This morning, at the U.S. International Trade Commission, the hearing commenced in In the Matter of Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-800) before presiding Administrative Law Judge David. P. Shaw. This case involves the ITC’s investigation into allegations brought by InterDigital that respondents Huawei, Nokia, and ZTE
Target dates set for Samsung-Ericsson, InterDigital ITC Section 337 SEP investigations
The statute that governs the U.S. International Trade Commission’s jurisdiction over patent infringement complaints requires the ITC to resolve its investigations into such complaints “at the earliest practicable time” Typically, ITC investigations will take anywhere from 12-18 months (depending on complexity, number of patents, etc.) from the institution of the investigation until the “target date,”
A rundown of pending SEP-related Section 337 investigations at the U.S. International Trade Commission
The United States International Trade Commission (ITC) is a quasi-judicial agency with broad investigative powers relating to trade practices. These powers include the ability to investigate unfair trade practices relating to the importation of products that infringe valid U.S. patents — so-called “Section 337 actions” (Section 337 actions can encompass other conduct, but are commonly used to target patent infringement). But because the ITC may only issue injunctive relief (via exclusion orders and cease & desist orders), and cannot award monetary damages, the assertion of standard-essential patents in Section 337 actions has become a subject of great debate. Within about a month, the Commission will issue a Final Determination in Investigation No. 337-TA-794 (involving Samsung and Apple) that may address the propriety of asserting FRAND-pledged SEPs in Section 337 actions. In the meantime, however, there are several ongoing ITC investigations where standard-essential patents are being asserted. Below is a brief summary of where each of these cases currently stand:
Continue Reading A rundown of pending SEP-related Section 337 investigations at the U.S. International Trade Commission
RANDomness
- The Federal Circuit denied Apple’s petition for an en banc rehearing of its prior denial of a preliminary injunction against Samsung based on Apple’s failure to demonstrate a “causal nexus” between infringement and irreparable harm. However, Apple still has an appeal pending of a denial of a permanent injunction against Samsung. (Bloomberg)
- Yesterday
RANDomness
- The global patent battle between Apple and Samsung continues, both on the SEP and non-SEP front. The U.S. International Trade Commission recently issued a notice that it will review an Administrative Law Judge’s prior finding that Samsung infringed several non-SEP Apple patents, and also remanded part of the case back to the ALJ. (More
Acacia Research subsidiary Adaptix files new ITC complaint accusing Ericsson of infringing 4G LTE-essential patent
Assertion of standard-essential patents are all the rage at the ITC these days, with an upcoming trial on InterDigital’s claims (Inv. No. 337-TA-800), another recent complaint filed by InterDigital, dueling Ericsson-Samsung complaints, and the highly anticipated Final Determination in ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-794 involving Apple and Samsung due in March. And today, a company named Adaptix — a subsidiary of noted non-practicing entity Acacia Research — threw its hat into the ring, firing off a Section 337 complaint accusing Ericsson’s 4G LTE base stations of infringing U.S. Pat. No. 6,870,808, titled “Channel Allocation in Broadband Orthoganol Frequency-Division Multiple-Access/Space-Division Multiple-Access Networks.” But this might not be your typical standard-essential patent case — it has a couple of twists.
Continue Reading Acacia Research subsidiary Adaptix files new ITC complaint accusing Ericsson of infringing 4G LTE-essential patent
InterDigital, Nokia, others dispute public interest implications of 3G/4G patent assertions
Earlier this month, InterDigital Communications filed a Section 337 complaint with the ITC, alleging that Samsung, Nokia, ZTE, and Huawei infringed several of InterDigital’s 3G and 4G-essential patents. As we noted in our earlier post on the matter, InterDigital included a statement regarding the public interest along with its complaint, attempting to preemptively assuage any public interest concerns the Commission may have due to the inclusion of standard-essential patents in the complaint. Over the past two weeks, though, the proposed respondents have each filed their own public interest statements with the ITC, asserting a number of reasons why the public interest might be adversely affected by the institution of an investigation based on InterDigital’s complaint.
Continue Reading InterDigital, Nokia, others dispute public interest implications of 3G/4G patent assertions
Decision delayed in Samsung-Apple ITC case until March 7
Until today, the U.S International Trade Commission had set a deadline of February 6, 2013 to issue its Final Determination in In the Matter of Certain Electronic Devices, Including Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, and Tablet Computers (Inv. No. 337-TA-794). In this highly-anticipated decision, the ITC is likely to address various issues relating to the assertion of standard-essential patents in Section 337 investigations before the Commission (for more information, see our previous post on the case). However, today the ITC issued a Notice of Commission Determination to Extend the Target Date for Completion of the Investigation, giving notice that it is extending the target date for issuance of its Final Determination until March 7, 2013.
Continue Reading Decision delayed in Samsung-Apple ITC case until March 7
Federal Circuit affirms broad ITC jurisdiction over Section 337 actions brought by NPEs (InterDigital v. ITC)
Today the Federal Circuit issued a per curiam order (with Judge Newman dissenting) denying a combined petition for a panel rehearing and a rehearing en banc in InterDigital Communications v. International Trade Commission (No. 2010-1093) (en banc). However, along with the order, the panel also issued a new opinion to fully address arguments made by intervenor Nokia (the respondent in the underlying ITC case, Inv. No. 337-TA-613). In the opinion (written by Judge Bryson), the Court reiterates its prior conclusion (InterDigital Commc’ns v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 690 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2012)) that non-practicing entities (NPEs) may satisfy the ITC’s domestic industry requirement through substantial investment in domestic licensing activities, without any need to prove that any licensed products are actually produced domestically.
Continue Reading Federal Circuit affirms broad ITC jurisdiction over Section 337 actions brought by NPEs (InterDigital v. ITC)
Motorola drops remaining SEPs from Microsoft Xbox ITC action
In a not-so-surprising development in light of the FTC-Google/Motorola settlement announced last week, Google subsidiary Motorola Mobility asked the ITC yesterday to drop its two remaining standard-essential patents from its Xbox infringement dispute with Microsoft (Inv. No. 337-TA-752). The two patents dropped from the case — U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,980,596 and 7,162,094 — are alleged by Motorola to be essential to the ITU-T H.264 video coding standard. Given that the only relief that the ITC may grant is of an injunctive nature (whether an exclusion order or a cease & desist order), Motorola’s action appears to be consistent with the principles set forth in the FTC settlement, in which Google and Motorola agreed to forego seeking injunctive relief for SEPs except in certain extraordinary circumstances.
Continue Reading Motorola drops remaining SEPs from Microsoft Xbox ITC action