Can PTAB Decision Not to Institute IPR Tank Invalidity Defense In ITC?

Can PTAB Decision Not to Institute IPR Tank Invalidity Defense In ITC?

Judge McNamara determined to reopen the record after the hearing and take judicial notice of two PTAB decisions denying institution of IPR challenges of the asserted patents in Certain Composite Aerogel Insulation Materials and Methods for Manufacturing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1003. The ALJ’s decision raises interesting issues with respect to the effect of PTAB decisions on Section 337 investigations.

Update: Commission Reverses ALJ Finding Of No Induced Infringement After Oral Argument

Update: Commission Reverses ALJ Finding Of No Induced Infringement After Oral Argument

Following up on our November 22, 2016, post, the Commission issued a Notice of its Final Decision in Certain Lithium Metal Oxide Cathode Materials, Lithium-Ion Batteries For Power Tool Products Containing Same, And Power Tool Products With Lithium-Ion Batteries Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-951. As previously discussed, the oral argument in front of the Commission in this investigation was the first in nearly a decade.

ITC Provides Procedure for Rare Oral Argument

ITC Provides Procedure for Rare Oral Argument

As noted in our May 16, 2016, post, the ITC will be conducting a live Section 337 hearing before the Commission for the first time in nearly a decade. In a notice issued on October 11, 2016, the Commission indicated that the November 17, 2016, hearing will be limited to the issues of laches, contributory infringement, and the public interest. The Commission also provided details regarding the format of the hearing process.