UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`Washington, D.C.
`
`In the Matter of
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTAIN IOT DEVICES AND COMPONENTS
`
`Investigation No. 337—TA-1094
`
`THEREOF (IOT, THE INTERNET OF
`THINGS)—WEB APPLICATIONS DISPLAYED
`ON A WEB BROWSER
`
`NOTICE OF COMMISSION DECISION TO REVIEW AN INITIAL
`
`DETERMINATION TERMINATING THE INVESTIGATION AND ,
`ON REVIEW TO AFFIRM THE TERMINATION BASED UPON
`
`THE ACTUAL EXPIRATION OF THE ASSERTED PATENT;
`TERMINATION OF INVESTIGATION
`
`AGENCY: US. International Trade Commission.
`
`ACTION:
`
`Notice.
`
`SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the US. International Trade Commission has
`determined to review the presiding administrative law judge’s (“ALJ”) initial determination
`(“ID”) (Order No. 10), which terminated the investigation for good cause on the basis of the
`imminent expiration of the asserted patent. On review, the Commission has determined to affirm
`the termination based upon the actual expiration of the asserted patent.
`
`FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sidney A. Rosenzweig, Office of the General
`Counsel, US. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, S.W., Washington, DC. 20436,
`telephone (202) 708-2532. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this
`investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 am. to
`5:15 pm.) in the Office of the Secretary, US. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, S.W.,
`Washington, DC. 20436, telephone (202) 205—2000. General information concerning the
`Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at httQS://www.usitc. gov. The '
`public record for this investigation may be Viewed on the Commission'3 electronic docket (EDIS)
`at hrtgs'.//edz's usztcgov _Hearing-impaired personsare advised that information on _t_h_is matter
`can be obtained bycontacting the Commission TDD terminal On (202)205-1810.
`
`SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this inVestigation on
`January 22, 2018, based upon an amended and supplemented complaint filed by Lakshmi
`Arunachalam, Ph.D. and Wechhange, Inc., both of Menlo Park, California.
`83 FR 3021 (Jan.
`
`

`

`«.2—
`
`_.__._4__.«A_..__...._-_~..__.-_~-2.“-_....-_r.a-__..-__-_“.._.-__..‘_.»4‘-_.-_‘._-.‘-—_.._--.-_
`
`\
`
`22, 2018). The complaint alleged Violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended I
`‘ .(‘19U.S.C: '133'7),“by’a‘numb'er ofproposed respondents in‘the importation into the United States, “‘ ‘
`the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain IOT
`devices and components thereof (IOT, the Internet of Things)—web applications displayed on a
`web browser by reason of infringement of certain claims of US. Patent No. 7,930,340 (“the ’340
`patent” ’), as well as unfair methods of competition and unfair acts (criminal and civil RICO
`violations, breach of contract, theft of intellectual property, antitrust Violations, and trade secret
`misappropriation), the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in
`the United States.
`83 FR at 3021. The Commission determined to institute the investigation
`only as to infringement of the ’340 patent, and named as respondents Apple Inc. of Cupertino,
`California; Facebook,Inc. of Menlo Park, California; Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of
`Ridgefield Park, New Jersey; and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of Seoul, South Korea.
`Id. at
`3022. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (“OUII”) was also named as a party.
`Id.
`‘
`
`‘ " ‘
`
`‘
`
`‘
`
`‘
`
`On January 29, 2018, the respondents moved to terminate the investigation based upon the
`then-imminent expiration of the ’340 patent. The complainants responded in opposition to the
`motion. The ALJ denied the motion for failure to comply with Commission rules. Order No. 8
`at 2 & vn.1 (Feb-20, 2018). On February 21, 2018, the respondents filed a renewed motion to
`terminate, which corrected the omission in their previous motion. The complainants renewed
`their opposition to the motion. OUII supported the motion.
`
`On February 27, 2018, the ALJ granted the motion as an ID, finding that good cause exists
`for terminating the investigation. The ID finds that given “the structure of section 337
`investigations” there was insufficient time for the Commission to “reach a final determination or
`issue any relief before the March 5, 2018 expiration date” of the ’340 patent. Order No. 10 at 6.
`
`On March 5, 2018, the ’340 patent expired. That same day, the complainants filed a
`“Motion for Rehearing and Reinstating the Investigation” (“Compl’ts Submission”). The
`Commission determined to treat that submission as a petition for Commission review of the ID
`_ under 19 CFR 210.43. The petition seeks an advisory ruling on certain issues. Compl’ts i
`.
`Submission 6.
`
`On March 12, 2018, the respondents and OUII filed responses in opposition to the
`complainants’ submission. The responses explain, inter alia, that the complainants’ submission
`does not provide an adequate basis for Commission review under Commission Rule 210.43 (b)(l),
`19 CFR 210.43(b)(1). Resp’ts Resp. 3; OUII Resp. 1, 3.
`
`Having considered the record of the investigation, including the parties’ submissions to the
`Commission, the Commission decides as follows. The Commission “can issue only an exclusion
`.order barring future importation _or_a cease and desist order barring future.conduct,’.’. neither of. - ,, - - M _
`which can issue as to an expired patent. Texas Instruments Inc. v. US. Int ’1 Trade Comm ’n, 851
`F.2d 342, 344 (Fed. Cir. 1988). Because the’340 patent has now actually expired, the ID’s good
`
`2
`
`

`

`" ‘ '
`
`cause (the imminent expiration of the patent) is now moot. Accordingly, the Commission has
`‘ ” " “determined to‘r‘evi'ewthe‘ ID, and,’o‘n‘revievv,‘to affirm‘th‘e termination based upon the actual
`expiration of the ’340 patent. The Commission declines the complainants’ invitation to issue
`advisory rulings, and terminates the investigation.
`
`‘ "
`
`‘
`
`‘
`
`The authority for the Commission’s determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff
`Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part210 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice
`and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).
`
`By order of the Commission.
`
`Issued: March 23, 2018
`
`Lisa R. Barton
`
`Secretary to the Commission
`
`

`

`CERTAIN IoT DEVICES AND COMPONENTS THEREEOF
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1094
`
`(IoT, THE INTERNET OF THINGS (IoT) — WEB
`' APPLICATIONS DISPLAYED ON A WEB BROWSER)
`
`PUBLIC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`1, Lisa R. Barton, hereby certify that the attached NOTICE OF COMlVIISSION DECISION TO
`REVIEW AN INITIAL DETERMINATION TERMINATING THE INVESTIGATION AND ON
`
`REVIEW TO AFFIRM THE TERMINATION BASED UPON THE ACTUAL EXPIRATION OF
`
`THE ASSERTED PATENT; TERMINATION OF INVESTIGATION has been served by hand upon
`the Commission Investigative Attorney, Jeffrey Hsu, Esq. and the following parties as indicated, on
`3/23/2018
`
`W3)
`
`Lisa R. Barton, Secretary
`US. International Trade Commission
`
`500 E Street, SW, Room 112
`
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`On Behalf of Com lainants Dr. Lakshmi—Arunachalam PhD and
`
`
`Wechhange, Inc.:
`
`Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam, PhD
`222 Stanford Ave.
`-
`M31110 Park, CA 94025
`
`On Behalf of Respondent Apple Inc.:
`
`Brian E. Ferguson
`WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
`2001 M Street, NW, Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`El Via Hand Delivery ‘
`[3 Via Express Delivery
`Via First Class Mail
`Cl Other:
`
`I
`
`Cl Via Hand Delivery
`D Via Express Delivery
`Via First Class Mail
`C] Other:
`,
`
`On Behalf of Respondents Samsung. Electronics America, Inc. and
`Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.:
`
`Sturgis M. Sobin, Esq.
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`One CityCenter, 850 Tenth Street, NW
`Washington, DC 20001
`
`On Behalf of Respondents Facebook= Inc.:
`
`Stephen R. Smith
`COOLEY LLP
`1299 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 700
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`'
`
`El Via Hand Delivery
`[3 Via Express Delivery
`g] Via First Class Mail
`D Other
`
`'
`
`’
`
`-
`
`'
`
`13 Via Hand Delivery
`[:1 Via Express Delivery
`El Via First Class Mail
`El Other:
`
`