On January 12, 2017, the International Trade Commission (“the Commission”) issued a notice in Certain Sleep-Disordered Breathing Treatment Systems and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-890).
By way of background, the investigation is based on a complaint filed by ResMed Corporation, ResMed Incorporated, and ResMed Limited (collectively, “ResMed”) alleging violation of Section 337 by Respondents BMC Medical Co., Ltd., 3B Medical, Inc., and 3B Products, L.L.C. in the importation and/or sale of certain sleep-disordered breathing treatment systems and components thereof that infringe one or more claims of various patents. See our July 22, 2013 and August 20, 2013 posts for more details on the complaint and the Notice of Investigation, respectively. On August 22, 2014, ALJ Pender issued a notice of his Initial Determination (“ID”) finding a violation of Section 337 with respect to U.S. Patent Nos. 7,178,527; 7,950,392; 7,997,267; 7,341,060; 8,312,883; and RE 44,453. ALJ Pender further determined that there was no violation with respect to U.S. Patent No. 7,926,487. See our August 25, 2014 post for more details regarding the ID. On December 23, 2014, the Commission affirmed the finding of a violation of Section 337 for several of the asserted patents and issued (1) a limited exclusion order, and (2) cease-and-desist orders directed to the domestic respondents. See our December 30, 2014 post for more details regarding the Commission’s determination. On November 29, 2016, ALJ Pender issued the public version of the Final Initial Remand Determination on Remand of no violation. See our December 8, 2016 post for more details.
According to the notice:
Having examined the record of this investigation, the Commission has determined to review in-part the RID for the limited purpose of modifying pages 20-21 and 24 of the RID. The Commission does not adopt the RID’s statements that ‘the amount a complainant spends to purchase components manufactured in the United States is immaterial to the economic prong analysis’ (RID at 20-21) or that evidence of payments to domestic suppliers is ‘per se insufficient to include in the quantitative analysis.’ RID at 24. The Commission has determined to otherwise not review the RID. The Commission has determined to vacate the suspended remedial orders. The investigation is terminated.