Home > Legal Library > Article




Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected


ALJ Gildea Issues Notice Of Initial Determination Finding Violation Of Section 337 By Nanya Technology In Certain Semiconductor Chips With DRAM Circuitry (337-TA-819)




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

 
April 4, 2013

Previously published on April 3, 2013

On March 26, 2013, ALJ E. James Gildea issued a notice regarding the Final Initial Determination and Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond (“ID”) in Certain Semiconductor Chips with DRAM Circuitry, and Modules and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-819).

By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by Elpida Memory, Inc and Elpida Memory (USA) Inc. alleging violation of Section 337 by Respondents Nanya Technology Corporation and Nanya Technology Corporation U.S.A. (collectively, “Nanya”) in the importation into the U.S. and sale of certain semiconductor chips with DRAM circuitry, and modules and products containing the same that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,150,689 (the ‘689 patent), 6,635,918 (the ‘918 patent), 6,555,861, 7,659,571 (the ‘571 patent), 7,713,828 (the ‘828 patent), 7,495,453 (the ‘453 patent), and 7,906,809 (the ‘809 patent). See our December 16, 2011 post for more details on the ITC’s notice of investigation for this matter.

According to the March 26, 2013 notice, ALJ Gildea determined that a violation of Section 337 had occurred by Nanya by way of its infringement of (i) one or more of claims 8-11 and 17-18 of the ‘689 patent; (ii) one or more of claims 4, 14, and 20 of the ‘918 patent; (iii) one or more of claims 5-6 of the ‘828 patent; (iv) claim 27 of the ‘453 patent; and (v) one or more of claims 1-2 of the ‘809 patent. ALJ Gildea also found no violation of Section 337 had occurred by Nanya with respect to one or more of claims 1 and 3-4 of the ‘571 patent and claims 17-18 of the ‘453 patent.

ALJ Gildea further determined that a domestic industry exists that practices the ‘689, ‘918, ‘828, ‘453, and ‘809 patents. ALJ Gildea also determined that a domestic industry does not exist that practices the ‘571 patent.

The notice issued by ALJ Gildea released only the first four pages of the ID. We will provide additional information after 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...

 
 
Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. Overview