Default Determination Highlights The Importance Of Alleging Every Element

Default Determination Highlights The Importance Of Alleging Every Element

In Certain Carbon Spine Board Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-1008, the ITC investigated Complainant Laerdal’s allegations of section 337 violations based on the infringement of certain U.S. patents, copyrights, trade dresses and trademarks.  The ITC determined to issue a limited exclusion order to some, but not all of the respondents, and a cease and desist order to one respondent.  But the Commission also found that certain of Laerdal’s allegations relating to trade dress and copyright infringement were not adequately plead to support a violation of Section 337 which reduced the scope of the granted remedy.

Complainant Cannot Move For Summary Determination Against Its Own Interests

Complainant Cannot Move For Summary Determination Against Its Own Interests

Judge Pender issued Order No. 19 in Certain Access Control Systems and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1016, denying Complainant The Chamberlain Group’s (“CGI”) motion for summary determination that the accused products do not infringe one of the asserted patents under the ALJ’s claim construction order. CGI moved for summary determination in an attempt to obtain interlocutory Commission review of the claim construction order, but the ALJ denied the motion explaining that summary determination cannot be entered against the moving party’s interest.

ALJs Split on Inequitable Conduct Pleading

ALJs Split on Inequitable Conduct Pleading

ALJ Lord issued an Order Granting a Motion to Strike Affirmative Defense of unclean hands and inequitable conduct. Certain Krill Oil Products and Krill Meat for Production of Krill Oil Products, Order No. 8 (Feb. 7, 2017). Applying a heightened pleading standard for an inequitable conduct defense, ALJ Lord held that this affirmative defense did not satisfy the requirements of particularity articulated by the Federal Circuit in Exergen.