ALJ Emphasizes Importance of Procedural Schedule

ALJ Emphasizes Importance of Procedural Schedule

In a recent order, Administrative Law Judge Bullock granted Respondents Fujifilm Holdings Corporation, Fujifilm Corporation, Fujifilm Holdings America Corporation, and Fujifilm Recording Media U.S.A., Inc. (collectively, “Fujifilm”) motion to strike Complainants Sony Corporation, Sony Storage Media Solutions, Sony Storage Media Manufacturing Corporation, Sony DADC US Inc., and Sony Latin America Inc. (collectively, “Sony”) amended and supplemental identification of accused products and to preclude Sony from adding such products to the investigation.  Certain Magnetic Tape Cartridges and Components Thereof, Inv. 337-TA-1058, Order 14.

read more
Inducement After Importation Actionable Under Section 337

Inducement After Importation Actionable Under Section 337

Complainants often must rely on indirect infringement to prove a violation of Section 337.  Indirect infringement may be in the form of induced or contributory infringement.  In a recent opinion, the Commission clarified issues relating to post-importation inducement and distinctions between induced and contributory infringement.  Certain Digital Video Receivers And Hardware And Software Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1001, Commission Opinion (December 6, 2017). 

read more
ALJ Denies Inequitable Conduct “Fishing Expedition”

ALJ Denies Inequitable Conduct “Fishing Expedition”

In a recent order, Administrative Law Judge Lord denied Respondents CSL Behring LLC, CSL Behring GMBH, and CSL Behring Recombinant Facility AG (“CSL Behring”) motion to compel discovery from Complainants Bioverativ Inc., Bioverativ Therapeutics Inc., and Bioverativ U.S. LLC (“Bioverativ”) related to CSL Behring’s affirmative defense of inequitable conduct.  Certain Recombinant Factor IX Products, Inv. No. 337-TA-1066, Order No. 11.

read more
When Is It Too Late to Amend an Answer to an ITC Complaint?

When Is It Too Late to Amend an Answer to an ITC Complaint?

We recently posted about when a complainant is permitted to amend its complaint and the good cause that must be shown.  Similar issues arise where a respondent wants to amend an answer without showing good cause.  An order issued last week by Administrative Law Judge Lord provides insight as to respondent’s burden in seeking leave to amend its answer to the complaint.  Certain Industrial Automation Systems and Components Thereof Including Control Systems, Controllers, Visualization Hardware, Motion Control Systems, Networking Equipment, Safety Devices, and Power Supplies, Inv. No. 337-TA-1074, Order 10 (December 15, 2017).

read more

Follow us on Twitter

Archives