Home > Legal Library > Article




Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected


ALJ Lord Issues Notice Of Initial Determination In Certain Integrated Circuit Chips (337-TA-859)




by:
Alexander B. Englehart
Eric W. Schweibenz
Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. - Alexandria Office

 
March 25, 2014

Previously published on March 24, 2014

On March 21, 2014, ALJ Dee Lord issued a notice regarding the Initial Determination (“ID”) in Certain Integrated Circuit Chips and Products Containing the Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-859).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by Realtek Semiconductor Corp. (“Realtek”) alleging violation of Section 337 in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain integrated circuit chips and products containing the same that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,787,928 (the ‘928 patent) and 6,963,226 (the ‘226 patent). See our September 20, 2012 and October 22, 2012 posts for more details on Realtek’s complaint and the Notice of Investigation, respectively. On January 30, 2013, former ALJ Robert K. Rogers, Jr. partially terminated the investigation with respect to the ‘226 patent. See our February 1, 2013 post for more details.

According to the notice, ALJ Lord found that no violation of Section 337 has occurred with respect to the ‘928 patent. Specifically, the ALJ determined that Realtek has not satisfied the domestic industry requirement with respect to the ‘928 patent. The ALJ also found that certain claims of the ‘928 patent are invalid under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, but that one claim is not invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 112. ALJ Lord further found that certain of Respondents LSI Corp.’s and Seagate Technology’s accused products literally infringe various claims of the ‘928 patent. The ALJ also found that the importation requirement has been satisfied for most (but not all) of the accused products.

The notice released by ALJ Lord released only limited information. We will provide additional information once the public version of the ID issues in its entirety.



 

The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance.
 

View More Library Documents By...

 
Author
 
Alexander B. Englehart
Eric W. Schweibenz
 
Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. Overview