ARTICLE
28 October 2021

ALJ Shaw Finds Violation Of Section 337 In Certain Movable Barrier Operator Systems (337-TA-1209)

OM
Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P

Contributor

Oblon is among the largest US law firms that exclusively practice IP law. Businesses worldwide depend on Oblon to establish, protect and leverage their IP assets. Our team of 100+ legal professionals includes some of the country’s most respected practitioners. Most attorneys hold advanced degrees in engineering, physics, chemistry, biotechnology and other scientific disciplines. Oblon is headquartered within steps of the USPTO office in Alexandria, Virginia. 
On October 13, 2021, ALJ David P. Shaw released the public version (Part I, Part II) of his final initial determination ("ID") finding a violation of section 337 in Certain Movable Barrier Operator Systems...
United States Intellectual Property
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

On October 13, 2021, ALJ David P. Shaw released the public version ( Part I Part II) of his final initial determination ("ID") finding a violation of section 337 in Certain Movable Barrier Operator Systems and Components Thereof  (Inv. No. 337-TA-1209).

By way of background, this investigation was instituted on August 10, 2020 based on a complaint filed by Overhead Door Corporation of Lewisville, Texas and GMI Holdings Inc. of Mount Hope, Ohio alleging violations of section 337 by The Chamberlain Group, Inc. of Oak Brook, Illinois ("Respondent") through the importation and/or sale of certain moveable barrier operator systems and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,970,345; 9,483,935; 7,180,260; 7,956,718; and 8,410,895. The asserted patents relate generally to remotely controlled barrier operator systems for opening and closing garage doors, gates, and other barriers. The accused products are barrier operators, including garage door operators, commercial barrier operators, and gate operators that include a transmitter and receiver.

According to the ID, ALJ David P. Shaw found a violation of section 337 based on the following conclusions of law:

  • The accused products infringe the asserted claims of the asserted patents.
  • The domestic industry requirement has been satisfied with respect to the asserted patents.
  • It has not been shown by clear and convincing evidence that the asserted claims of the asserted patents are invalid.
  • It has not been shown by clear and convincing evidence that the asserted claims of the asserted patents are patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101.

ALJ Shaw recommended issuance of a limited exclusion order and cease-and-desist order directed to Respondent, and that bond be set at 100%.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More