Skip to content

International Trade Commission Litigation

With a presence in Washington, D.C., as well as a national and global presence, the collective experience of Vinson & Elkins’ IP attorneys in over 30 Section 337 investigations by the International Trade Commission provides a perfect platform to meet our clients’ business needs. Our attorneys have “end to end” experience – from pre-complaint, to enforcement by Customs and Border Protection and the Department of Justice – with a wide variety of subject matters, including Section 337 investigations based on patents, trade secrets and unfair competition claims. V&E attorneys have been involved in “bet the company” cases before the ITC and have also handled cases tailored to meet the needs of small- and medium-sized businesses.

Well-versed in the ITC’s rules of engagement, remedies, and relief, we build a compelling case for our clients, whether domestic or foreign-based, and whether as complainant or respondent. We represent clients in a variety of industries, including clean energy, plastics, software, high tech, semiconductors, consumer goods, and electronics. Our team is deep in scientific and technical talent and IP litigation experience, and we combine these skills to safeguard and advance our clients’ interests before the ITC.

Experience Highlights

  • (ITC) – Represented consumer products company in asserting patent infringement, trademark infringement, copyright infringement, false advertising and unfair competition claims against multiple Chinese-based counterfeit manufacturers, as well as large online marketplaces including Alibaba, DH Gate, and Bonanza; after institution and successful motion practice and discovery, successfully settled the dispute against the online marketplaces and obtained default judgments against the Chinese-based counterfeit manufacturers

  • (ITC); (Fed. Cir.) — Defending the world’s leading supplier of personal computers in ITC Section 337 investigations regarding audio, video, and computer hardware and software technologies

  • (ITC) — Lead counsel to a wireless handset manufacturer in investigation regarding media player technology; obtained summary determination of invalidity based on lack of patentability; affirmed on appeal

  • (ITC) – Represented a leading semiconductor materials manufacturer against a former competitor in an investigation regarding silicon wafer manufacturing; obtained a complete dismissal of the action

  • (ITC) — Represented a retail plastics bag manufacturer before the ITC relating to patent infringement by foreign manufacturers and domestic importers of plastic bags; we obtained one of only two general exclusion orders issued by the ITC in 2004 and successfully stopped the importation of infringing plastic bags by a number of competitors

  • (ITC) — Represented a major smartphone manufacturer before the ITC relating to alleged patent infringement concerning flash memory chips; we obtained a favorable ruling of no violation and no infringement after a two-week hearing before the ALJ

  • (ITC) — Represented a major smartphone manufacturer in an investigation brought by BTG International before the ITC relating to NAND multi-level flash memory devices; we tried the case to the ALJ and obtained a favorable settlement shortly before issuance of the ALJ’s opinion

  • (E.D. Tex.); (N.D. Cal.); (ITC) — Represented a smartphone manufacturer in multiple patent infringement matters involving global licensing disputes relating to standard-essential cellular telephony patents

  • (ITC) — Represented the world’s leading PC manufacturer in a case involving noise cancellation technology used with multiple-microphone PCs;  after deposing the technical expert and obtaining admissions of noninfringement, the case settled on favorable terms one month before trial

  • (ITC); (D.Del.) — Lead trial counsel in a multi-national patent litigation between Sharp and AU Optronics; after Sharp initiated the patent litigation by asserting seven patents against AU Optronics in the ITC and Delaware, identified over 12 patents for AU Optronics to counter-assert in the ITC, multiple United States district courts, China, and Taiwan; shortly after AU Optronics counter-asserted its patents in the United States, the parties settled the dispute with a global patent license agreement

  • (ITC) — Represented Hitachi, Ltd. of Japan and Hitachi Data Systems Corp. in a patent litigation brought by EMC Corporation involving large scale data storage and virtualization technology implemented by redundant array of independent disks

  • (E.D. Tex.); (ITC) — Represented a global automobile manufacturer in the defense of a patent infringement action relating to telematics systems

  • (ITC) — Represented Hitachi Maxell of Japan in a patent litigation involving patented zero-mercury-added alkaline battery technology

  • (ITC) — Represented a digital radio technology company in an investigation brought by a patent holding company; the patents at issue involved parallel processing CPUs; resolved the case with a favorable settlement

  • (ITC) — Defended a major smartphone manufacturer in an ITC investigation involving several patents relating to flash memories and methods of manufacturing them; the case settled shortly before trial began on favorable terms for our client

  • (ITC) — Represented a large retail grocery chain in patent investigation brought by a grill manufacturer before the United States International Trade Commission relating to multiple mode (solid and gas fueled) outdoor grills; obtained favorable settlement and complete resolution for our client