{"id":2292,"date":"2018-12-07T12:22:05","date_gmt":"2018-12-07T17:22:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=2292"},"modified":"2018-12-08T12:54:03","modified_gmt":"2018-12-08T17:54:03","slug":"petitioner-is-entitle-to-remedy-against-defaulting-itc-respondents","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=2292","title":{"rendered":"Petitioner is Entitle to Remedy Against Defaulting ITC Respondents"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>In <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cafc.uscourts.gov\/sites\/default\/files\/opinions-orders\/17-2445.Opinion.12-7-2018.pdf\">Laerdal Medical Corp. v. ITC<\/a>, [2017-2445] (December 7, 2018), the Federal Circuit reversed the ITC&#8217;s denial of remedies against defaulting respondents because Laerdal failed to properly plead its trade dress claim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>, [2017-2445] (December 7, 2018), the Federal Circuit reversed the ITC&#8217;s denial of remedies against defaulting respondents because Laerdal failed to properly plead its trade dress claim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Commission\u00a0concluded that, even when the pleaded facts were presumed\u00a0true, Laerdal failed to show that any of the defaulting respondents violated \u00a7 1337 with respect to the alleged trade dresses\u00a0and copyrights.\u00a0 Specifically, the Commission found that Laerdal\u00a0failed to plead sufficiently (1) that it suffered the requisite\u00a0harm, (2) the specific elements that constitute its trade\u00a0dresses, and (3) that its trade dresses were not functional.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Thus, despite approving the ALJ\u2019s initial\u00a0determination finding all respondents in default and\u00a0despite requesting supplemental briefing solely related to\u00a0the appropriate remedy, the Commission issued Laerdal<br>no relief on those claims or against any of the respondents\u00a0named in those claims.\u00a0\u00a0Laerdal appeals the Commission\u2019s termination of its\u00a0trade dress claims, contending the Commission acted in\u00a0violation of \u00a7 1337(g)(1) by terminating the investigation\u00a0and issuing no relief for its trade dress claims against\u00a0defaulting respondents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>19 U.S.C. \u00a7 1337(g)(1) provides that in the event of a default,\u00a0the Commission shall presume the facts alleged in\u00a0the complaint to be true and shall, upon request,\u00a0issue an exclusion from entry or a cease and desist<br>order, or both.\u00a0 The Federal Circuit concluded that statute, on its face, unambiguously\u00a0requires the Commission to grant relief against\u00a0defaulting respondents, subject only to public interest\u00a0concerns, if all prerequisites of \u00a7 1337(g)(1) are satisfied.\u00a0The statute\u2019s plain text, surrounding context, purpose,\u00a0and legislative history, as well as the Commission\u2019s own<br>prior decisions, supported this conclusion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p> \u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In Laerdal Medical Corp. v. ITC, [2017-2445] (December 7, 2018), the Federal Circuit reversed the ITC&#8217;s denial of remedies against defaulting respondents because Laerdal failed to properly plead its trade dress claim. , [2017-2445] (December 7, 2018), the Federal Circuit &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=2292\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[90],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2292","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-itc"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2292","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2292"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2292\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2295,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2292\/revisions\/2295"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2292"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2292"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2292"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}