Here’s the latest.

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Trump’s Steel Tariffs

Reported by Lawrence Hurley on

This week, the Supreme Court refused to hear the petition American Institute for International Steel, Inc. v. United States arising from steel and aluminum tariffs implemented by the Trump administration in March of 2018. The Court’s denial cements the Trump administration’s win against the American Institute for International Steel in the Federal Circuit earlier this year. The tariffs in dispute were a 25% tariff on imported steel and a 10% tariff on imported aluminum. Hurley offered this summary of the denial:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday turned away a challenge to President Donald Trump’s tariffs on imported steel brought by an industry group that had argued that a key part of the law under which he imposed the duties violates the U.S. Constitution. The justices declined to hear the American Institute for International Steel’s appeal of a February ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in favor of the administration. The institute is a pro-free trade group that represents steel importers and users of imported steel.

For more information on this case, see our coverage.

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Cert in Rovi-Comcast ITC Dispute

Reported by Steven Adkins on

The Supreme Court also denied the petition Comcast Corp. v. International Trade Commission this week. Before the Court’s denial, the Federal Circuit agreed with the ITC’s ruling that Comcast violated section 337 under an induced infringement theory. Adkins pointed out the takeaways following the final conclusion of this case:

Companies importing products into the United States (or having products imported) should be aware of the ITC’s reading of importation and whom the ITC can find to be an importer for purposes of investigating potential Section 337 violations. Moreover, the reach of Section 337 is broader than just products that infringe at the moment of importation; post-importation infringement can also give rise to a violation of the trade law.

For more information on this case, see our coverage.

Federal Circuit Backs Ford’s Design Patent Win In Auto Parts Fight

Reported by Dani Kass on

The Federal Circuit upheld a Texas decision finding a certain marketer and distributor of aftermarket automotive parts, New World International, infringed on a total of four Ford patents in Ford Global Technologies, LLC v. New World International, Inc. The suit, originally filed in 2015 by Ford, upheld a $568,000 dollar judgment including a $2.1 million dollar award of attorney’s fees. Kass provided this summary:

Ford filed the suit in 2015, accusing the companies collectively referred to as New World of selling aftermarket parts that copied the equipment designs covered by its patents. The case, which was originally filed in Michigan federal court, was later transferred to Texas after the U.S. Supreme Court’s TC Heartland ruling limited where plaintiffs could file. Parts of the case were decided on summary judgment and others after a jury trial, then fees were granted after New World supposedly handed over inaccurate sales records during discovery and filed ‘multiple excessive’ motions that delayed litigation.

For more information on this case, see our coverage.