On October 15, 2014, Appellee Commission filed an En Banc Brief and Intervenor Cross Match filed a Brief on Rehearing En Banc urging the full Federal Circuit to overturn the split panel Opinion in Suprema v. ITC, Appeal No. 12-1170 (Fed. Cir. December 13, 2013), that vacated the exclusionary remedy issued by the Commission in the 720 Investigation and held that "an exclusion order based on a violation of 19 U.S.C. §1337(a)(1)(B)(i) may not be predicated on a theory of induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(b) where direct infringement does not occur until after importation."  The Commission asserts that it correctly determined that Suprema imported scanners to induce infringement, that Congress intended identical infringement liability under Sections 271(a) and (b), and both the Supreme Court and Federal Circuit have tied inducement liability to supplying articles used to directly infringe.  Cross Match asserts that the full Federal Circuit should afford Chevron deference to the Commission’s longstanding interpretation of Section 271(b) and that “[a] contrary conclusion … would leave a gaping hole in the Commission’s ability to enforce the statutory protections against unfair trade practices and permit foreign importers to induce domestic infringement with impunity.”  On October 22, 2014, the ITCTLA and Nokia Corp. filed amicus briefs in support of the Commission following earlier amicus briefs filed by Google, Microsoft, and other technology companies urging the Federal Circuit to uphold the split panel decision.