Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 is a provision in United States trade law that prohibits the importation, sale, or distribution of articles that infringe intellectual property rights, such as patents, trademarks, and copyrights. It is designed to protect American businesses and inventors from foreign competition that uses their patented or copyrighted products or processes without permission.
Under Section 337, the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has the authority to investigate complaints of intellectual property infringement and to issue orders prohibiting the importation of infringing goods. The USITC also has the power to impose fines and other penalties on companies that violate its orders.
One of the main advantages of Section 337 is that it allows companies to seek relief from intellectual property infringement through a single administrative agency rather than through the courts. This can be a faster and more efficient process than litigation, which can be costly and time-consuming.
However, Section 337 has also faced criticism for its potential to be used as a tool for protectionism. Some have argued that it can be used to block imports of goods that do not actually infringe on intellectual property rights, but rather are simply competing with domestic products. This has led to calls for reforms to the provision, including measures to ensure that it is not used to unfairly protect domestic industries from competition.
Overall, Section 337 plays an important role in protecting American businesses and inventors from intellectual property infringement. While there may be valid concerns about its potential for abuse, the provision remains an important tool for ensuring that intellectual property rights are respected and enforced in the international trade arena.
26 CFR § 1.337(d)
Hearings proceed in a manner similar to federal bench trials. Bonding When a violation of Section 337 is found, the ITC will also seek input regarding the public interest with respect to the appropriate remedy and the amount of bond that should be posted by the Respondent during the 60 day Presidential Review period. In none of these cases is the ITC working on behalf of a U. If the Commission declines to review the ID, it becomes the Final Determination. Once the ITC institutes an investigation it publishes a Notice of Investigation in the Federal Register, serves the complaint upon the respondents, and assigns an Administrative Law Judge ALJ.
The inclusion of licensing activity may help non-practicing entities satisfy the domestic industry requirement. In Enercon, respondent Enercon GmbH had entered into a contract for sale of its wind turbines with respondent New World Power Corp. Unless i Is disposed of by sale or distribution by the ii Is not g Tiered partnerships. It can be difficult to discern when looking at a Vikings seating chart, however the majority of these 300 level sideline sections excluding section 337 are separated into a small lower lower portion lettered rows , and larger upper portion numbered rows. See Welded Stainless Steel Pipe and Tube, Inv. In furtherance of this goal, the ALJ is required to set a target date for the completion of the investigation within 45 days of institution of the investigation. Temporary Relief ITC Rules 210.
. Overview of a Section 337 Investigation in the ITC An ITC action is initiated by filing a complaint. The ALJ that issued the determination also found that the ITC can consider contributory infringement and inducement of infringement under Section 337 as well as direct infringement, further demonstrating the ITC's willingness to consider a wide range of actions unfair importation. Under Section 337 c , removal of such counterclaims to a federal district court is mandatory. ITC investigations related to patent infringement are, however, limited to importation-related infringement. As someone with degrees in both engineering and English literature, Bas is uniquely suited to present complicated topics to non-technical audiences. For example, in Hardware Logic Emulation Systems, ITC Inv.
For example, in Variable Speed Wind Turbines, ITC Inv. First, it must address infringing imports. The Commission is required to determine within 35 days whether it will accept the motion for temporary relief. A review of recent case law developments related to ITC practice is then presented. . A complainant can satisfy the domestic industry requirement by showing that it has made significant USinvestments related to articles covered by the asserted patent, or that it has made substantial investments to exploit the patent, which may be satisfied by licensing activities or attempts.
Section 337 Reform Bill Targets the Worst Abuses of ITC Patent Litigation
You should also consider staying any parallel district court action. These conferences serve generally to establish the ground rules for discovery and the hearing. Orrick does not have a duty or a legal obligation to keep confidential any information that you provide to us. Significant Changes by 1994 Amendments As a review, the following key changes in ITC practice were made by the 1994 amendments to Section 337, as part of the Uruguay Round Agreements. BTG unsuccessfully argued that since it only made the accused product by means of the patented process once, prior to the enactment of 25 U. Starting the Investigation ITC Rules 210. A Corporate Partner is a 2 Stock of the Corporate Partner - i In general.
Sec. 337. Nonrecognition For Property Distributed To Parent In Complete Liquidation Of Subsidiary
Discovery ITC Rules 210. Introduction Section 337 a 1 B of the Tariff Act of 1930 declares unlawful "importation into the Untied States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation by the owner, importer, or consignee, of articles that - i infringe a valid and enforceable See 19 U. In most cases, it does so, especially if the complainants worked with OUII before filing to ensure the complaint is in order. By clicking "OK" below, you understand and agree that Orrick will have no duty to keep confidential any information you provide. The Federal Circuit specifically found that the ITC incorrectly interpreted the Federal Circuit's decision in Maxwell v. International Trade Commission provide a powerful tool for intellectual property rights holders to safeguard such IP against infringement in importation. The ITC, on the other hand, is bound by a finding of infringement by a district court.
Section 337 Investigations Before the International Trade Commission
For A The B The iii Section 732 f basis reduction. Another jurisdictional difference is that the ITC cannot invalidate a patent and so its findings do not have preclusive effect on subsequent district court litigation, although appellate review at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit may generate an opinion on which basis issue and claim preclusion may apply. Discovery in an ITC investigation begins immediately after the investigation is instituted and employs many of the same mechanisms provided by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, such as interrogatories, requests for production, subpoenas, requests for admission, and depositions. § 271 g but will investigate matters covered by the 35 U. About four months before the target date, the ALJ issues an Initial Determination ID , which is certified to the Commission. Effective Date Section applicable to any distribution in complete liquidation, and any sale or exchange, made by a corporation after July 31, 1986, unless such corporation is completely liquidated before Jan.
This amendment effectively removed the possibility of subjecting foreign infringers to multiple proceedings. Limited exclusion orders under Section 337 d 1 are often granted in conjunction with a cease and desist order, and only apply to articles imported by parties found to be in violation of Section 337. District Court, however, "shall not delay or affect the proceeding under this section, including the legal and equitable defenses that may be raised under this subsection. See also Agricultural Tractors under 50 Power Take-off Horsepower, ITC Inv. Furthermore, Section 332 of the Tariff Act authorizes the International Trade Commission the "ITC" to perform such investigations. Such a petition, however, can only discuss new questions raised by the determination which the party has not yet had an opportunity to argue.
AX's purchase of X stock has the effect of an exchange by X of appreciated property for X stock, and thus, is a Section 337 d Transaction. Of those, approximately 21% 9 of 42 ended in a finding of a violation of Section 337 by the Commission. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so. This prevents game playing in the form of switching importation of the infringing articles to another company that was not named in the investigation. The remaining 10 cases are still pending.
