Ericsson finally sees resolution of its standard essential patent (“SEP”) campaign against Lenovo and Motorola, filed globally in multiple jurisdictions, importantly at the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”). In a...more
Given the recent unanimous decision by a UK appellate court that Ericsson’s injunction efforts based on standard-essential patents (“SEPs”) were, essentially by their very nature, “hold-up” and “coercion” that violated...more
For decades, the ITC’s jurisdictional requirement – known as the domestic industry requirement – effectively shut out innovators from availing themselves of the powerful remedies of the forum, in the form of an exclusion...more
3/7/2025
/ Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Appeals ,
Appellate Courts ,
Design Patent ,
En Banc Review ,
Enforcement Actions ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Section 337
In the wake of the Supreme Court’s elimination of “Chevron deference” in the Loper decision, many commentators have suggested that the ITC’s authority over unfair imports under Section 337 might be curtailed. See Loper Bright...more
Late last month, the Supreme Court issued two opinions which seemingly shook up the field of administrative law. As explained in this article, however, while both decisions bear significantly on certain administrative...more
7/18/2024
/ Appeals ,
Cease and Desist Orders ,
Chevron Deference ,
En Banc Review ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 ,
Jury Trial ,
Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo ,
SCOTUS ,
SEC v Jarkesy ,
Securities Act of 1933 ,
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ,
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Successful ITC trade secret complainants follow these rules before filing the complaint in Section 337 investigations:
Identify and prepare “packages” for each of the trade secrets you plan to assert before you file the...more
To be a successful trade secret litigant at the ITC, it is critical to be mindful of unique substantive and procedural aspects of Section 337 litigation. These differences offer both promise and peril for complainants. ...more
Opponents of the use of Section 337 by Standard Essential Patent (SEP) holders claim that the threat of ITC exclusion orders lends itself to patent hold-up. These opponents, however, can point to no instance in which an ITC...more
The key to success as a Complainant in the ITC is careful preparation, long before the complaint is filed. Nowhere is this more important than in preparing and planning a Complainant’s domestic industry case. The so-called...more
The U.S. International Trade Commission (the “ITC”), in an important new opinion, recently extended a series of final determinations that complainants had satisfied the “economic prong” of Section 337’s domestic injury...more
In a recent IAM article, Levelling the playing field in ITC patent cases by identifying redesigns to a set deadline, we commented on best practices for ITC complainants to protect their interests against the nascent uptick of...more
Amid the continuing threat to U.S. intellectual property rights posed by foreign actors, the International Trade Commission (ITC) is poised to become the latest federal agency to bolster protections for U.S. IP owners. The...more
Last Thursday, September 10, 2020, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division (“DOJ”) issued an updated Business Review Letter (“2020 Letter”) to the Institute of Electrical Electronics Engineers, Incorporated...more
Some respondents at the ITC have taken advantage of using infringement contentions as a procedural tool to deny patent owners from getting their day in court. In some investigations, respondents have gone so far as to delay...more
When licensing discussions with an intransigent implementer break down, SEP owners face a difficult question: what remedies are available (injunctive relief or damages) in each U.S. court (International Trade Commission and...more
12/24/2019
/ Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Department of Justice (DOJ) ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
FRAND ,
Injunctive Relief ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Joint Policy Statements ,
NIST ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Section 337 ,
Standard Essential Patents ,
USPTO ,
USTR
In a recent decision clarifying the legal standards of the International Trade Commission’s domestic industry requirement, the Commission has upheld, with modified reasoning, Chief Administrative Law Judge Bullock’s initial...more
11/11/2019
/ Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Domestic Industry Requirement ,
Initial Determination (ID) ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Multinationals ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Section 337 ,
Threshold Requirements
The adoption of multiple, standardized technologies looms on the horizon. This presents the challenge of balancing innovator’s intellectual property rights with implementer’s desire for fair access to technology. As more...more
11/5/2019
/ China ,
FRAND ,
Germany ,
India ,
Injunctive Relief ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
IP License ,
Netherlands ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Standard Essential Patents ,
UK Supreme Court
Litigation involving standard-essential patents (“SEPs”) is on the rise. The now longstanding and disturbing impact of efficient infringement by recalcitrant implementers is the predominant cause of the increase. As many...more
Recently, Chief Administrative Law Judge (“CALJ”) Bullock of the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”), in Certain Carburetors and Products Containing Such Carburetors, Inv. No. 337-TA-1123, Order No. 77, suggested that...more
The August 13, 2019 decision from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in WAG Acquisition, LLC v. Multi Media LLC, Civil Action No. 2-14-cv-02340, deals a blow to a common attack on litigation...more
On March 26, 2019, the International Trade Commission issued its Final Determination in Certain Mobile Electronic Devices and Radio Frequency and Process Components Thereof, 337-TA-1065. The 1065 Investigation is one of...more
As we mentioned in December, the International Trade Commission issued a notice to review the Final Initial Determination and Recommended Determination issued by Administrative Law Judge Pender in Certain Mobile Electronic...more
3/14/2019
/ Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Apple ,
Competition ,
Customs and Border Protection ,
Exclusion Orders ,
Initial Determination (ID) ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Manufacturers ,
Monopolization ,
Patent Infringement ,
Public Interest ,
Qualcomm ,
Semiconductors
There is a common misconception the domestic industry economic prong requirement is insurmountable and an unknowable factor in a patent infringement action at the International Trade Commission (“ITC” or “Commission”),...more
As anticipated, on December 12, 2018, the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) issued a notice to review the Final Initial Determination and Recommended Determination (“FID”) issued by Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”)...more
12/17/2018
/ Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Apple ,
Competition ,
Exclusion Orders ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Imports ,
Infringement ,
Initial Determination (ID) ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Manufacturers ,
Monopolization ,
Patent Infringement ,
Qualcomm ,
Semiconductors
A recent decision by the International Trade Commission (“ITC” or the “Commission”) held that pre-commercial or non-commercial items qualify as “articles” for purposes of section 337 investigations. The decision opens up the...more