Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Kyocera Wireless Corp. v. ITC

Kyocera Wireless Corp. v. ITC

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

October 14, 2008, Decided

2007-1493, 2007-1494, 2007-1495, 2007-1496, 2007-1497, 2007-1498, 2007-1499, 2007-1514, 2007-1573, 2008-1004, 2008-1009, 2008-1010, 2008-1012, 2008-1013, 2008-1015, 2008-1018, 2008-1019

Opinion

 [***1059]  [*1345]   RADER, Circuit Judge.

The United States International Trade Commission ("ITC" or "Commission") determined that Qualcomm Incorporated ("Qualcomm") infringed Broadcom Corporation's ("Broadcom's") United States Patent 6,714,983 ("'983 Patent") with its imports. As a remedy, the ITC issued a limited exclusion order ("LEO") against the importation of all downstream products containing the accused technology. Aside from Qualcomm, the appellants in this action are Qualcomm's customers. Some customers are wireless device manufacturers whose products are subject to [***1060]  the LEO. Others are wireless network operators whose networks depend on products subject to the LEO. Despite the broad downstream scope of the LEO, Broadcom named only Qualcomm as a respondent in its ITC complaint. Because the ITC correctly construed the critical disputed claim term in Broadcom's patent, and because  [**6] the ITC correctly rejected Qualcomm's invalidity arguments under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103, this court affirms the ITC's finding that the '983 Patent is not invalid. This court also affirms the ITC's determination of no direct infringement by Qualcomm. However, because the ITC misapplied the standard for induced infringement, this court vacates and remands on infringement. Finally, because the ITC has no statutory authority to issue an LEO against downstream products of non-respondents, this court vacates and remands the limited exclusion order.

Broadcom's '983 patent is entitled "Modular, portable data processing terminal for use in a communication network." The patent claims a mobile computing device that can both communicate with wireless networks and operate in a reduced power mode to extend battery life:

One or more circuits adapted for use in a mobile computing device comprising:

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

545 F.3d 1340 *; 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 21505 **; 89 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1057 ***

KYOCERA WIRELESS CORPORATION, Appellant, and QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, Appellant, and MOTOROLA, INC., Appellant, and SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, LTD., Appellant, and LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM U.S.A., INC., Appellant, and SANYO FISHER CO., Appellant, and T-MOBILE USA, INC., Appellant, and AT&T MOBILITY, LLC (formerly known as Cingular Wireless, LLC), Appellant, and SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION, Appellant, and PALM, INC., Appellant, and PANTECH WIRELESS, INC., PANTECH CO., LTD., and PANTECH & CURITEL COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Appellants, and UT STARCOM, INC., Appellant, and HIGH TECH COMPUTER CORPORATION, Appellant, and SHENZHEN HUAWEI COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES CO., LTD., Appellant, and RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED and RESEARCH IN MOTION CORPORATION, Appellants, and FOXCONN INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LTD., Appellant, and CASIO HITACHI MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, LTD., Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, Appellee, and BROADCOM CORPORATION, Intervenor.

Prior History:  [**1] On appeal from the United States International Trade Commission in Investigation No. 337-TA-543.

Kyocera Wireless Corp. v. ITC, 315 Fed. Appx. 242, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 21457 (Fed. Cir., Aug. 27, 2008)

Disposition: AFFIRMED-IN-PART, VACATED-AND-REMANDED-IN-PART.

CORE TERMS

infringement, specification, wireless communication, imported, products, exclusion order, articles, induced, manufacturers, chips, downstream, patent, network, communications, mobile, anticipate, violating, wireless, customers, chipsets, parties, method of communication, prior art, circuitry, handsets, adapted, programmed, invention, software, affirms

Patent Law, Jurisdiction & Review, Standards of Review, De Novo Review, Infringement Actions, Claim Interpretation, General Overview, Aids & Extrinsic Evidence, Construction Preferences, Anticipation & Novelty, Description in Publications, Elements, Business & Corporate Compliance, Infringing Acts, Indirect Infringement, Intent & Knowledge, International Trade Law, US International Trade Commission Proceedings, Investigations, Judicial Review, Administrative Law, Judicial Review, Deference to Agency Statutory Interpretation, Governments, Legislation, Interpretation