Background
Infineon Technologies, one of the world’s leading semiconductor manufacturers, filed a complaint with the International Trade Commission in July 2024 alleging that Chinese chipmaker Innoscience was importing gallium nitride (GaN) power semiconductor devices that infringed four Infineon patents. GaN technology is increasingly critical for high-efficiency power systems used in electric vehicles, AI data centers, renewable energy systems, and industrial automation.
The investigation initially covered four patents, but by the time of the evidentiary hearing, only two remained: U.S. Patent No. 9,899,481 (covering lateral transistor source-sensing GaN design) and U.S. Patent No. 9,070,755 (covering electrode stack design). In December 2025, Administrative Law Judge issued a Final Initial Determination finding a Section 337 violation based on the ‘481 patent, while finding no violation as to the ‘755 patent. Both sides petitioned for Commission review.
Infineon holds approximately 450 GaN patent families — one of the broadest portfolios in the industry. The case is part of a broader wave of trade enforcement actions targeting Chinese semiconductor companies accused of using patented technology developed by established chipmakers.
The Commission’s Holding
The full Commission affirmed the ALJ’s finding that Innoscience violated Section 337 of the Tariff Act by importing semiconductor devices that infringe claims 1–4, 6, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 9,899,481. The Commission reviewed and upheld the ALJ’s claim construction of “lateral transistor devices,” the infringement analysis, the validity findings (rejecting Innoscience’s invalidity defenses), and Infineon’s satisfaction of the domestic industry requirement.
As to the ‘755 patent, the Commission declined to review the ALJ’s finding of no violation, leaving that determination in place. Infineon had petitioned for review of the non-infringement finding on the ‘755 patent, but the Commission found insufficient basis to disturb the ALJ’s analysis.
The Commission ordered a limited exclusion order barring importation of infringing Innoscience semiconductor devices, along with cease and desist orders against Innoscience entities based on their significant U.S. inventory and operations. A bond of 100% of entered value was set for the 60-day Presidential review period.
Key Takeaways
- The ITC’s exclusion order covers more than 80 Innoscience product SKUs across the INN650D, INN700D, and ISG product series — a broad ban that could significantly disrupt Innoscience’s U.S. business.
- U.S. Customs and Border Protection had previously cleared redesigned Innoscience chips in a separate ITC investigation (involving a different patent holder, Efficient Power Conversion). This ruling introduces a new, independent import ban that Innoscience must separately design around.
- The 60-day Presidential review period means the exclusion order could be modified or disapproved on public interest grounds, though Presidential vetoes of ITC orders are rare.
- The cease and desist orders prevent Innoscience from selling existing U.S. inventory of infringing products, not just blocking new imports.
Why It Matters
GaN semiconductors are a strategically important technology at the intersection of the U.S.–China technology competition. These chips enable smaller, more efficient power converters used in everything from laptop chargers to EV drivetrains and data center power supplies. The ITC’s decision to block Innoscience imports reinforces the trend of established Western chipmakers using trade enforcement tools to protect their patent portfolios against rapidly growing Chinese competitors.
For companies in the GaN supply chain — including EV manufacturers, power supply designers, and data center operators — this ruling may narrow the pool of available chip suppliers and could affect pricing for GaN power devices in the U.S. market. The case also signals that the ITC remains an effective venue for semiconductor patent enforcement, offering import bans that go beyond what district courts typically provide.