ITC response to complainants' motion to add/remove respondents
posted on
Nov 25, 2012 10:58AM
COMMISSION INVESTIGATIVE STAFF’S RESPONSE TO COMPLAINANTS’ MOTION TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT AND NOTICE OF INVESTIGATION TO REMOVE AND ADD RESPONDENTS The Commission Investigative Staff (“Staff”) responds to the motion of Complainants Technology Properties Limited LLC, Phoenix Digital Solutions LLC and Patriot Scientific Corporation (collectively “TPL” or “Complainants”) to amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation to remove Respondent Huawei North America and to add as additional respondents Huawei Device Co., Ltd., Huawei Device USA Inc., and Futurewei Technologies, Inc. (Mot. Docket No. 853-010), filed November 13, 2012. TPL does not seek to remove Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. as a respondent. For the reasons set forth herein, the Staff supports this motion to amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation.
......
II. DISCUSSION
TPL’s Complaint accuses Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. and Huawei North America of
violating Section 337 based on the importation and sale of accused products, including the
Huawei M835 and MediaPad. (Complaint at ¶76-7). However, Huawei North America does not
appear to exist. (Memo at 3). Complainants now contend that three additional parties are proper
respondents with respect to the accused Huawei products set forth in the original complaint.
According to TPL’s motion, Huawei Device Co., Ltd. is responsible for manufacturing at least
some of the accused Huawei products, and Futurewei Technologies, Inc. and Huawei Device
USA Inc. are responsible for importing as least some of those products. (Id.) Complainants also
allege that Huawei Device USA Inc. is responsible for selling the Huawei Accused Products in
the United States after importation. (Id.) The moving parties therefore desire to substitute
Huawei Device Co., Ltd., Huawei Device USA Inc., and Futurewei Technologies, Inc. for
Huawei North America as named respondents in this investigation. (Id.) Counsel for Huawei
Technologies Co., Ltd. stated that it would oppose this motion. (Mot. at 2).