IPR Enforcement Actions on Crawler Cranes, Wireless Devices
New IPR Infringement Investigation of Crawler Cranes. The International Trade Commission has instituted investigation 337-TA-887 to determine whether imports of certain crawler cranes and components thereof are violating Section 337 of the 1930 Tariff Act by reason of patent infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets. These mobile cranes use variable position counterweight technology to improve their operation and use.
Complainant Manitowoc Cranes LLC requests that after this investigation the ITC issue a limited exclusion order, which would direct U.S. Customs and Border Protection to prohibit the entry of the infringing products into the U.S., and cease and desist orders, which would require the named respondents to cease actions that violate Section 337, including selling infringing imported articles out of U.S. inventory. The respondents in this investigation are located in China and the U.S.
Import Restrictions Under Consideration for Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities. In patent infringement investigation 337-TA-800 of certain wireless devices with 3G capabilities and components thereof, the presiding administrative law judge has recommended the issuance of a limited exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders against the respondents, which are located in China, Finland and the U.S. The ITC is now soliciting through Aug. 7 public comments on the effects of any such remedies on the public health and welfare in the U.S., competitive conditions in the U.S. economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the U.S., and U.S. consumers. In particular, the ITC is interested in comments that:
- explain how the subject articles are used in the U.S.;
- identify any public health, safety or welfare concerns in the U.S. relating to the recommended orders;
- identify like or directly competitive articles that the complainant, its licensees or third parties make in the U.S. that could replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded;
- indicate whether the complainant, its licensees and/or third-party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the orders within a commercially reasonable time; and
- explain how the limited exclusion order would impact consumers in the U.S.