InterDigital Inc (IDCC)

[olddog967]

In regard to vacating a case decision because of mootness, the following cited article discusses a March 2015 CAFC decision on the issue.

The case at issue was an ITC case where one of the asserted patents expired during the Commission’s final review period. The Commission issued a no violation finding covering all of the asserted patents. The losing party filed an appeal requesting that the ITC decision in regard to the expired patent be vacated. CAFC using it’s discretion, upheld the ITC decision and refused to vacate.

The Commission also ruled that the domestic industry requirement was not met. The loser claimed that the Commission’s new domestic industry requirements based on IDCC case decisions had been applied retroactively. CAFC did not agree and upheld the Commission decision.. This would be another reason for not filing cases again with the ITC, as IDCC could now have problems meeting the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement.

http://www.itcblog.com/federal-circuit-affirms-itc-final-determination-of-no-violation-of-section-337-in-lsi-corp-appeal-2014-1410