`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, D.C.
`
`Before The Honorable MaryJoan McNamara
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN DERMATOLOGICAL
`TREATMENT DEVICES AND
`COMPONENTS THEREOF
`
`
`
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1356
`
`COMMISSION INVESTIGATIVE STAFF’S
`MARKMAN PRE-HEARING STATEMENT
`
`Pursuant to the amended procedural schedule set forth in Order No. 10 and Ground Rule
`
`1.14.2, the Commission Investigative Staff (“Staff”) hereby provides its Markman Pre-Hearing
`
`Statement. Each of the items required by Ground Rule 1.14.2 is set out below.
`
`A. The names of all known speakers or witnesses, including an identification of whether the
`speaker is counsel, a fact witness, or an expert witness
`Speakers for the Staff may include Investigative Attorney Aaron D. Rauh and
`
`Supervisory Attorney Jeffrey T. Hsu. The Staff does not intend to call fact or expert witnesses of
`
`its own but reserves the right to examine any fact or expert witness called by one of the private
`
`parties.1
`
`B. A list, by title and number, of all exhibits which the parties will seek to introduce at the
`Markman hearing
`The Staff intends to rely on the agreed-upon Joint Exhibits (JXM exhibits) and the
`
`exhibits identified by Complainant and Respondents (CXM and RXM exhibits). The Staff states
`
`that it may rely on and seek to move into the record any exhibit identified by the private parties
`
`
`1 At this time, the Staff understands that no party intends to call any witnesses at the Markman
`hearing.
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1356
`
`- 1 -
`
`Staff’s Markman Pre-Hearing Statement
`
`
`
`
`
`
`but not moved into the record by the private parties.
`
`C. A list of any stipulations to which the parties have agreed
`The Parties have agreed to constructions for certain claim terms. See Amended Joint
`
`Claim Construction Chart (June 23, 2023), EDIS Doc. ID 799313. On June 23, 2023, the Parties
`
`also submitted a Joint Technology Stipulation. See EDIS Doc. ID 799243. The Parties have not
`
`entered into any other stipulation related to claim construction.
`
`D. A proposed schedule/allocation of time for the Markman hearing, including the estimated
`length for the appearance of each speaker or witness
`The parties met and conferred and agreed to a schedule/allocation of time for the
`
`Markman hearing. The parties have agreed to allocate 2.5 hours of of hearing time to
`
`Complainant, 2.5 hours of hearing time to Respondents, and 1.5 hours of hearing time to the
`
`Staff. For each group of Asserted Patents, the parties propose to begin with a brief opening
`
`and/or technology tutorial from each private party, and the parties will the proceed to address
`
`each disputed term in the order set forth below (which is the order in which the terms were
`
`addressed in the respective Markman briefs). The joint proposed schedule is as follows:
`
`1. U.S. Patent Nos. 9,320,536, 9,775,774, and 10,869,812
`
`a. Complainant’s Opening/Tutorial
`
`b. Respondents’ Opening/Tutorial
`
`c. Disputed Terms:
`
`i. “a [user holdable device releasably couplable] deployable needle
`assembly end surface” / “the releasably couplable deployable
`needle assembly end surface” – argued first by Respondents, then
`Complainant, then Staff, followed by rebuttal arguments, if any
`
`ii. “separatably” – argued first by Complainant, then Respondents,
`then Staff, followed by rebuttal arguments, if any
`
`iii. “draft shaft” – argued first by Complainant, then Respondents,
`then Staff, followed by rebuttal arguments, if any
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1356
`
`- 2 -
`
`Staff’s Markman Pre-Hearing Statement
`
`
`
`iv. “the deployable needle assembly mechanically separatably from
`the proximal end” – argued first by Respondents, then
`Complainant, then Staff, followed by rebuttal arguments, if any
`
`v. “energiz[e/ing] the plurality of extended needles” – argued first by
`Respondents, then Complainant, then Staff, followed by rebuttal
`arguments, if any
`
`vi. “pulsed radio frequency signals” – argued first by Respondents,
`then Complainant, then Staff, followed by rebuttal arguments, if
`any
`
`2. U.S. Patent Nos. 9,480,836, 10,058,379, and 11,406,444
`
`a. Complainant’s Opening/Tutorial
`
`b. Respondents’ Opening/Tutorial
`
`c. Disputed Terms:
`
`i. “plurality of electrodes” – argued first by Respondents, then
`Complainant, then Staff, followed by rebuttal arguments, if any
`
`ii. “a plurality of electrodes, the electrodes being bipolar”/ “a plurality
`of electrodes . . . the electrodes are bipolar” – argued first by
`Respondents, then Complainant, then Staff, followed by rebuttal
`arguments, if any
`
`iii. “[a/an] Alternating Current (AC) [RF/Radio Frequency (RF)]
`signal” / “an RF signal with oscillating current” – argued first by
`Respondents, then Complainant, then Staff, followed by rebuttal
`arguments, if any
`
`iv. “… [causes/to cause] energy to be substantially applied to body
`segments around each electrode” – argued first by Respondents,
`then Complainant, then Staff, followed by rebuttal arguments, if
`any
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1356
`
`- 3 -
`
`Staff’s Markman Pre-Hearing Statement
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: July 11, 2023
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /s/ Aaron D. Rauh
`Margaret D. Macdonald, Director
`Jeffrey T. Hsu, Supervisory Attorney
`Aaron D. Rauh, Investigative Attorney
`OFFICE OF UNFAIR IMPORT INVESTIGATIONS
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E. Street, S.W., Suite 401
`Washington, D.C. 20436
`Phone: 202-205-2025
`Email: Aaron.Rauh@usitc.gov
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1356
`
`- 4 -
`
`Staff’s Markman Pre-Hearing Statement
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that on July 11, 2023, he caused the foregoing COMMISSION
`INVESTIGATIVE STAFF’S MARKMAN PRE-HEARING STATEMENT to be served in
`the manner indicated below:
`
`Via EDIS
`
`Via Email
`
`Via BOX
`
`Via BOX
`
`Via BOX
`
`The Honorable Lisa R. Barton
`Secretary to the Commission
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW, Room 112
`Washington, DC 20436
`The Honorable MaryJoan McNamara
`Administrative Law Judge
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW, Room 317
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`Email: McNamara337@usitc.gov
`Counsel for Complainant Serendia, LLC
`
`Kevin C. Wheeler
`LATHAM &WATKINS LLP
`555 11th St. NW, Suite 1000
`Washington, DC 20004
`Email: serendiaitc.lwteam@lw.com
`Counsel for Respondents EndyMed Medical, Ltd.
`and EndyMed Medical, Inc.
`
`Guy Yonay
`PEARL COHEN ZEDEK LATZER BARATZ LLP
`7 Times Square, 19th Fl.
`New York, NY 10036
`Email: EndyMed@PearlCohen.com
`Counsel for Respondents Ilooda, Co., Ltd. and
`Cutera, Inc.
`
`Daniel E. Valencia
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`One CityCenter, 850 Tenth Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20001
`Email: COV-Ilooda-ITC@cov.com
`
`1
`
`
`
`Via BOX
`
`Via BOX
`
`Via BOX
`
`Via BOX
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Counsel for Respondents Jeisys Medical Inc. and
`Cynosure, LLC
`
`David M. Airan
`LEYDIG, VOIT & MAYER, LTD.
`Two Prudential Plaza
`180 N. Stetson Ave, Suite 4900
`Chicago, IL 60601-6745
`Email: Leydig-Jeisys-ITC@leydig.com
`
`Paul M. Bartkowski
`BARTKOWSKI PLLC
`6803 Whittier Ave., Suite 200A
`McLean, VA 22101
`Email: Jeisys-337@bartkowskipllc.com
`Counsel for Respondents Lutronic Corporation;
`Lutronic Aesthetics, Inc. aka Lutronic, Inc.;
`Lutronic, LLC
`
`Richard V. Wells
`BAKER & MCKENZIE, LLP
`815 Connecticut Ave. NW
`Washington, D.C. 20006
`Email: HOU-Lutronic-ITC@bakermckenzie.com
`Counsel for Respondents Rohrer Aesthetics, Inc.
`and Rohrer Aesthetics, LLC
`
`Lesley McCall Grossberg
`Ice Miller LLP
`1735 Market St., Suite 3900
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`Email: RohrerITC@icemiller.com
`Counsel for Respondents Counsel for Respondents
`Sung Hwan E&B Co., LTD. d/b/a SHEnB Co. LTD;
`Cartessa Aesthetics, LLC and Aesthetics
`Biomedical, Inc.
`
`Ryan B. McCrum
`JONES DAY
`901 Lakeside Avenue
`Cleveland, OH 44114-1190
`Email: SHEnB-ITC-JD@jonesday.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Aaron D. Rauh
`Aaron D. Rauh
`Investigative Attorney
`OFFICE OF UNFAIR IMPORT INVESTIGATIONS
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW, Suite 401
`Washington, DC 20436
`Phone: (202) 205-2025
`Email: Aaron.Rauh@usitc.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
