Powerful remedies, particularly General Exclusion Orders, are often cited as a reason why patent owners should consider asserting their patents at the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 instead of, or in addition to, in U.S. District Court. A recent Federal Circuit decision reaffirms another advantage of … Continue Reading
As I wrote last May (here), the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has begun a pilot program that will allow Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) to issue interim Initial Determinations (IDs) on fewer than all issues in a Section 337 investigation. On January 25, 2022, ALJ Cheney became the first ALJ to utilize the interim ID … Continue Reading
In January 2021, I noted that the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) saw a flurry of new complaints filed in the second half of 2020, particularly in November and December. See here. A similar pattern emerged at the end of 2021, culminating with eight Section 337 complaints filed between December 15 – 31, 2021.… Continue Reading
We previously wrote that a co-pending ITC Section 337 investigation virtually guarantees that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) will exercise its discretionary power to deny institution under 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a) when considering a petition for inter partes review (IPR) or post-grant review (PGR). See ITC Section 337: Kiss of Death … Continue Reading
When considering a petition for post-grant review (PGR) or inter partes review (IPR), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has discretion to deny institution under 35 U.S.C. §§ 314(a) and 324(a). The PTAB’s Consolidated Trial Practice Guide provides that, when exercising its discretion, the Board may consider “events in other proceedings related to the … Continue Reading
One advantage of filing a patent infringement complaint at the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) instead of in U.S. District Court is that a Complainant does not need to use the Hague Service Convention process or other treaty to serve the complaint on foreign entities. As explained here, recent ITC decisions expand the methods through … Continue Reading
Earlier today, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) announced a pilot program that will allow Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) to issue interim Initial Determinations (IDs) on fewer than all issues in Section 337 investigations. The announcement can be found here. The pilot program is part of the ITC’s ongoing efforts to expeditiously resolve Section 337 … Continue Reading
Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (“Section 337”), gives the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) broad powers to investigate and address unfair acts and unfair competition in the importation of articles into the United States. Most Section 337 investigations address issues of infringement of statutory intellectual property such as … Continue Reading
The U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) recently terminated CERTAIN MOTORIZED SELF-BALANCING VEHICLES, Investigation No. 337-TA-1000, brought by Razor USA LLC against alleged infringers of a patent related to electric hoverboards, denying Razor any relief. In doing so, the ITC confirmed that an original patent is surrendered when a Reissue Patent issues, even if a pending … Continue Reading
One of the most common responses to being sued for patent infringement is a petition to the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) challenging the validity of the patent. To avoid duplication of effort, either the Board or the tribunal can defer to the other. According to a recent decision, the U.S. International Trade … Continue Reading
Monday’s announcement of the institution of a section 337 investigation of Certain Batteries and Products Containing the Same, 337-TA-1244, is notable as the first time in recent memory that a battery company has sued in the US International Trade Commission (ITC) for design patent infringement. Battery patents typically cover new and useful features of a … Continue Reading
After a slow but steady start to 2020, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) saw a flurry of new complaints filed in the second half of the year. Eight new complaints were filed in December, resulting in a total of 57 complaints filed in 2020. As discussed in previous posts (e.g. here and here), the … Continue Reading
After a steady, but typical number of Section 337 complaints filed in the first half of 2020, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) saw a dramatic increase in July. Twelve new complaints were filed, representing the second largest number of complaints ever filed in one month. Despite issues surrounding the COVID-19 crisis and uncertain economic … Continue Reading
In Mayborn Group, Ltd. v. ITC, 19-2077 (July 16, 2020), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed an U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) decision denying a petition for rescission of a General Exclusion Order (GEO) based on new invalidity arguments presented by a party not involved in the underlying investigation. This decision … Continue Reading
On July 20, 2020, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) announced that it has chosen WebEx Meeting as its secure FedRAMP-certified video teleconferencing solution for Section 337 hearings and conferences involving Confidential Business Information (CBI). The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) presiding over each investigation has responsibility for determining appropriate hearing procedures using WebEx Meeting, and … Continue Reading
The U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) is an important venue for Intellectual Property owners seeking to enforce their rights against imported infringing products under 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (“Section 337”). IP owners often focus on obtaining Limited Exclusion Orders (or in certain circumstances, General Exclusion Orders) from the ITC. IP owners should not, however, overlook … Continue Reading
Like many other Federal Agencies and U.S. District Courts, the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) has been open for business during the COVID-19 crisis, but on a limited basis. On June 22, 2020, the ITC announced plans for re-opening on a broader basis. As the District of Columbia and the surrounding areas begin a phased … Continue Reading
Like many other Federal Agencies and U.S. District Courts, the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) is open for business during the COVID-19 crisis, but on a limited basis. Modifications to the ITC’s business began on March 17, 2020, and the ITC’s COVID-19 Action Plan will remain in place through at least July 10, 2020. Part … Continue Reading
Like many other Federal Agencies and U.S. District Courts, the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) is open for business during the COVID-19 crisis, but on a limited basis. Modifications to the ITC’s business began on March 17, 2020. On May 14, 2020, the ITC’s COVID-19 Action Plan was extended through July 10, 2020. Although limited … Continue Reading
Although investigations under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 have focused on intellectual property rights involving patents, unregistered trademarks or trade secret claims, the language of Section 337 is much broader. The provision applies to any “unfair methods of competition and unfair acts in the importation of articles.” That language is similar to … Continue Reading
The United States International Trade Commission (ITC) can provide a powerful alternative forum for enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, including U.S. patents.[1] But there are limitations on the actions that can be brought at the ITC. For example, to bring an action for patent infringement at the ITC, a patent owner must demonstrate, inter alia, … Continue Reading
In yet another twist in the saga of Certain Beverage Brewing Capsules, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-929, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has issued an order temporarily rescinding the extant remedial orders in that investigation pending appeal of a district court judgment finding the claims of the patent-in-suit invalid. The … Continue Reading
Just one month after the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issued an important decision in Certain Solid State Storage Drives, Stacked Electronics Components, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1097 holding that labor, capital, and employment investments in non-manufacturing activities, such as engineering and research and development, can satisfy Section 337’s domestic industry requirement (see … Continue Reading
Just a few days after denying a motion to terminate in Certain Color Intraoral Scanners and Related Hardware and Software, Inv. No. 337-TA-1091, Order No. 23 (May 18, 2018) that was based on a forum selection clause in a prior agreement between private parties (see our prior post), Administrative Law Judge Cheney granted a motion to … Continue Reading
