The ITC recently ruled that even if a respondent is estopped from raising certain invalidity challenges because it failed to raise them in a previously filed IPR, the Office of Unfair Imports Investigations Staff can raise those very same challenges during an ITC investigation.
The ITC recently clarified that 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(2) does not require that a domestic industry product be sold before a complaint is filed for a domestic industry to exist.
The ITC allows supplementation of a party’s Notice of Prior Art in some instances, but will deny the addition of new prior art references if the party does not explain why they did not obtain the added references earlier or how the added references pertain to the asserted patents.
The Federal Circuit recently reversed the ITC’s finding of a Section 337 violation based on the ITC’s reliance on unrebutted expert testimony.
In a recent decision, the Commission expanded the universe of investments that complainants can use to meet the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement.