5 Key Takeaways | ITC Litigation and Enforcement Conference
For years, the U.S. International Trade Commission maintained that the potent remedies available under Section 337 were unavailable to intellectual property owners considered to be nothing more than “mere importers.” That...more
A domestic industry may never be too small so long as the commercial product is 100% American-made according to the latest Federal Circuit opinion. In Wuhan Healthgen Biotech v. ITC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the...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
In a recent opinion, the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) held that economic investments and activities related to patented pre-commercial and non-commercial articles can meet Section 337’s domestic industry...more
Administrative Law Judge Lord held the economic prong can be satisfied even when the percentage of complainant’s domestic investments in the patented products is small in relation to its overall domestic investments. In re...more
In a recent decision, the Commission overruled the ALJ to clarify, and ultimately expand, the universe of investments that complainants can use to meet the economic prong of the domestic industry (“DI”) requirement. Certain...more
In a recent Initial Determination (“ID”), Chief Administrative Law Judge Bullock held that the “greater weight of authority” supports the conclusion that investments in discontinued products can form the basis for an existing...more
ALJ Pender’s initial determination in Certain Mobile Device Holders and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1028 (Sept. 12, 2017), finding a violation of Section 337, provides important guidance on what investments count...more