An IP Matter & Antidumping Case Involving Diamond Sawblades
Telcordia Technologies, Inc. v. Cisco Sys. Inc., No. 09-1175, involved plaintiff's suit for infringement of patents '306, '763, an '633, related to transmission of data in telecommunications networks. The court vacated and remanded part of the district court's judgment denying defendant's JMOL motion on invalidity of the '306 patent, as the district court erroneously construed the only term on which it based its denial. With respect to remaining claims, the court affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's JMOL motion that the asserted claims of the '763 patent are indefinite. The court also affirmed the district court's finding that the jury's verdict of $6.5 million award compensates plaintiff only for past infringement, and also affirmed the district court's award of interest under section 284 as it does not constitute an impermissible double recovery. Lastly, the court held that it was not abuse its discretion by directing the parties to negotiate the terms of the appropriate royalty.
Diamond Sawblades Mfr. Coation v. US, 09-1274, concerned an antidumping case involving diamond sawblades and related parts from Korea and China. In affirming the decisions of the Court of International Trade, the court held that the Court of International Trade did not abuse its discretion when it ordered remand for further consideration an original Commission determination that there was neither material injury nor threat of material injury to the domestic diamond sawblade industry. Furthermore, the court affirmed the Commission's affirmative finding that imports of sawblades and parts from China and Korea pose a threat of material injury to the domestic industry, as the Court of International Trade correctly found that the Commission's determination on remand was supported by substantial evidence.
- Full text of Telcordia Technologies, Inc. v. Cisco Sys. Inc
- Full text of Diamond Sawblades Mfr. Coation v. US