(United States Federal Circuit) - Ruling of the International Trade Commission that respondent-intervenor uPI violated the Consent Order as to the imports known as "previously accused products" is affirmed,the modified penalty is affirmed, and the ruling of no violation as to the post-Consent Order products is reversed, and where: 1) substantial evidence does not support the Commission's conclusion that uPI's post-Consent Order products were independently developed; and 2) the United States sale or importation of downstream products,which incorporate uPI's previously accused upstream products and infringe the '190 patent, constitutes a violation of the Consent Order's knowingly aiding or abetting provision.
Source: findlaw.com