ARTICLE
14 June 2021

Chief ALJ Bullock Issues Initial Determination Of No Violation In Certain Foodservice Equipment (337-TA-1166)

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 June 4, 2021, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued a notice regarding his initial determination ("ID") finding no violation of section 337 in Certain Foodservice Equipment and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-1166).
United States Intellectual Property

On June 4, 2021, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued a notice regarding his initial determination ("ID") finding no violation of section 337 in Certain Foodservice Equipment and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-1166).

By way of background, this investigation was based on a May 30, 2019 complaint filed by Illinois Tool Works, Inc. of Glenview, Illinois; Vesta Global Limited of Hong Kong; Vesta (Guangzhou) Catering Equipment Co., Ltd. of China; and Admiral Craft Equipment Corp. of Westbury, New York (collectively, "Complainants") alleging violations of section 337 by five Chinese respondents that import and/or sell in the U.S. certain commercial kitchen equipment and components thereof for use in restaurants, bars, cafes, cafeterias, etc. whose manufacture involves the misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition through tortious interference with contractual relationships. According to the ID, Chief ALJ Bullock determined there was no violation of section 337 based on the following conclusions of law:

  • Respondents have misappropriated certain of Complainants' trade secrets in the manufacture of certain accused products.
  • Complainants have not shown that Respondents tortiously interfered with contracts.
  • Complainants have not shown that the importation and sale of accused products has the threat or effect of destroying or substantially injuring a domestic industry.

A public version of the ID containing more detailed information will issue after all parties have submitted their proposed redactions to the Chief ALJ.

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.

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