U.S. International Trade Commission
Returning to Washington in May, ACI’s 16th Annual Practitioners’ Think Tank on ITC Litigation & Enforcement is your opportunity to learn from and network with key members of the ITC Bench, senior ITC Attorneys and leading...more
The Commission may grant a cease and desist order (“CDO”) when it finds a violation of Section 337. See 19 U.S.C. 1337(f)(1). Historically the Commission would grant a CDO upon a showing that a respondent had a “commercially...more
We are pleased to announce that our team’s fourth-annual international trade law year-in-review report was published just before the New Year. In it, we take a detailed look at how 2022 played out and explore how 2023 might...more
September saw six complainants file seven new Section 337 complaints with the Commission. This month’s ITC Wrap-Up focuses on a recent trend among several Commissioners that could increase the number of cease and desist...more
While it is well understood that the ITC can issue an exclusion order to stop the importation of articles found to infringe a patent, it is not as well known that such orders can also prevent certain domestic activities. A...more
When people think of actions filed with the International Trade Commission (ITC) under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, they likely think of patent infringement cases. And the majority of ITC cases do involve patents,...more
Patent Judgments and Awards - On July 14, 2017, the International Trade Commission determined that financial services company Diebold Nixdorf, Inc. (“Diebold”) violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act by importing ATMs and...more
We previously wrote about the ITC Commissioners’ split on the standard for the issuance of cease and desist orders. In recent opinions, Commissioners Schmidtlein and Kieff have written separately to express their view that...more
En Banc Federal Circuit Upholds The Commission’s Position In Suprema – On August 10, 2015, in an en banc Opinion written by Circuit Judge Reyna, the Federal Circuit upheld the Commission’s position in Suprema, Inc. v....more