IPR Enforcement: Liquid Crystal eWriters, Flash Memory Devices
Liquid Crystal eWriters. The International Trade Commission received Dec. 8 on behalf of Kent Displays Inc. a petition requesting that it institute a Section 337 investigation regarding liquid crystal ewriters and components thereof. The proposed respondents are located in China.
Section 337 investigations primarily involve claims regarding intellectual property rights violations by imported goods, including the infringement of patents, trademarks, and copyrights. Other forms of unfair competition involving imported products, such as misappropriation of trade secrets or trade dress and false advertising, may also be asserted. The primary remedy available in Section 337 investigations is an exclusion order that directs U.S. Customs and Border Protection to stop infringing imports from entering the U.S. In addition, the ITC may issue cease and desist orders against named importers and other persons engaged in unfair acts that violate Section 337, including selling infringing imported articles out of U.S. inventory.
Flash Memory Devices. The ITC is requesting comments no later than Dec. 20 on any public interest issues raised by a complaint filed on behalf of Memory Technologies LLC alleging that the importation, sale for importation, and sale within the U.S. after importation of flash memory devices and components thereof are violating Section 337 of the 1930 Tariff Act. Comments should address whether the issuance of the limited exclusion order and/or 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.