FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler will venture to Capitol Hill next month amid a fierce debate surrounding the government push to force Apple to unlock one of its devices and ongoing consideration of whether and how to tweak the wiretap law known as the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) as a way to address broader encryption concerns. Hill observers expect Wheeler to get questions about CALEA and the FCC’s perspective on tweaking it, a topic that also came up during a November oversight hearing following the deadly attacks in Paris.
Customs brokers play a central role in the Energy Department’s plans to require submission of “certifications of admissibility” data elements in the Automated Commercial Environment at time of entry for products subject to energy efficiency standards, said DOE officials speaking at a workshop held Feb. 19 in Washington. A key motive behind the agency’s proposal is that it will prompt brokers to ask their importer clients whether products included in a given entry are subject to energy efficiency standards, forcing the importer to consider whether testing and certification are required, they said.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a challenge brought by Ford to CBP’s denial of a $6.2 million refund of duty overpayments on entries of Jaguar cars. Ford requested the refunds via reconciliation, and argued its reconciliation entries should have deemed liquidated, and the refunds issued, when a year passed without any CBP action. As explained by Ford, the Court of International Trade had first ruled its court challenge was filed to early (see 10072920), and then ruled it was too late (see 14061901). Moving past the timing question, the Federal Circuit a Feb. 3 decision (here) ruled that CIT was within its rights to decline to issue judgment in favor of Ford, and make the company challenge denied protests of the liquidations themselves. “District courts may refuse declaratory relief where an alternative remedy is better or more effective,” it said.
The Court of International Trade allowed CBP to proceed with enhanced bonding requirements on an importer of garlic from China, finding on Feb. 11 that a preliminary antidumping duty rate calculated by the Commerce Department is sufficient basis to mandate a high single transaction bond. Premier Trading had requested an injunction, arguing Commerce’s decision was premature until the final results of an AD duty administrative review set an actual final rate. But CIT said Premier failed to cite specific laws and evidence in favor of the injunction, criticizing a “lack of candor” by the company’s lawyer.
The three patents that haptics technology supplier Immersion is citing in International Trade Commission and federal court infringement complaints are “foundational” in nature and “vital to the use of haptics on a mobile device in particular,” Immersion CEO Victor Viegas said on a Thursday conference call with analysts about the complaints. Immersion said Thursday it filed against Apple and AT&T on six models of iPhones and the Apple Watch. “We felt they were the appropriate patents to bring to case in this particular action.” The three patents were never previously “litigated” in earlier Immersion patent lawsuits against other carriers and manufacturers, Viegas said. The complaints in U.S. District Court in Wilmington, Delaware, and at the ITC allege violations of U.S. patents 8,619,051, 8,773,356 and 8,659,571. The ITC complaint also seeks a Section 337 import investigation and an exclusion order barring import of the infringing Apple products. “Immersion’s inventions have literally shaped haptics as we know it today,” said Viegas. “Years of foresight, tenacity, passion have led us to the spot we find ourselves today. Haptics exists because the world needs it. Immersion has made it a reality. We’re the undisputed leader in haptics. We’ve carefully crafted a valuable set of solutions, knowhow, IP, even an ecosystem of partners to bring these rich experiences to consumers through over 3 billion devices. My hope is that those of you who really care about Immersion see the stunning success we’ve had in achieving this broad and meaningful adoption.” The complaints against Apple and AT&T are “an important step in our efforts to be fairly compensated for our achievements and our continuing efforts to bring touch to the markets we serve,” he said. Apple and AT&T representatives didn’t comment.
The three patents that haptics technology supplier Immersion is citing in International Trade Commission and federal court infringement complaints are “foundational” in nature and “vital to the use of haptics on a mobile device in particular,” Immersion CEO Victor Viegas said on a Thursday conference call with analysts about the complaints. Immersion said Thursday it filed against Apple and AT&T on six models of iPhones and the Apple Watch. “We felt they were the appropriate patents to bring to case in this particular action.” The three patents were never previously “litigated” in earlier Immersion patent lawsuits against other carriers and manufacturers, Viegas said. The complaints in U.S. District Court in Wilmington, Delaware, and at the ITC allege violations of U.S. patents 8,619,051, 8,773,356 and 8,659,571. The ITC complaint also seeks a Section 337 import investigation and an exclusion order barring import of the infringing Apple products. “Immersion’s inventions have literally shaped haptics as we know it today,” said Viegas. “Years of foresight, tenacity, passion have led us to the spot we find ourselves today. Haptics exists because the world needs it. Immersion has made it a reality. We’re the undisputed leader in haptics. We’ve carefully crafted a valuable set of solutions, knowhow, IP, even an ecosystem of partners to bring these rich experiences to consumers through over 3 billion devices. My hope is that those of you who really care about Immersion see the stunning success we’ve had in achieving this broad and meaningful adoption.” The complaints against Apple and AT&T are “an important step in our efforts to be fairly compensated for our achievements and our continuing efforts to bring touch to the markets we serve,” he said. Apple and AT&T representatives didn’t comment.
The following lawsuits were filed at the Court of International Trade during the week of Feb. 8-14:
The three patents that haptics technology supplier Immersion is citing in International Trade Commission and federal court infringement complaints are “foundational” in nature and “vital to the use of haptics on a mobile device in particular,” Immersion CEO Victor Viegas said on a Thursday conference call with analysts about the complaints. Immersion said Thursday it filed against Apple and AT&T on six models of iPhones and the Apple Watch. “We felt they were the appropriate patents to bring to case in this particular action.” The three patents were never previously “litigated” in earlier Immersion patent lawsuits against other carriers and manufacturers, Viegas said. The complaints in U.S. District Court in Wilmington, Delaware, and at the ITC allege violations of U.S. patents 8,619,051, 8,773,356 and 8,659,571. The ITC complaint also seeks a Section 337 import investigation and an exclusion order barring import of the infringing Apple products. “Immersion’s inventions have literally shaped haptics as we know it today,” said Viegas. “Years of foresight, tenacity, passion have led us to the spot we find ourselves today. Haptics exists because the world needs it. Immersion has made it a reality. We’re the undisputed leader in haptics. We’ve carefully crafted a valuable set of solutions, knowhow, IP, even an ecosystem of partners to bring these rich experiences to consumers through over 3 billion devices. My hope is that those of you who really care about Immersion see the stunning success we’ve had in achieving this broad and meaningful adoption.” The complaints against Apple and AT&T are “an important step in our efforts to be fairly compensated for our achievements and our continuing efforts to bring touch to the markets we serve,” he said. Apple and AT&T representatives didn’t comment.
Four models of “accent” chests imported by Ethan Allen are not subject to antidumping duties on wooden bedroom furniture from China, said the Commerce Department in a remand redetermination filed “under protest” on Feb. 12. Reversing course from a 2014 scope ruling where it found all four models covered by AD duties (see 14060403), Commerce said all four models are living room furniture, not bedroom furniture, despite continued concerns that they are suitable and sometimes advertised for bedroom use.
Technology and Internet industry groups urged the U.S. to continue promoting IP protection among its trading partners, and identified countries that violate existing IP obligations or fail to provide "fair and equitable" market access, in comments filed with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and made public Monday. Stakeholders submitted comments to the USTR in response to the agency's request for written responses to its Special 301 report (see 1602080061), which is meant to "identify countries that deny adequate and effective protection of intellectual property rights (IPR) or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S. persons who rely on intellectual property protection." Commenters also warned of both active and proposed rules by certain global competitors that limit cross-border data flows and encourage digital protectionism.