IPR Enforcement: Insulation Materials, Breathing Treatment Systems, Car Wheels
Insulation Materials. The International Trade Commission has terminated patent infringement investigation 337-TA-1003 of composite aerogel insulation materials and methods for manufacturing the same with respect to certain asserted claims and associated infringement allegations at the request of complainant Aspen Aerogels Inc.
Breathing Treatment Systems. The ITC has terminated without the imposition of import restrictions patent infringement investigation 337-TA-997 of sleep-disordered breathing treatment systems and components thereof. This action is based on a settlement between complainants ResMed Corporation, ResMed Incorporated, and ResMed Limited and the respondents, which are located in China and the U.S.
Car Wheels. The ITC has terminated without the imposition of import restrictions patent and trademark infringement investigation 337-TA-1006 of passenger vehicle automotive wheels. This action is based on Daimler AG’s withdrawal of its allegations with respect to the last remaining respondents.
Electrical Connectors. The ITC received Feb. 6 on behalf of J.S.T. Corporation a petition requesting that it institute a Section 337 investigation regarding electrical connectors, components thereof, and products containing the same. The proposed respondents are located in Germany, China, Mexico, Brazil, and Taiwan.
The ITC is now requesting comments no later than Feb. 21 on any public interest issues raised by this complaint. Comments should address whether the issuance of the limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders requested by the complainant 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 orders are used in the U.S.;
- identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the U.S. relating to the potential 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 requested orders within a commercially reasonable time; and
- explain how the requested orders would impact U.S. consumers.