desist orders by five respondents. On May 1, 2008, the Commission issued a “Notice of Institution of Formal Enforcement Proceeding.” An evidentiary hearing was conducted in January 2009. ALJ Luckern concluded that all enforcement respondents violated the orders and issued significant civil penalties against those companies. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link