The ITC recently concluded a general exclusion order was appropriate because it was nearly impossible to identify the source of infringing products.
The Federal Circuit held that the ITC was required to consider whether to rescind a civil penalty for infringing a consent order on a now-invalidated patent, but left open the possibility that the ITC could refuse to rescind the civil penalty.
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.