IPR Enforcement: Coated Optical Fibers, Air Mattresses
Coated Optical Fibers. The International Trade Commission has instituted investigation 337-TA-1031 to determine whether imports of UV curable coatings for optical fibers, coated optical fibers, and products containing same are violating Section 337 of the 1930 Tariff Act by reason of patent infringement. The products at issue are coated optical fibers with improved mechanical properties allowing for reliable, efficient long distance transmission of electronic information signals (e.g., cables used to connect homes and businesses for the distribution of electronic information signals).
Complainants DSM Desotech Inc. and DSM IP Assets B.V. request 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 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.
Air Mattresses. In patent infringement investigation 337-TA-971 of air mattress systems, components thereof, and methods of using the same, the ITC’s presiding administrative law judge has recommended the issuance of a limited exclusion order against such products imported by three respondents.
The ITC is now requesting comments no later than Dec. 19 on whether the issuance of the LEO would affect 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., or U.S. consumers. In particular, the ITC is interested in comments that:
- explain how the articles potentially subject to the order are used in the U.S.;
- identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the U.S. relating to the potential order;
- 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 requested order within a commercially reasonable time; and
- explain how the requested orders would impact U.S. consumers.