Settlement Halts Infringement Claim Aimed at Toshiba

WASHINGTON: A settlement has halted an U.S. government investigation into allegations of patent infringement aimed at Toshiba concerning image display and motion-sensitive sound effects devices.

On Jan. 20, 2012, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) posted a notice on the Federal Register—Certain Motion-Sensitive Sound Effects Devices and Image Display Devices and Components and Products Containing Same; Termination of Investigation—saying the ITC will not review a “determination granting a joint motion to terminate” the investigation.

The investigation involved “respondents Toshiba Corporation of Tokyo, Japan, and Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc., of Irvine, Calif. (collectively, ‘Toshiba’)” and the decision to end the investigation into the allegations of patent infringement were “based on a settlement agreement” being reached, the notice says.

The ITC says it instituted the investigation on May 19, 2011, based on a complaint filed by Ogma, LLC which alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 “in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain motion-sensitive sound effects devices and image display devices and components and products containing same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,825,427 and 6,150,947.”

However, “numerous respondents, including Toshiba” were named in the complaint, and on July 19, 2011, an administrative law judge (ALJ) issued “Order 1” in relation to “Investigation No. 337-TA-787” consolidating the investigations, the ITC says. The consolidated investigation then proceeded, and “on Dec. 13, 2011, Ogma and Toshiba filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation as to Toshiba based on a settlement agreement,” the notice says.

On Dec. 21, 2011, the ALJ granted the motion to terminate the investigation as to the Toshiba firms, which were “the last remaining respondents in the investigation,” and the ALJ “determined that the investigation should be terminated.”

The ITC has determined not to review the decision and the investigation is terminated.