Canon Seeks to Partially Terminate ITC Investigation

Canon has asked the US International Trade Commission, or USITC, for a partial termination of the investigation against dozens of remanufacturers and distributors of remanufactured cartridges in the USA.

According to the motion, Canon wants to withdraw all its allegations and claims on four of the original nine “dongle gear drum” patents it lodged back in May, namely U.S. Patent Nos. 8,369,744 (the ’744 patent), 8,565,640 (the ‘640 patent), 8,676,085 (the ’085 patent), and 8,135,304 (the ’304 patent).

In that original complaint, Canon identified thirty-two claims on its nine dongle gear drum patents naming 10 inventors. The plaintiffs are as follows:

• ACM Technologies, Inc.
• Do It Wiser LLC:
• International Laser Group, Inc.:
• Jiangxi Yibo E-Tech Co., Ltd., Aster Graphics Co., Ltd., Aster Graphics, Inc., The Supplies Guys, LLC, American Internet Holdings, LLC
• Katun Corporation
• Nectron International, Inc.
• Ninestar Image Tech Limited, Zhuhai Seine Technology Co., Ltd., Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd., Seine Tech (USA) Co., Ltd., Seine Image Int’l Co., Ltd., Ninestar Image Tech, Ltd., Seine Image (USA) Co., Ltd., Nano Pacific Corporation, Linkyo Corp., Ink Technologies Printer Supplies, LLC
• Print-Rite Holdings Ltd., Print-Rite N.A., Inc., Union Technology International (M.C.O.) Co. Ltd., Print-Rite Unicorn Image Products Co. Ltd., Innotex Precision Ltd.
• LD Products, Inc.
• Shenzhen ASTA Official Consumable Co., Ltd.
• Acecom, Inc. – San Antonio
• Grand Image Inc.
• Green Project, Inc.
• Online Tech Stores, LLC
• Printronic Corporation
• Zinyaw LLC

Canon’s reasons to partly terminate the investigation are based on Commission Rule 210.21(a)(1), which stipulates that “Any party may move at any time prior to the issuance of an initial determination on violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to terminate an investigation in whole or in part as to any or all respondents, on the basis of withdrawal of the complaint or certain allegations contained therein, or for good cause other than the grounds listed in paragraph (a)(2) of this section. A motion for termination of an investigation based on withdrawal of the complaint, or for good cause, shall contain a statement that there are no agreements, written or oral, express or implied between the parties concerning the subject matter of the investigation, or if there are any agreements concerning the subject matter of the investigation, all such agreements shall be identified, and if written, a copy shall be filed with the Commission along with the motion”.

Canon argues in its motion that the USITC is still in its prehearing, early stages of the investigation and fact discovery. It claims a more streamlined investigation will conserve the resources of the private parties, the Office of Unfair Import Investigations, as well as the Commission. Canon states that there are no agreements, written or oral, express or implied, between the parties concerning the subject matter of this investigation as it relates to Canon’s motion.

If the USITC grant Canon’s motion, only twenty-five claims covering five patents, with only four named inventors, will remain in the investigation.

One industry commentator has told Recycling Times “Canon appears not to have done its original homework. Two weeks ago, two company names were dropped from the investigation because they simply did not exist. And now Canon has reduced the number of patents and claims in the investigation.”

You can see a copy of Canon’s actual motion requesting a partial termination of the ITC investigation at:
http://issuu.com/recyclingtimes/docs/canon_s_motion

Also, you can watch more at inTouch News

For further advice on US, European and Chinese patents, contact patent attorney Helen Duan at helenduan@innopat.com.cn