It sounds like there are two prongs to this statement. First the patentee must prove that it has a substantial investment in the exploitation of a patent and second, it must prove that those investments pertain to products that are covered by the patent that is being asserted.
If I understand the ITC's position correctly under the second prong, does this mean that a patentee must now basically prove (in some legal venue)that a product infringes its patents before it can bring a case before the ITC? How else can a patentee prove that its investments in patents pertain to products covered by the patent?
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
