Category Archives: Importation

§ 271(g) held not to be limited by single-entity requirement; label-related copyright claims remanded

Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC v. Willowood, LLC et al. Docket Nos. 2018-1614, -2044 REYNA, TARANTO, STOLL December 18, 2019 Brief Summary: DC dismissal of copyright claims relating to Syngenta’s label remanded as premature. DC erred by imposing single-entity requirement on … Continue reading

Posted in Copyright, Importation, Infringement, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

ITC claim construction, written description, and finding of infringement by imported E. coli strains affirmed by Federal Circuit

Ajinomoto Co. et al. v. Int. Trade Commission (ITC) et al. Docket No. 2018-1590, -1629 (ITC No. 337-TA-1005) DYK (C/D), MOORE, TARANTO August 6, 2019 Brief Summary: ITC claim construction, written description, and finding that certain E. coli strains imported … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Doctrine of equivalents, Importation, Infringement, International Trade Commission, Prosecution History Estoppel, Uncategorized, Written description | Leave a comment

Rivera et al. v. International Trade Commission and Solofill, LLC (Intervenor)

Docket No. 2016-1841 REYNA, LINN, CHEN May 23, 2017 Brief Summary: ITC decision of no § 337 violation because the asserted claims to a beverage brewer are invalid for lack of written description affirmed. Summary: Rivera appealed ITC holding that … Continue reading

Posted in Contributory Infringement, Importation, Inducement to Infringe, Infringement, International Trade Commission, Written description | Leave a comment

Suprema, Inc. et al. v. International Trade Commission et al.

Docket No. 2012-1170 En banc opinion (REYNA), DYK(d), O’MALLEY/PROST/LOURIE/DYK (d) August 10, 2015 Revised Sept. 14, 2015: affirmed ITC findings of no infringement of US 7,277,562, infringement of US 5,900,993, and that Appellants failed to prove invalidity of the ‘993 … Continue reading

Posted in Importation, International Trade Commission | Leave a comment

Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. et al.

Docket Nos. 2013-1462, -1656 LOURIE, O’MALLEY, HUGHES October 22, 2014 Brief Summary: No direct infringement by disputed products were ordered, manufactured, shipped, delivered and paid for abroad despite pricing and contracting negotiations in the US. Direct infringement by sales of … Continue reading

Posted in Importation, Infringement, Procedural Issues | Leave a comment