U.S. International Trade Commission
Ten Section 337 Investigations were terminated in the first half of 2024. Of those ten investigations, two involved design patents. Although those investigations ended with the Commission issuing no remedial orders (including...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
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more
The Federal Circuit today affirmed a decision by the District Court denying defendant Thales DIS AIS Deutschland USA's motion for preliminary injunction to prevent patentee plaintiff Koninklijke Philips N.V. from obtaining an...more
Under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“Section 337”), the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC” or “Commission”) has the authority to issue exclusion orders barring the importation of articles that...more
In May 2020, we reported in an article published by Law360, “design patents outperform utility patents when it comes to injunctive relief.” The same is true when it comes to a rare form of injunctive relief—a general...more
This year, we will mark the 10-year anniversary of the first jury verdict in the landmark IP litigation between Apple and Samsung, which resulted in the jury awarding more than $1B to Apple. More than $500M of that award was...more
The International Trade Commission can more readily provide injunctive relief against an adjudged infringer than a district court, under appropriate conditions (i.e., with regard to an infringing product or a product made by...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed imposition of an exclusion order under 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930) by the Federal Trade Commission against 10X Genomyx (an intervenor in this appeal) over...more
Last month, the Federal Circuit affirmed an exclusion order imposed by the International Trade Commission against Bio-Rad for importing infringing microfluidic systems and components used for gene sequencing or related...more
Goodwin’s 337 Quarterly Insider remains the premiere publicly available source for keeping up to date on all meaningful decisions coming out of the Commission. Please find below Goodwin’s insights on the months of April, May,...more
272-1 Federal Circuit Holds a New Invalidity Challenge at the ITC is not a Change in Condition that Enables the ITC to review the Validity of a Patent or Rescind an Exclusion Order - The Federal Circuit (Court) recently...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a US International Trade Commission (ITC) decision denying a petition for rescission of a general exclusion order (GEO) prohibiting importation of products accused of...more
In a recently issued initial determination, the ITC granted summary determination on violation and recommended issuance of a general exclusion order (“GEO”) against respondents after finding that a limited exclusion order...more
MAYBORN GROUP, LTD., MAYBORN USA, INC. v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISISION - Before Lourie, Linn, and Wallach. Appeal from the U.S. International Trade Commission. Summary: An invalidity challenge, raised after the...more
A recent decision by the International Trade Commission (ITC) to temporarily rescind a seizure and forfeiture order after the Court of International Trade (CIT) granted summary judgment of non-infringement for certain...more
The COVID-19 pandemic surprisingly is not impacting the number of filings at the ITC in fiscal year (“FY”) 2020. Prior to the start of quarantine on March 16, 2020, fifteen (15) new complaints were filed at the ITC. On...more
On December 5, 2019, Judge David C. Godbey of the Northern District of Texas denied the defendant Diebold Nixdorf, Inc.’s (“Diebold”) motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), in Nautilus Hyosung Inc. v. Diebold, Inc. et al.,...more
In a recent Initial Determination (“ID”), ALJ McNamara indicated that the inclusion of a certification provision in the Limited Exclusion Order (“LEO”) was warranted to allow the respondent to import non-infringing redesigns....more
In a recent Enforcement Initial Determination, ALJ Shaw held that Sony had violated previously issued cease and desist orders (“CDOs”) and determined that the appropriate penalty was a fine of $210,134 – Sony’s net profit...more
In a recent Commission opinion, the ITC reviewed and affirmed ALJ Bullock’s Initial Determination (ID), and issued a general exclusion order (“GEO”). Certain Self-Anchoring Beverage Containers, Inv. 337-TA-1092, Comm’n Op....more
In a recent opinion, the ITC found that four defaulting respondents violated section 337 and that a general exclusion order (GEO) was the appropriate remedy for unlicensed products. Certain LED Lighting Devices and Components...more
In another example of why defaulting at the ITC can be a dangerous strategy, the ITC recently found all eight named respondents in default and concluded a general exclusion order (GEO) was the appropriate remedy. Since the...more
In her April 16, 2019 Public Interest Findings, Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) McNamara decisively stated that antitrust issues disguised as competitive conditions arguments are not a factor in the International Trade...more