UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN ELECTRONIC DEVICES,
`INCLUDING SMARTPHONES,
`COMPUTERS, TABLET COMPUTERS,
`AND COMPONENTS THEREOF
`
`
`
` Inv. No. 337-TA-1373
`
`
`
`ORDER NO. 3:
`
`
`PROPOSED PROCEDURAL SCHEDULE
`
`(October 19, 2023)
`
`On October 11, 2023, the Commission instituted this Investigation pursuant to subsection
`
`(b) of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, to determine:
`
`whether there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the importation
`into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States
`after importation of certain products identified in paragraph (2) by reason of
`infringement of one or more of claims 1, 4, 7, and 8 of the ’877 patent; claims 10
`and 15 of the ’859 patent; claims 1, 3-5, 7 and 8 of the ’566 patent; claims 1 and 23
`of the ’933 patent; and claims 1 and 23 of the ’054 patent, and whether an industry
`in the United States exists or is in the process of being established as required by
`subsection (a)(2) of section 337[.]1
`
`88 Fed. Reg. 70425-26 (Oct. 11, 2023).
`
`The Notice of Investigation (“NOI”) names as complainants: InterDigital, Inc. of
`
`Wilmington, DE, InterDigital VC Holdings, Inc., of Wilmington, DE, InterDigital Patent
`
`Holdings, Inc., of Wilmington, DE, and InterDigital Madison Patent Holdings SAS, of Paris,
`
`France (collectively, “Complainants” or “InterDigital”). Id. at 70425. The NOI names as
`
`respondents: Lenovo Group Limited, of Quarry Bay, Hong Kong SAR, Lenovo (United States)
`
`
`1 The asserted patents are U.S. Patent No. 10,250,877 (“the ’877 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 8,674,859 (“the ’859
`patent”), U.S. Patent No. 9,674,556 (“the ’556 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 9,173,054 (“the ’054 patent”), and U.S.
`Patent No. 8,737,933 (“the ’933 patent”).
`
`Page 1 of 7
`
`

`

`Inc. of Morrisville, NC, and Motorola Mobility LLC, of Chicago, IL (collectively,
`
`“Respondents”). Id. Commission Investigative Staff (“Staff,” and with Complainants and
`
`Respondents, the “Parties”) is a party in this Investigation. Id.
`
`Target Date
`
`Based upon a review of the Complaint and the NOI, and taking into account my
`
`commitments in other instituted investigations, I have determined that a target date of 16-months
`
`is appropriate. The target date is therefore Tuesday, February 11, 2025. Based upon the target
`
`date, the final initial determination on violation (“ID”) in this Investigation will be due no later
`
`than Friday, October 11, 2024. The proposed Procedural Schedule is set forth in Attachment
`
`A hereto.
`
`Filings with OALJ
`
`The OALJ is not accepting paper filings/copies, CD’s, flash drives, and the like. As we
`
`get closer to the evidentiary hearing (“Hearing”), we may be accepting flash drives, but that
`
`remains to be determined.
`
`Applications for Subpoenas should be filed exclusively on McNamara337@usitc.gov.
`
`Courtesy copies of documents filed on EDIS should be sent to McNamara337@usitc.gov. Please
`
`contact Dockets Staff for procedures for filing documents on EDIS. Filing instructions on EDIS
`
`are also available on the Commission’s website.
`
`The Hearing most likely will be conducted in-person. This will be discussed at a
`
`Management Conference. The Commission uses WEBEX as its secure video platform.
`
`Management Conferences most likely will be held by WEBEX.
`
`Pre-Hearing and Evidentiary Hearing
`
`
`
`The Hearing is scheduled for May 8-10 and May 13-14, 2024 in a Courtroom to be
`
`Page 2 of 7
`
`

`

`announced closer to the Hearing date. At my discretion, a Pre-Hearing Conference (or more than
`
`one) to resolve outstanding Motions in Limine (“MIL”) and High Priority Objections (“HPO”)
`
`and other outstanding motions and issues is likely to be to held by telephone within two (2) to
`
`three (3) weeks before the Hearing, if possible. A final Pre-Hearing Conference will commence
`
`in the same location as the Hearing and on the first day of the Hearing, May 8, 2024.
`
`The Hearing will be held in one of the Commission courtrooms. The Hearing days will
`
`start at 9:30 a.m. and conclude at 5:30 p.m. each day, barring unforeseen circumstances (severely
`
`inclement weather, etc.). If any part of the Hearing is held by video on WEBEX, we will issue
`
`other instructions.
`
`Complainants (collectively as a group) and Respondents (collectively as a group), unless
`
`they lack an identity of interests,2 are each limited to two (2) total MILs and/or HPOs in
`
`combination, without a request for leave and an approval of additional MILs and/or HPOs. If the
`
`parties (each group) do not share an identity of interests on infringement and invalidity, they may
`
`request leave for additional MILs and/or HPOs, as may be necessary. MILs and/or HPOs styled
`
`as a single motion but are in fact omnibus in nature may: (1) be denied automatically in their
`
`entirety; (2) be ruled on according to the number of MILS/HPOs allowed while denying the
`
`remaining MILs/HPOs in the document; (3) be denied without prejudice with a request for
`
`refiling. Motions for Receipt of Evidence without a Sponsoring Witness will be treated
`
`separately.
`
`Direct testimony will be taken live, or in-person, during the Hearing, unless leave is
`
`requested by motion and is granted for an alternative pursuant to Ground Rule 8.4. This type of
`
`
`2 If any Respondent alleges that it lacks an identity of interests with any other Respondent, a motion for leave must
`be filed showing such lack of identity of interest. Unless and until such motion is granted, Respondents are
`collectively limited to no more than two (2) total MILs and/or HPOs in combination. Likewise for Complainants.
`
`Page 3 of 7
`
`

`

`Leave is given rarely and almost never for an expert. Please do not count on an exception to
`
`Rule 8.4. Basic background information about a witness or the issues (no other substance) may
`
`be considered as part of an acceptable witness statement if leave is granted. Whether other
`
`testimony may be provided in a witness statement will be determined later but it is not likely
`
`unless exigent circumstances exist, and then, only with leave.
`
`As discussed in Ground Rule 1.14.4.1, opening statements are required. Closing
`
`statements are not. However, they are helpful and encouraged.
`
`Changes to Ground Rules
`
`Please read the Ground Rules and follow them.
`
`The procedure for discovery disputes has been clarified. (See G.R. 2.5.). However, the
`
`Parties should bring discovery problems to the attention of Chambers as soon as possible in
`
`addition to the scheduled Management Conferences that are designed to deal with problems as
`
`they occur.
`
`There is a more complete explanation of the expectations for pre-hearing briefs. (G.R.
`
`7.2.). Conclusory statements are not sufficient.
`
`Service of paper copies of proposed exhibits to Chambers prior to the Hearing is no
`
`longer required. (See G.R. 8.7.2.).
`
`The document filing requirement of Ground Rule 1.2 has been amended. All documents
`
`that the Parties create for filing (e.g., motions and memoranda of law, affidavits, declarations,
`
`expert reports—any document created in Word for filing on EDIS) must contain in the footer of
`
`each page the name of the party that filed the document along with the title of the document.
`
`Chambers and Dockets require that certain documents be filed on BOX before they are
`
`transmitted by Chambers to Dockets for filing. The Parties will each be sent a link to BOX
`
`Page 4 of 7
`
`

`

`before those hearings (always the Evidentiary Hearing) where exhibits must be transmitted to
`
`BOX. Each party will be expected to notify my Program Support Specialist, of one individual
`
`who will be responsible for the filings on BOX. Chambers does not accept FTP or other links
`
`from law firms.
`
`In addition to pertinent Ground Rules regarding expert reports, the Parties shall file on
`
`EDIS all expert reports upon which they intend to rely. (See, e.g., G.R. 8.5.).
`
`Any submission that exceeds the page limitations set forth in the Ground Rules may be
`
`denied provisionally. Likewise, an opposition or response to a motion that exceeds the relevant
`
`page limitations may be denied provisionally and returned for refiling. If there is not a re-filing,
`
`the response may not be considered for the ruling. A party must show good cause and receive
`
`permission for leave to file any submission that exceeds the page limitations for that type of
`
`submission.
`
`Other Instructions/Contact
`
`Most Case/Discovery Management Conferences will be held by WEBEX. Several days
`
`before, the Parties will be invited to submit: (1) the names of the speaker and listener for each
`
`party with the identity of the party they represent; and (2) their e-mail addresses and telephone
`
`numbers where they can be reached, if necessary. The Parties will be sent an invitation, that will
`
`include a dial-in number, which they must accept if they wish to participate. Other procedural
`
`suggestions or directions will be sent before a WEBEX proceeding.
`
`Other Issues
`
`Parties should notify Chambers of the names of all non-parties or third-parties that are
`
`known to have discoverable information in this Investigation by a filing a Notice on EDIS before
`
`the first Discovery Management Teleconference, or as soon as can be determined. A copy of the
`
`Page 5 of 7
`
`

`

`same should be sent to Chambers through McNamara337@usitc.gov.
`
`As the Investigation proceeds closer to the Hearing, the Parties should advise Chambers
`
`if they need additional days or fewer days for the Hearing. The Parties are urged to think about
`
`the amount of time that they may need as soon as the case starts to narrow and eliminate
`
`patents/claims or prior art references.
`
`NEXT Advocates: Nurturing Excellence in Trial Advocates
`
`The Private Parties are encouraged to give less experienced attorneys an opportunity to
`
`argue, whether in a Markman Hearing, during the Hearing, or, as an incentive for participation in
`
`the program OALJ is now sponsoring, at some other oral argument as may be requested and
`
`possibly allowed. (See G.R. 11.). The Parties may request the same, for example on a summary
`
`determination motion, or on an issue that may be disposed of before the Hearing, if warranted
`
`and it is scheduled. A less experienced attorney who is arguing need not be identified, but we
`
`will note the law firms who are participating in the program. A request for a short oral argument
`
`on an issue the Parties jointly agree upon should be filed on EDIS with a pledge that less
`
`experienced attorneys from each party will be participating as a presenter.
`
`Contact
`
`Please note that in the event a party needs to contact Chambers for an emergency
`
`intervention or request which they have filed on EDIS (and even if they have not), unless
`
`otherwise notified, they should copy Ms. Jae B. Lee, jae.lee@usitc.gov, Mr. Alton L. Hare,
`
`alton.hare@usitc.gov, and McNamara337@usitc.gov. and whoever else may be designated at the
`
`time.
`
` If documents are being filed on EDIS, they also should be sent to
`
`McNamara337@usitc.gov.
`
`Page 6 of 7
`
`

`

`Communications with my Attorney-Advisors and Program Support Specialist whether
`
`oral or written, may not be cited in pleadings or papers unless there are writings and they are
`
`cited by Chambers. Letters should be addressed to the Administrative Law Judge.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 7 of 7
`
`