The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has decided not to modify, reverse, or reverse the Presiding Administrative Judge’s (ALJ) preliminary ruling denying the request for interim relief. This means that Reynolds Tobacco cannot ban 35 companies that allegedly infringed its vape patents from continuing to sell disposable vape devices and their components in the United States.
U.S. ITC Issues Part 337 Final Ruling
On December 18, the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) issued a notice that the U.S. International Trade Commission has decided not to modify, vacate, or reverse the Presiding Administrative Judge’s (ALJ) decision denying the preliminary determination of the request for interim Relief (” ID “, Ruling No. 28). The decision means that RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. Its application for a temporary exclusion order and cease and desist order for the import and sale of certain disposable electronic cigarette devices and their components was not approved.
Reynolds Tobacco’s application for a temporary exclusion order is not granted
The investigation was filed by British American Tobacco subsidiary Reynolds Tobacco on July 22, 2024, alleging that the import and sale of certain disposable e-cigarette devices and their components by 35 companies infringed its US Patent No. 11,925,202. The companies surveyed included companies in China, Hong Kong, and the United States.
Along with the complaint. RJ filed a temporary exclusion order and a cease and desist order seeking to bar these products from entering or continuing to be sold in the U.S. market during the investigation.
The U.S. International Trade Commission accepted the case and assigned the presiding administrative judge to lead the investigation. However, due to the complexity of the case. The Committee designated the interim relief proceedings as a “more complex” matter on 29 July 2024. Some of the defendants, such as Kimsun and Bidi Vapor, closed the investigation by reaching consent orders. However several defendants did not appear in court.
On November 19, 2024, an administrative judge issued an Interim relief ruling (” TEO “) denying Reynolds Tobacco’s request for interim relief. It held that:
- The patent infringement claim lacks the probability of success;
- There is a major dispute over the validity of the patent;
- The plaintiff has failed to show that failure to take relief would cause irreparable harm.
Renault then filed a comment document but said it would not seek a review of the decision by the commission.
