Trade Law Daily is a Warren News publication.

Section 337 Terminations for Arbitration Subject to Appeal, Says Federal Circuit

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned an International Trade Commission decision to end a Section 337 patent investigation of infringement by LG so that the case could go to arbitration with patent holder InterDigital. LG had said it held a license for the patented technology at issue, and the commission found that a plausible basis for arbitration. Both the ITC and LG argued that the appeals court had no jurisdiction to hear the case, because termination for arbitration is not listed as subject to appeal under the governing statute, 19 USC 1337. But the appeals court found that termination of a Section 337 investigation for arbitration is in effect an appealable final determination, even though it isn’t enumerated in the statute. Turning to whether LG had grounds to request arbitration, the appeals court found that the portion of the agreement governing the license on 3G technology had expired, so LG had no right to assert a right to arbitration over the license.

Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article

Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.

Judge Alan Lourie dissented. Although he agreed with the majority on LG having no grounds to ask for arbitration, he said that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the case in the first place. The statute is clear that terminations for arbitration are not appealable, he said, and in any case such a termination isn’t final -- if the arbitrator finds that no right exists to arbitration, InterDigital would be able to file another complaint at the ITC.

(Interdigital Communications v. ITC, CAFC No. 12-1628, dated 06/07/13, Judges Prost and Bryson, Judge Lourie dissenting)