On August 17, 2012, Motorola Mobility LLC, Motorola Mobility Ireland, and Motorola Mobility International Limited (collectively “Complainants”) filed a complaint requesting that the ITC commence an investigation pursuant to Section 337.

The complaint alleges that Apple Inc. (“Apple”) unlawfully imports into the U.S., sells for importation, and/or sells within the U.S. after importation certain wireless communication devices, portable music and data processing devices, computers, and components thereof that infringe one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,883,580 (“the ‘580 patent”), 5,922,047 (“the ‘047 patent”), 6,425,002 (“the ‘002 patent”), 6,493,673 (“the ‘673 patent”), 6,983,370 (“the ‘370 patent), 7,007,064 (“the ‘064 patent”), and 7,383,983 (“the ‘983 patent”).

According to the complaint, the ‘580 patent is directed to messaging devices that logically process messages for a user in the context of space and time. The ‘047 patent is broadly directed to communications and control systems for multimedia where the control functions for various applications operate at more than one designated node or location.  The ‘002 patent covers a message manager program that ensures applications receive messages that are of interest.  The ‘673 patent discloses interactive services in a device such as reading announcements to a user or converting audible input into text.  The ‘370 patent generally covers messaging systems which provide continuity between messaging clients, providing the ability to sync the messaging capabilities of various devices.  The ‘064 patent is broadly described as covering wireless communications stems for obtaining and managing wireless content on a wireless communications device.  The ‘983 patent is directed to managing content between different wireless devices and covers systems and methods for pausing content on one device and resuming playback on another device.

As to related litigation, the complaint states that all seven asserted patents are the subject of a complaint alleging infringement against Apple that was filed concurrently in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.  Furthermore, the ‘370 patent was involved in a patent infringement case in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, later transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington naming different defendants.  That case is still pending.

The complaint alleges that Apple directly infringes the asserted patents because significant portions of Apple’s products are manufactured in Asia and later imported for sale into the United States.  The accused products are various models of the iPhone and iPad, although several computer products, including the Mac Pro, iMac, Mac mini, and MacBook devices are also accused of infringing the ‘370 patent. 

The complaint also asserts that Apple indirectly infringes the asserted patents, arguing that Apple induces infringement because it has knowledge of the ‘580 and ‘983 patents through discussions with Complainants and has knowledge of the ‘370 patent based on its monitoring of the related litigation.  Thus, Apple knowingly encourages infringement through its continuing publication of marketing documents and user manuals.  The complaint also states that Apple is liable for contributory infringement because there is a lack of substantial non-infringing uses of the accused products.

Complainants assert that they meet both the economic and technical prongs of the domestic industry requirement based on representative products including the Droid Razr, Droid Razr Maxx, Droid 4, and Motorola Xoom Wifi together with claim charts demonstrating that all limitations of an exemplary claim from each asserted patent are met by their representative products.  Complainants also assert they have made “made substantial investments in the United States in the exploitation of the asserted patents” including research and development, testing, repair, and service, pointing out that thousands of individuals are employed in Complainants’ facilities throughout the United States.

With respect to potential remedy, Complainants request that the Commission issue a permanent exclusion order and permanent cease and desist orders directed against Apple, its subsidiaries, related companies, and agents.  Complainants also request that a bond be imposed during the Presidential review period.