In a recent order, ALJ Bullock indicated that it is unsettled whether evidence related to unreleased products can be used to establish that a domestic industry exists.
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.
In a recent order, the ITC reiterated that, unlike in federal courts, only one complainant needs to demonstrate standing at the ITC.
In a recent Initial Determination (“ID”), Chief Administrative Law Judge Bullock held that the “greater weight of authority” supports the conclusion that investments in discontinued products can form the basis for an existing domestic industry. Certain Memory Modules and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1023, Initial Determination (Nov. 14, 2017).
In a recent Order setting the procedural schedule for a 100-Day Pilot Program proceeding, Judge Lord provided a helpful outline for proofs necessary to establish the economic prong of domestic industry. Certain Solid State Storage drives, Stacked Electronics Components, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1097, Order No. 3.
ALJ Rules that Products Manufactured After the Date of Complaint Not Relevant to Domestic Industry Analysis
In a recent Order, Judge Lord denied Complainant Macronix’s motion for summary determination that the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement has been met. Certain Non-Volatile Memory Devices and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1046, Order No. 26. Although the order is heavily redacted, Judge Lord’s analysis appears to focus on the fact that the products relied upon to meet the domestic industry requirement were not manufactured until after the date the complaint was filed.