• ITC Issues Public Version of Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding Opinion in Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies (337-TA-691)
  • February 4, 2011 | Authors: Andrew K. Beverina; Eric W. Schweibenz
  • Law Firm: Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P. - Alexandria Office
  • Further to our January 11, 2011 post, on January 28, 2011 the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued the public version of its opinion on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding in Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies and Components Thereof (337-TA-691).

    By way of background, the Complainant in this investigation is Hewlett-Packard Co. (“HP”).  Comptree Ink, InkPlusToner.com, SmartOne Services LLC, and Zhuhai Gree Magneto-Electric Co., Ltd. were terminated from the Investigation due to settlement agreements or consent orders.  The following remaining seven Respondents (collectively, “the Defaulting Respondents”) failed to answer the Complaint and were found in default: Zhuhai National Resources & Jingjie Imaging Products Co., Ltd. of China; Mipo International Ltd. of Hong Kong; Mextec Group Inc. d/b/a Mipo America Ltd. of Miami, Florida (“Mextec”); Shanghai Angel Printer Supplies Co. Ltd. of China; Shenzhen Print Media Co., Ltd. of China; Tatrix International of China; and Ourway Image Co., Ltd. of China.

    On August 30, 2010, ALJ Essex granted HP’s motion for summary determination that a domestic industry exists and that the Defaulting Respondents violated Section 337 with respect to claims 6 and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 6,089,687 ( the ‘687 patent) and claims 1, 5, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 6,264,301 ( the ‘301 patent).  ALJ Essex further provided recommendations as to a remedy, should a violation ultimately be found by the Commission.

    After reviewing the relevant portions of the record, the Commission determined to follow the recommendations of ALJ Essex and issued a general exclusion order with respect to claims 6 and 9 of the ’687 patent and claims 1, 5, and 6 of the ’301 patent, and a cease and desist order against Mextec with respect to the same claims.  Specifically, the Commission determined that a general exclusion order was appropriate because HP demonstrated the difficulty in identifying and preventing infringing suppliers, due to the high demand and relatively low production costs for toner.  The Commission also agreed that a cease and desist order was appropriate for Mextec, a domestic company with an inventory of infringing toner.  The public interest consideration further weighed in HP’s favor as the public interest favors respect for intellectual property rights and HP showed it could satisfy the demand for toner in the United States.  Finally, the Commission approved a 100% bond during the Presidential review period.