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.

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.

Respondents Sanctioned For Discovery Violation

Respondents Sanctioned For Discovery Violation

On September 28, 2017, in Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Products; Inv. No. 337-TA-1002, ALJ Lord issued the public version of her order requiring Respondents Wuhan Iron and Steel Group Corp., Wuhan Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., and WISCO America Co., Ltd. (“WISCO”) and Jiangsu Shagang Group and Jiangsu Shagang International Trade Co., Ltd. (“Shagang”) each pay about $35,000 to Complainant in attorney’s fees as a sanction for violating an order requiring the production of certain discovery.  The ALJ further held that an adverse inference would be entered against both parties.