The U.S. International Trade Commission has instituted a Section 337 investigation into gray market Monster Energy drinks imported by 13 respondents, alleging trademark infringement through the sale of products manufactured exclusively for foreign markets.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s final determination that Tineco’s redesigned wet-dry surface cleaning devices do not infringe Bissell’s patents, while upholding infringement findings against the original products.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s finding that Tineco’s redesigned wet-dry vacuum cleaners do not infringe BISSELL’s patents, while also establishing that ITC experts may rely on source code produced in discovery but never formally admitted as a hearing exhibit under FRE 703.
The ITC issued a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders against Chinese chipmaker Innoscience, finding its GaN semiconductor devices infringe Infineon’s U.S. Patent No. 9,899,481 covering lateral transistor source-sensing designs.
The U.S. International Trade Commission issues exclusion and cease-and-desist orders against Innoscience for infringing Infineon’s gallium nitride power semiconductor patent, blocking imports of the Chinese chipmaker’s GaN products into the United States.
The ITC issued a final determination in a GaN semiconductor patent case, finding that Innoscience’s current products do not infringe Infineon’s patents while issuing a limited exclusion order covering only discontinued legacy devices.
The U.S. International Trade Commission ordered import and sales bans on Innoscience’s gallium nitride semiconductor devices after finding infringement of Infineon’s patent covering advanced transistor packaging technology used in AI data centers and electric vehicles.
The ITC’s Full Commission affirmed that Innoscience infringed Infineon’s GaN transistor patent but found that Innoscience’s current redesigned products do not infringe, leaving the import ban with no practical effect on ongoing U.S. sales.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s finding that Keysight Technologies did not violate Section 337 by importing cybersecurity products, holding that Centripetal failed to prove its own products practiced the asserted patents and waived multiple infringement arguments on appeal.
Federal Circuit affirms ITC finding of no Section 337 violation in Centripetal Networks’ cybersecurity patent dispute against Keysight Technologies, citing failure to satisfy the domestic industry technical prong.
The U.S. International Trade Commission declined to review an administrative law judge’s finding that Apple’s redesigned Apple Watch blood oxygen feature does not infringe Masimo’s patents, effectively terminating the enforcement proceeding and closing the long-running import ban saga.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s finding that imported marine air conditioning systems did not violate Section 337, holding that the asserted patent claims were anticipated by prior art and the accused products did not infringe remaining claims.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s finding that Universal Electronics satisfied the domestic industry requirement under Section 337 based on its investments in QuickSet technology — a patented component integrated into televisions — even though those investments did not cover the entire television product.
The Federal Circuit affirmed an ITC exclusion order against FS.com’s imported fiber optic equipment, holding that Corning’s high-density fiber optic patents were enabled and that the asserted claims were infringed.
The Federal Circuit held that a patent complainant at the ITC must establish a specific domestic industry article covered by a patent claim with direct evidence — general expert testimony about product operation is insufficient to satisfy the technical prong.
The Federal Circuit vacated an ITC infringement determination because the patent owner’s expert lacked the specific experience required to qualify as a person of ordinary skill in the art — broad engineering expertise in related fields was not enough.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s exclusion order against Comcast set-top boxes, holding that the ITC’s authority under Section 337 extends to articles that infringe after importation when the importer induces customer infringement domestically.
The Federal Circuit held that a trademark registration creates a presumption of secondary meaning only as of the date of registration — not retroactively — requiring Converse to independently prove its Chuck Taylor trade dress had acquired distinctiveness before each infringer’s first infringing use.
The Federal Circuit held that the ITC’s Section 337 jurisdiction covers only physical ‘articles’ and does not extend to electronic transmissions of digital data — blocking the ITC from issuing exclusion orders against competitors that infringe by transmitting digital files over the internet rather than importing physical goods.
An en banc Federal Circuit held 6-4 that the ITC has jurisdiction to issue exclusion orders for imported products that become ‘articles that infringe’ through induced infringement completed after importation — resolving a key question about the ITC’s reach over method patent claims and significantly expanding the ITC’s role in policing patent infringement.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s exclusion order against Huawei and ZTE for infringing InterDigital’s standard-essential wireless patents, while clarifying important questions about the ITC’s authority to issue exclusion orders involving FRAND-committed patents — decisions that became focal points for global SEP licensing and ITC reform debates.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that a patent holder whose domestic industry consists solely of licensing activities — with no domestic manufacturing — can satisfy Section 337’s domestic industry requirement at the ITC, opening the door wider for non-practicing entities to use exclusion orders as a patent enforcement tool.
The Federal Circuit affirmed an ITC exclusion order barring importation of GPS chip products that infringed Broadcom’s GPS patents, holding that the claimed methods were patent-eligible under the machine-or-transformation test and rejecting a divided-infringement defense based on user interaction.
The Federal Circuit held that the ITC’s limited exclusion order authority under Section 337 does not extend to downstream products of non-parties to the investigation — rejecting the ITC’s longstanding practice of excluding finished goods containing infringing components made by respondents, and limiting such broad relief to general exclusion orders.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s non-infringement finding in a section 337 flooring patent dispute, holding that an applicant’s reliance on ‘play’ between panels to distinguish prior art during prosecution constituted a clear disclaimer that limited claim scope to systems incorporating play.
The Federal Circuit held that refurbishing single-use cameras originally sold in the United States is permissible repair, not patent infringement, because patent rights are exhausted by the first authorized U.S. sale.