ITC Blog: ITC 337 Update

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Gildea issued a public version of his Initial Determination and Recommended Remedy in Inv. No. 337-TA-734, Certain Electronic Devices With Image Processing Systems, Components Thereof, and Associated Software. The investigation arose out of a complaint filed by S3 Graphics Co. Ltd and S3 Graphics, Inc. (collectively “S3 Graphics”) against Apple Inc. S3 Graphics alleged that various Apple products infringed U.S. Patent No. 7,043,087 (“the ‘087 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 6,775,417 (“the ‘417 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 6,683,978 (“the ‘978 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 6,658,146 (“the ‘146 patent”).

ALJ Gildea found no violation of Section 337 with respect to the ‘087 patent or the ‘417 patent because, although Apple’s Mac OS X Devices directly infringe the asserted claims, those claims are obvious. Apple’s Mac OS X Devices were found to directly infringe asserted claims 11, 14, and 16 of the ‘978 patent, but a violation of Section 337 was found only with respect to claim 11, because claim 14 and 16 are invalid for obviousness. Similarly, Apple’s Mac OS X Devices were found to directly infringe asserted claims 4, 13, and 16 of the ‘146 patent, but a violation was found only with respect to claims 4 and 16 because claim 13 is obvious. Additionally, the Court held that an implied license and the doctrine of patent exhaustion apply to those Mac OS X Devices incorporating Nvidia GPU that are protected by an NVidia License. A domestic industry exists with respect to all patents-in-suit. ALJ Gildea found that none of the asserted claims of the four patents-in-suit are indirectly infringed or invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102 or 35 U.S.C. § 112. In his remedy and bond determination, ALJ Gildea recommended a limited exclusion order, a cease and desist order and that Apple be required to post a bond.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On August 2, 2011, ALJ Gildea granted an unopposed motion filed by Complainants Duggal Dimensions LLC, Duggal Energy Solutions LLC, and Duggal Visual Solutions, Inc. (collectively “Duggal”) to terminate Inv. No. 337-TA-736, Certain Wind and Solar Powered Light Posts and Street Lamps, based on withdrawal of the Complaint. Duggal has entered into a settlement agreement with the other private parties: Respondents Gus Power Incorporated, Efstonscience Inc., King Luminair, Inc., and The Stresscrete Group.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On February 2, 2011, ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued an initial determination setting a target date of August 2, 2012 in Inv. No. 337-TA-758, Certain Mobile Telephones and Modems. The complainant in this investigation is Sony Corporation. The respondents include LG Electronics LG Electronics, Inc., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc, and LG Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On January 28, 2011, ALJ Charles E. Bullock granted complainant Leviton Manufacturing Co., Inc.’s motion for partial termination of the pending investigation in Inv. No. 337-TA-739, Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products Containing the Same. The complainant’s granted motion to terminate the pending investigation “to the extent Leviton’s claims are based on any GFCI products made, used, offered for sale, sold or imported in the United States by Respondent General Protecht Group,” had the practical effect of dismissing the following respondents: General Protecht Group, Inc., SecureElectric Corporation and G-Techt Global Corporation. The investigation continues against the remaining respondents.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Essex granted a motion filed by complainants Hewlett-Packard Co. and Hewlett-Packard Develpment Co., L.P. (collectively "HP") to terminate the investigation as to respondents Mipo International Ltd. and Shenzhen Print Media Co., Ltd. on the basis of withdrawing the allegations against those respondents in In the Matter of Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-730. 

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Essex issued an initial determination granting BTG International ("BTG") and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively "Samsung") joint motion to terminate the investigation based on a settlement agreement in In the Matter of Certain MLC Flash Memory Devices and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-683.  The specific terms of the settlement agreement were redacted from the public version of the initial determination.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Essex issued an initial determination granting Chimei Innolux Corp., Chi Mei Optoelectronics USA, Innolux Corp. (collectively "CMI") and Sony Corp., Sony Corp. America, Sony Electronics, Inc., and Sony Computer Entertainment America, LLC (collectively "Sony") joint motion to terminate the investigation based on a settlement agreement in In the Matter of Certain Liquid Crystal Display Devices and Products Interoperable with the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-737.  The specific terms of the settlement agreement were redacted from the public version of the initial determination.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Charneski granted Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd's motion and found respondent Shenzhen Egreat Co., Ltd. ("Shenzhen") in default in In the Matter of Certain Flash Memory and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-685.  Shenzhen failed to respond to ALJ Charneski's earlier order directing Shenzen to show cause why it should not be found in default after failing to respond to the investigation.  Due to Shenzhen's failure to respond to the order to show cause ALJ Charneski entered an initial determination finding Shenzhen in default under 19 C.F.R. § 210.16.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 19, 2010, the public version of ALJ Charneski’s ID granting Complainant’s Motion for Summary Determination Concerning the Economic Prong of the Domestic Industry Requirement, and finding a violation of Section 337 in Inv. No. 337-TA-637, In the Matter of Certain Hair Irons and Packaging Thereof. ALJ Charneski ruled that no genuine issues of material fact precluded summary determination that complainant satisfied the technical and economic prong of the domestic industry requirement.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Essex issued an Initial Determination terminating Mextec d/b/a Mipo America Ltd. based on a settlement agreement in Inv. No. 337-TA-730, In the Matter of Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies and Components Thereof.  Judge Essex's order granting the termination of Mipo found that there was "no indication that termination [of Mipo] . . . would have an adverse impact on the public interest."  The terms of the settlement agreement are confidential and the public version filed with the ITC is highly redacted.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 10, 2010, the public versions of ALJ Rodgers' initial determinations issued granting Hewlett Packard's motions to terminate the investigation as to Sino Time Technologies d/b/a All Colors and Mextec d/b/a Mipo America Ltd. in Inv. No. 337-TA-723, Certain Inkjet Ink Cartridges with Printheads and Components Thereof.  HP reached a settlement agreement with each of the respondents.

• Email This
• 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.
 

• 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

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. 

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Essex issued an initial determination today granting a joint motion to terminate Inv. No. 337-TA-707, Certain Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors and Products Containing Same, Including Memory Modules. Complainants Infineon Technologies AG and Infineon Technologies North America Corp., and Respondents Elpida Memory, Inc. (“Elpida”), 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 filed a joint motion on June 18, 2010 to terminate the investigation on the basis of a settlement agreement. The agreement is between Infineon and Elpida, but while the remaining respondents are not party to the agreement, the motion requests that the investigation be terminated against those remaining respondents.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Bullock has issued an initial determinating terminating Inv. No. 337-TA-708, Certain Stringed Musical Instruments and Components Thereof (II), as to Floyd Rose Guitars, Floyd Rose Marketing, Inc., Davitt & Hanser Music Co., and Ping Well Industries based on a consent order.  The remaning respondents are Ibanez, Inc. (Hoshino) US and Ibanez, Inc. (Hoshino) Japan, Ltd.

ID Granting Joint Motion To Terminate Investigation (.PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Essex has filed an initial determination granting Complainant Hewlett-Packard's motion to terminate Inv. No. 337-TA-691, Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies and Components Thereof, with repsect to U.S. Patent Nos. 6,959,985 and 7,104,630.

ID Terminating Investigation As To Two Patents (.PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On May 28, 2010 ALJ Essex issued an initial determination granting a joint motion to terminate Inv. No. 337-TA-697, Certain Authentication Systems, Including Software and Handheld Electronic Devices.  The parties had filed their motion to terminate on the basis of a settlement agreement reached between complainant Prism Technologies, LLC and respondents Research in Motion Ltd. and Research in Motion Corporation.

ID Terminating Investigation (.PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On May 27, 2010 ALJ Gildea issued an abbreviated notice regarding issuance of a remand initial determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-650, Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors and Components Thereof and Products Containing the Same. The complainant is John Mezzalingua Associates, Inc. The ALJ determined that no domestic industry existed that practices U.S. Patent No. D440,539.  A complete public version is expected to be issued shortly.

Notice Regarding Remand of Initial Determination (.PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On May 26, 2010 ALJ Charneski issued an initial determination terminating Inv. No. 337-TA-680, Certain Machine Vision Software, Machine Vision Systems, and Products Containing Same, as to respondent Rasco GmbH on the basis of a consent order and a settlement agreement with complainants Cognex Corporation and Cognex Technology and Investment Corporation.

Initial Determination Terminating Investigation (.PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Essex issued an initial determination granting a joint motion to terminate Inv. No. 337-TA-713, Certain Display Devices, Including Digital Televisions and Monitors, as to respondent Viewsonic on the basis of a settlement agreement with complainant Sony Corporation.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On May 25, 2010 the Commission issued its determination not to review an intial determination of presiding ALJ Essex terminating Inv. No. 337-TA-707, Certain Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors and Products Containing Same, Including Memory Modules as to respondents Buffalo, Inc. of Japan and Buffalo Technology (USA) of Austin, Texas.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Charneski issued an initial determination terminating Inv. No.. 337-TA-680, Certain Machine Vision Software, Machine Vision Systems and Products Containing Same as to respondent Subtechnique, Inc. on the basis of a consent order reached with Complainant Cognex Corporation and Cognex Technology & Investment Corporation. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On May 6, 2010, ALJ Essex granted a unilateral motion to terminate the investigation as to respondents Buffalo, Inc. and Buffalo Technology ("Buffalo") in Inv. No. 337-TA-707, In the Matter of Certain Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors and Products Containing Same, Including Memory Modules. The termination was based on a consent order between Buffalo and complainants Infineon Technologies AG and Infineon Technologies North America Corp. ("Infineon"), wherein Buffalo agreed not to import into the United States, sell for importation, sell in the United States after important, or knowingly aid in such activities with regard to products containing Elpida dynamic random access memory semiconductors or products containing the same, including memory modules that infringe the asserted claims in U.S. Patent Nos. 5,397,664, 5,422,309, 5,397,664, and 7,071,074.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Gildea held that none of the Respondents infringed U.S. Patent No. 7,417,382 and that no domestic industry exists in Inv. No. 337-TA-666, In the Matter of Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp ("CCFL") Inverter Circuits and Products Containing The Same.  ALJ Gildea found that respondents (ASUSTeK Computer Inc., ASUS Computer International, Monolithic Power Systems, Inc., and Microsemi Corp.) did not infringe claims 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 7,417,382.  Gildea further held that no domestic industry exists which practices the '382 patent.  A complete public version of the initial determination will be issued after the parties have had a chance to propose redactions.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Bullock issued an initial determination in 337-TA-644, Certain Flash Memory Chips and Products Containing Same, granting complainants Spansion, Inc. and Spansion, LLC’s motion to withdraw U.S. Patent No. 6,080,639 from the complaint without prejudice. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On March 31, 2010, ALJ Charneski issued an enforcement initial determination following a violation of the Commission’s limited exclusion order of September 24, 2007 in Inv. No. 337-TA-564, In the Matter of Certain Voltage Regulators, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same. ALJ Charneski recommended that a cease and desist order issue against the respondent in this enforcement proceeding for violating the limited exclusion order.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On March 15, 2010 ALJ Essex issued an Initial Determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-669, In the Matter of Certain Optoelectronic Devices, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same, that a violation of section 337 occurred in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain optoelectronic devices, components thereof and products containing the same infringe one or more of claims 1, 2, 3 and 5 of U.S. Patent No. 5,359,447. ALJ Essex found that no violation of section 337 occurred with respect to claim 6 of the ‘447 patent and one of more of claim 8 of U.S. Patent No. 5,761,229.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On March 9, 2010, ALJ Charneski issued an Initial Determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-663, In the Matter of Certain Mobile Telephones and Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras and Components, that a violation of section 337 occurred in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation, of certain mobile telephones and wireless communication devices featuring digital cameras, or components thereof, that infringe claims 1, 4, and 12 of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,493,335 and claims 15, 23-27 of U.S. Patent No. 6,292,218. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Rogers issued the public version of his October 14 ,2009 initial determination that a violation of section 337 occurred in Inv. No. 337-TA-665, In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Integrated Circuits and Products Containing Same.   ALJ Rogers found that a violation of section 337 occurred in connection with U.S. Patent Nos. 5,646,434; 5,213,670; 5,851,899 and 6,495,918, belonging to complainant Qimonda AG. ALJ Rogers further found that a domestic industry did not exist that practiced any of the patents listed above. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Charneski issued a remand determination finding that respondents had not proven claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 5,227,335 invalid due to obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 by clear and convincing evidence in Inv. No. 337-TA-648, In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Using Tungsten Metallization and Products Containing Same.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Charneski issued an initial determination that no violation has occurred with respect to certain semiconductor integrated circuits using tungsten metallization or products containing same that infringe claim 1,3, or 4 of U.S. Patent No. 5,227,335 in Inv. No. 337-TA-648, In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Using Tungsten Metallization and Products Containing Same.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Bullock granted the joint motion of Complainants, Samsung Electronics Company, Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Respondent Eastman Kodak Company to terminate the investigation based upon the execution of a settlement agreement in Inv. No. 337-TA-671, In the Matter of Certain Digital Cameras.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Charneski granted the parties’ joint motion to terminate the investigation as to Amistar Automation, Inc. based on a consent order and settlement agreement in Inv. No. 337-TA-680, In the Matter of Certain Machine Vision Software, Machine Vision Systems and Products Containing Same.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Charneski issued an order setting the deadline for Initial Determination as December 16,2010, and target date as April 16, 2011in Inv. No. 337-TA-694, In the Matter of Certain Multimedia Display and Navigation Devices and Systems, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Charneski issued an ID terminating the Investigation as to the LG Respondents based on a settlement agreement in Inv. No. 337-TA-663, In the Matter of Certain Mobile Telephones and Wireless Communication Devices Featuring Digital Cameras, and Components.  (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 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 20, 2009, ALJ Charneski issued an Initial Determination in the matter of Certain Cast Steel Railway Wheels, Certain Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to the Same and Certain Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-655. The Initial Determination included the following conclusions of law, among others: (1) the Commission has personal and subject matter jurisdiction; (2) the importation requirement has been met and (3) a violation of section 337 has occurred with respect to the trade secrets owned by complainant Amsted. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 4, 2009, the Commission issued the public version of its October 4, 2009 notice of its determination to review in part the final initial determination made by the ALJ on August 28, 2009, finding no violation of section 337 in Inv. No. 337-TA-692, In the Matter of Certain Ceramic Capacitors and Products Containing Same. The Commission requested submissions from complainants and respondents that address the form of remedy and the public interest factors in the context of the investigation. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On November 3, 2009, ALJ Gildea issued the public version of the October 3, 2009 final initial determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-650, In the Matter of Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors and Components Thereof and Products Containing Same. ALJ Gildea found that a violation of section 337 occurred in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after the importation of certain coaxial cable connectors by reason of infringement of one or more claims of the patents held by complainant, U.S. Patent Nos. 6,558,194, 5,470,257, D440,539 and D519,076.

ALJ Gildea issued a recommended determination on remedy and bond that the Commission should issue a general exclusion order directed to coaxial cable compression connectors that infringe the asserted claims of complainant’s patents at issue, and that respondents should be required to post a bond of 13 cents for each accused coaxial cable compression connector imported during the review period. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On September 24, 2009, ALJ Essex issued the public version of his August 28, 2009 Final Initial and Recommended Determinations for Inv. No. 337-TA-630, In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Chips with Minimized Chip Package Size and Products Containing Same (III). ALJ Essex concluded that there was no violation of section 337 by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 17 and 18 of United States Patent No. 5,679,977; claims 1-4,9-12, and 15-16 of United States Patent No. 6,133,627; and claims 1-4, 9, 10 and 33-35 of United States Patent No. 5,663,106. While ALJ Essex found no violation of section 337, his Recommended Determination, in the event the Commission finds a violation of section 337, is that a general exclusion order that includes downstream products is not warranted. To the extent the Commission determines to issue a general exclusion order, ALJ Essexrecommended that the exclusion order include a certification provision. Should the Commission decide not to issue a general exclusion order, ALJ Essex recommends that the Commission should issue a limited exclusion order directed only to respondents Acer Inc.; Acer America Corp.; Centon Electronics, Inc.; Kingston Technology Corporation; Nanya Technology Corporation; Nanya Technology Corp. USA; Powerchip Semiconductor Corp.; ProMos Technologies, Inc.; Ramaxel Technology, Ltd; SMART Modular Technologies, Inc.; TwinMOS Technologies, Inc.; and TwinMOS Technologies, USA, Inc. and all of their affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, or other related business entities, or their successors or assigns. Should the Commission find a violation, ALJ Essex recommended that the Commission issue a cease and desist order directed toward the domestic respondents Acer, Centon, Kingston, Nanya, Elpida and SMART. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On September 21, 2009, ALJ Charneski issued his Initial Determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-648, In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Using Tungsten Metallization and Products Containing Same. ALJ Charneski determined that the Commission has jurisdiction over the parties and investigation, and that all respondents but one had sold for importation, imported, or sold after importation into the United States products made according to the accused processes. ALJ Charneski also determined that, while each accused process of each respondent practiced each of the claims of the patent asserted against it, claims 1, 3, and 4 of U.S. Patent No. 5,227,335 are invalid as anticipated by prior art. Thus, there was no violation of section 337 with respect to those claims. (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

ALJ Essex issued an initial determination on violation of section 337 and a recommended determination on remedy and bonding in Inv. No. 337-TA-630, In the Matter of Certain Semiconductor Chips with Minimized Chip Package Size and Products Containing Same. ALJ Essex held that no violation of section 337 has occurred. The products at issue do not literally infringe the asserted claims of U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,679,977 and 6,133,627, nor do they infringe under the doctrine of equivalents U.S. Pat. No. 5,663,106. The ALJ also found that all three patents were not invalid for anticipation, obviousness, or indefiniteness and that a domestic industry exists. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Bullock terminated the investigation as to respondent SAN Corp. pursuant to a consent order stipulation entered by the parties in Inv. No. 337-TA-679, In the Matter of Certain Products Advertised as Containing Creatine Ethyl Ester. On July 13, 2009 Complainant and Respondent SAN Corp. filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation as to SAN based upon a consent order stipulation. The consent order stipulation complied with the requirements of Rule 210.21(c)(3). In the consent order stipulation SAN agreed not to import, sell for import, or sell after importation the subject products and to report to the commission the quantity and value that it already has imported or sold after importation. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

The Commission decided to review the ALJ’s Order No. 26 terminating the investigation as to respondent Ethical Naturals, Inc. in Inv. No. 337-TA-668, In the Matter of Certain Non-Shellfish Derived Glucosamine and Products Containing Same. The ALJ granted a motion to terminate the investigation as to one of six respondents, Ethical Naturals, Inc., based on a settlement agreement. The Commission decided to review this order and determination despite the fact that no petitions for review were filed. The subject of the Commission’s review was designated as Confidential and not disclosed. Written submissions are due on September 7, 2009 and reply submissions are due September 17, 2009. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

The Commission instituted Inv. No. 337-TA-684, In the Matter of Certain Articulated Coordinate Measuring Arms and Components Thereof. In response to a complaint filed on July 28, 2009 on behalf of Hexagon Metrology, AB of Sweden and Hexagon Metrology, Inc. of North Kingstown, Rhode Island the commission decided to institute an investigation concerning whether section 337 is violated by the importation of certain articulated coordinate measuring arms and components thereof by reason of infringement of U.S. Pat. No. 5,829,148. The named respondents are: Metris N.V., Metris U.S.A., Inc., Mitutoyo Corp., and Mitutoyo America Corp. (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

The Commission has granted review in part of the final initial determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-619, In the Matter of Certain Flash Memory Controllers, Drivers, Memory Cards and Media Players and Products Containing Same. On April 10, 2009 the ALJ issed a final initial determination finding no violation of section 337 by respondents. The ALJ also found that claim 8 of U.S. Pat. No. 7,137,011 was rendered obvious by prior art. The Commission, after reviewing the ALJ’s final initial determination, has decided to review the claim construction, infringement, and validity (including the ALJ’s decision not to consider a PCT publication as prior art) of U.S. Pat. No. 6,763,424. 

The Commission instructed the parties to address five questions in their briefing: (1) whether the accused products would infringe claim 17 of the ’424 patent if “updating pages of original data within any of the metablock component blocks less than all the pages within the block” was construed to cover single-page updates; (2) whether “reading and assembling data from the first and second plurality of pages” should be construed to cover the so-called “table method” and if infringement would result if the term was so construed; (3) why the Sinclair PCT was not listed on any notice of prior art as required by Ground Rule 5; (4) under what circumstances the Commission should consider a reference not submitted in accordance with an ALJ’s ground rule; and (5) the similarities and differences between U.S. Pat. No. 6,725,321 and the Sinclair PCT. Written submissions are required by September 3, 2009 and reply submissions are required by September 12, 2009. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

ALJ Roberts granted Complainant Phillips Lumileds Lighting Company, LLC’s motion to withdraw its complaint and terminate the investigation in its entirety in Inv. No. 337-TA-556, In the Matter of Certain High-Brightness Light-Emitting Diodes and Products Containing Same. Commission Rule 210.21(a)(1) permits a motion for an order terminating an investigation provided the motion contain a statement disclosing any agreements between the parties concerning the subject matter of the investigation or stating that no such agreement exists. Phillips’ motion to terminate the investigation states that no such agreement exists in this case. On May 24, 2009 the Federal Circuit vacated the Commissions limited exclusion order and remanded this case to allow respondent to challenge the validity of Phillips’ asserted patent. The asserted patent, however, will expire on December 18, 2009 and Phillips would not be able to complete the entire remand proceeding prior to the patent’s expiration. ALJ Roberts, finding no extraordinary circumstances preventing the termination of the remanded investigation and finding that such a termination to be in the public interest, granted Phillips’ motion. (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On August 7, 2009, ALJ Charneski issued a Notice of an Initial Determination in Inv. No. 337-TA-641, In the Matter of Certain Variable Speed Wind Turbines and Components Thereof. (PDF) The Initial Determination included the following conclusions of law, among others:

• the Commission has personal and subject-matter jurisdiction
• the importation requirement has been met
• a violation of section 337 has occurred with respect to two of the three patents-at-issue

• 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

ALJ Gildea issued an ID/RD on violation on July 24, 2009, in Inv. No. 337-TA-636, In the Matter of Certain Laser Imageable Lithographic Printing Plates. The public version of the ID/RD to follow.

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On July 24, 2009, ALJ Essex issued an Initial Determination Staying Investigation No. 337-TA-677 pending the completion of a Federal Circuit Appeal. ALJ Essex issued the stay pursuant to his authority under Commission Rule 210.15(a)(1) and considered the five factors set forth in Certain Semiconductor Chips with Minimized Chip Package Size and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-605, Comm’n Op. at 3, 2008 ITC LEXIS 888 at *4 (May 27, 2008). 

In its Notice of institution, the Commission acknowledged that the asserted patent was involved in reexam proceedings at the USPTO and was the subject of a Federal Circuit Appeal. In the Notice the Commission affirmatively stated that it was not making a determination whether a stay was warranted at that time and further stated that the presiding ALJ may want to make that determination at the outset of the investigation. Respondent Desire2Learn Inc. (D2L) filed for the stay on June 12, 2009, and Complainant Blackboard, Inc. opposed the motion.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On July 23, 2009, ALJ Bullock issued an ID extending the target date to February 2, 2010, (73.5 months) and setting a new procedural schedule in Inv. No. 337-TA-501, In the Matter of Certain Encapsulated Integrated Circuit Devices and Products Containing the Same. This investigation was remanded by the Commission on July 1, 2009.  (PDF)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

On July 20, 2009, ALJ Bullock issued the public version of his June 29, 2009, Initial Determination on Violation of Section 337 and Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond in Inv. No. 337-TA-621, In the Matter of Certain Probe Card Assemblies, Components Thereof and Certain Tested DRAM and NAND Flash Memory Devices and Products Containing Same. ALJ Bullock concluded that respondents’ accused products did not infringe the asserted claims of the patents-at-issue and that no domestic industry existed with respect to some of the asserted claims. ALJ Bullock also concluded that one asserted claim was invalid as anticipated under 35 U.S.C. §102.  (PDF-1) (PDF-2)

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link