throbber
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`WASHINGTON, DC
`
`In The Matter Of
`
`CERTAIN SILICON MICROPHONE
`PACKAGES AND PRODUCTS
`CONTAINING SAME
`
`337-TA-825
`
`ORDER NO. 8: REGARDING RESPONDENTS’ MOTIONS IN LIMINE NO. 5
`(September 18, 2012)
`
`On September 7, 2012, Analog Devices, Inc., (ADI) Amkor Technology, Inc. (Amkor),
`
`and Avnet, Inc. (Arnvet) (collectively, “Respondents”) filed Motion in Limine No. 5 (MIL 5) to
`
`Exclude Certain Testimony and Argument on the Basis of Collateral Estoppel and Judicial
`
`Estoppel offered by Complainant Knowles Electronics, LLC (Knowles). (Motion Docket No.
`
`825-019.)
`
`On September 13, 2012, Complainant filed its Opposition to Motion in Limine No. 5.
`
`Complainant argues Resp0ndent’s motion is: (1) moot (since it is raised in an improper appendix
`
`to its brief in violation of Ground Rule 9.2); (2) tmtimcly (since it was not raised before it filed
`
`its brief —improperly or not); and (3) inappropriate (since it requires resolution of the merits).
`
`Afier examining and analyzing the submissions of the parties, I find that MIL 5 is an
`
`inappropriate attempt to have me decide issues that ca.nonly properly be decided as a Motion for
`
`Summary Detennination or in a final Initial Determination after a hearing on the merits. More
`
`specifically, Respondent is really requesting I rule that Complainant may not assert the patents at
`
`issue because of collateral estoppel/resjudicata orjudicial estoppel, both of which require
`
`significant evidentiary and legal analysis not appropriate for a motion in limine.
`
`1
`
`

`
`I also consider it likely Respondents have not correctly applied the law with respect to
`
`issue preclusion. (See Kearns v. General Motors C0rp., 94 F.3d 1553 (Fed. Cir. 1996) and other
`
`USITC decisions cited by Complainant.) Hence, I recommend Respondents give serious
`
`consideration to their position concerning issue preclusion.
`
`Respondent’s MIL 5 is hereby DENIED.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`%.. £534j —-L
`
`Thomas B. Pender
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`2
`
`

`
`IN THE MATTER OF CERTAIN SILICON MICROPHONE
`PACKAGES AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME
`
`337-TA-825
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I, Lisa R. Barton, hereby certify that the attached PUBLIC ORDER NO; 8 has been served
`upon the following parties via first class mail and air mail where necessary on
`sgptgmhgf 13
`, 2012.
`
`%;%§>
`
`Lisa R. Barton, Acting Secretary
`U.S. Intemational Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW, Room 112A
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`t
`
`FOR COMPLAINANT KNOWLES ELECTRONICS LLC.:
`
`David A. Garr, Esq.
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`1201 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`)Via Hand Delivery
`(
`)Via Overnight Mail
`(
`(\)Via First Class Mail
`(
`)Other:
`
`FOR RESPONDENTS ANALOG DEVICES, INC., AMKOR TECHNOLOGY, INC. &
`AVNET INC.
`
`Steven Bauer, Esq.
`PROSKAUER ROSE, LLP
`One Intemational Place
`Boston, MA 02110
`
`)Via Hand Delivery
`(
`)Via Ovemight Mail
`(
`(\ )Via First Class Mail
`(
`)Other:
`
`PUBLIC MAILING LIST
`
`Heather Hall
`LEXIS - NEXIS
`9443 Springboro Pike
`Miamisburg, OH 45342
`
`Kermeth Clair
`THOMSON VVEST
`1100 —13"' Street NW
`Suite 200
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`)Via Hand Delivery
`(
`)Via Overnight Mail
`(
`(\)Via First Class Mail
`(
`)Other:
`
`)Via Hand Delivery
`(
`)Via Ovemight Mail
`(
`(\)Via First Class M ail
`(
`)Other:

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket