Protecting your IP rights. ITC Litigation

Our litigators have decades of intellectual property trial experience to help you successfully navigate the unique rules and procedures of the US International Trade Commission (ITC). The ITC is a popular but complex avenue for enforcing IP rights, and requires our combination of extensive technical prowess and a comprehensive understanding of the ITC’s substantive and procedural law.


ITC Intelligence.

The unique rules and procedures of ITC investigations require counsel with substantive legal knowledge and first-rate trial skills. Wolf Greenfield’s ITC team includes litigators with decades of intellectual property trial experience, extensive technical knowledge, and a comprehensive understanding of the ITC as a venue, providing you with the best possible resources to achieve your objectives.

1 st
We obtained a first-ever victory of unpatentability in a 100-day proceeding
5 %
Top 5% of all US law firms for respondent-side ITC success
8 %
Top 8% of all US law firms for complainant-side ITC success
10
In the last four years alone, we have successfully handled 10 Section 337 ITC Investigations
WG_ITC-1
About Section 337: ITC litigation.

Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 prohibits unfair trade practices, including the importation of articles that violate a valid US patent, trademark, trade dress, or copyright infringement.  Section 337 also applies to the misappropriation of trade secrets and other forms of unfair competition.

Undefeated.

Wolf Greenfield represents both complainants and respondents in Section 337 ITC investigations with a significant track record of success. In the last four years alone, we have handled 10 Section 337 ITC Investigations, with client success in each one. 

Fast pace, high stakes.

Section 337 Investigations move at a rapid pace, and the primary remedy available to the complainant is an order that excludes importation into the US of the infringing article. As a result, Section 337 Investigations are high-stakes matters requiring serious and prompt attention. We stand ready to meet your needs.     

Nimble and efficient.

ITC cases can reach trial in as little as seven months. Parties must quickly get to the merits, and discovery deadlines are far more compressed than in district court. The short time frame and fast pace of an ITC action make it challenging for all parties—both complaints and respondents—to litigate efficiently, and we have designed our ITC practice to meet these challenges. 

Awards & Recognition


We have successfully handled a wide range of proceedings before the ITC, including:

  • Section 337 ITC Investigations
  • Enforcement proceedings
  • Modification proceedings
  • Enforcement-related proceedings before Customs
  • Redesigned product proceedings before Customs  
Typing-1

Why clients turn to us for their ITC cases.

They’re good for International Trade Commission work. They’re very technically competent as far as technology goes. They’re a great bunch of litigators as well, and they’re willing to work with clients on pricing issues. They just care a lot about the results. They work hard for their clients.

Client
Chambers USA

They can go very deep in technical discussions with experts and are very good at what they do. They excel in their technical expertise.

Client
Chambers USA

They are excellent at what they do. They’re very knowledgeable and incredibly responsive.

Client
Chambers USA

ITC Experience

Inv. No. 337-TA-1012 (Fujifilm v. Sony) and Inv. No. 337-TA-1076 (Fujifilm v. Sony)

We successfully represented Sony in a multi-year global patent dispute with Fujifilm related to computer storage technology. The dispute spanned multiple ITC investigations, as well as parallel proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and Rule 177 proceedings before Customs. During the ITC investigations, Wolf Greenfield prevailed in preventing any violation based on Sony’s newest generation of accused products and technology.

Inv. No. 337-TA-1012-Enforcement (Fujifilm v. Sony)

In this follow-on enforcement proceeding (337-TA-1012-Enforcement), Wolf Greenfield secured on behalf of client Sony  an initial determination that rejected nearly every theory pursued by opponent Fujifilm. The ALJ specifically found that client Sony acted entirely in good faith in attempting to comply with the ITC’s orders.

Inv. No. 337-TA-1174

We successfully represented Aster Graphics (a printer cartridge manufacturer) in in this ITC investigation launched by Canon concerning replacement printer cartridges. The ALJ granted Aster’s motion for summary determination of non-infringement.

Inv. No. 337-TA-994

We succeeded in obtaining the first-ever victory on unpatentability in a 100-day proceeding for all joint defense respondents major electronics companies (e.g. Sony, HTC, LG, Samsung, etc.), securing a ruling from the ITC that the asserted patent was invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. We also led the joint defense group effort to secure a claim construction under which there was no infringement. These successful decisions were affirmed by the Federal Circuit.

Inv. No. 337-TA-903

We successfully represented patent owner BTG, as plaintiffs in this ITC investigation against multiple competitors concerning antibody pharmaceutical products against competitors targeting soon-to-be launched products. Our team secured a string of pre-trial victories, including a favorable claim construction decision, compelling critical discovery and defeating several motions for summary determination. These successes positioned BTG to secure a favorable settlement on the eve of trial, securing our client’s high-value market exclusivity for many years.

Inv. No. 337-TA-892

We successfully defended Sony against wide-ranging infringement allegations involving VoIP technology, including claims against the PlayStation 4. Our extensive technical workup of invalidity and product-based prior art led to favorable settlement and the plaintiff dropping its case two weeks before the hearing.Inv. No. 337-TA-935. We successfully represented patent owners Segway and DEKA as plaintiffs in this ITC investigation against multiple competitors concerning Segway-type personal transporter and controller devices. We successfully secured a rarely-granted General Exclusion Order (GEO) to preclude importation by numerous respondents and non-respondents. Critical to our success were our claim construction arguments, which persuaded the ITC staff attorney, and later the ALJ, to adopt our positions, which paved the way for the GEO and forced multiple settlements.

Inv. No. 337-TA-836

We successfully represented Sony in this complex multi-respondent case involving LCD, CPU and GPU technologies, and succeeded in convincing ITC Staff to support our summary determination motion, leading to favorable pre-hearing settlement.

Contact