Fed. Cir. Alongside the International Trade Commission and intervenors in Broadcom’s infringement appeal


On Tuesday, the Federal Circuit issued a ruling in favor of the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) and intervenor Renesas Electronics Corporation and others in upholding both an ITC ruling and two rulings of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The case stems from Broadcom Corporation’s ITC complaint that Renesas and others infringed its patents by importing certain products in violation of a provision of the Tariff Act.

In particular, the dispute concerns two patents held by Broadcom. U.S. Patent No. 7,437,583 seeks to “reduce power consumption in computer systems by blocking clock signals with circuitry to turn signals on and off for downstream parts of the circuit”, while U.S. Patent No. 7,512,752, directed to a “memory access unit that improves on conventional methods of requesting data located at different addresses in shared memory,” the opinion explains.

Broadcom’s ITC allegations were heard by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) who ruled that the company failed to demonstrate a violation of the Tariff Act’s “unfair trade practices” provision. ‘import’. Broadcom would have failed to prove the second prong of the article’s conjunctive requirement: that an industry related to the patent-protected article exists or is being established in the United States. The ALJ also found that a claim in the ‘752 patent was not patentable because it was obvious from certain prior art.

The ITC then upheld the relevant portions of the ALJ’s determination. In this week’s ruling, the Federal Circuit reviewed and upheld the ITC’s finding that there was no tariff law violation because Broadcom failed to demonstrate a branch. of national production. Specifically, the appellate panel said it requires companies to demonstrate “” that there is a product of the domestic industry that actually enforces “at least one claim of the claimed patent” in order to satisfy to the “technical requirement” of the provision.

The panel ruled that Broadcom did not identify any specific integration of its technology, firmware, or a specific location where the firmware was stored. Further, China did not challenge the ITC’s finding on this point, but rather introduced new theories that the ITC properly considered to have been disclaimed. The decision also upheld the PTAB’s two joint patentability decisions, putting Broadcom’s and Renesas’ cross-appeals to bed for now.

Prior to the federal circuit, Broadcom was represented by Steptoe & Johnson LLP and Renesas by Morrison & Foerster LLP.


Comments are closed.