直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Suprema Inc. v. ITC  and ClearCorrect Operating v. ITC Top the List of the Most Important Federal Circuit Decisions from 2015

January 06, 2016

Authored and Edited by Elizabeth D. Ferrill; Esther H. Lim

In a pair of 2015 cases, the Federal Circuit reached different conclusions on the ITC’s authority over patent cases. In August, in Suprema Inc. v. ITC, No. 12-1170 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 10, 2015)—a case involving fingerprint scanners—a split en banc Court held that the ITC can prevent importation of goods based on induced infringement.  Several months later, in ClearCorrect Operating v. ITC, No. 14-1527 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 10, 2015)—a case involving 3D digital models for teeth aligners—a split panel held that the ITC cannot prevent importation of digital data.  These represent two of the most important Federal Circuit decisions from 2015 because they define the scope of ITC’s authority to bar importation in an increasingly global and digital world where cross-border collaborations abound and the distinction between tangible products and digital representations has blurred.

In these cases, the Federal Circuit sent mixed messages:  expanding the ITC’s authority beyond direct infringement in Suprema while limiting its authority to cases involving “articles” in ClearCorrect. Under Suprema, the ITC can adjudicate indirect infringement of method claims.  Meanwhile, under ClearCorrect, the ITC is powerless to exclude digital transmission of patented software because it is not a “material” thing.  The same software stored on a disk, however, would constitute an “article” subject to ITC jurisdiction. Although the Court may address the tension in an en banc review, it might defer to Congress to clarify or change the law.

These decisions have far-reaching implications, particularly in the rapidly growing markets of e-commerce, 3D printing, and digital technology.  Although Suprema closed the loophole for articles that were induced by foreign sellers to infringe after importation, ClearCorrect leaves open the possibility of avoiding the reach of the ITC through digital transmissions.  Thus, these cases will shape how business is conducted, how products are designed and implemented, and how articles are sold internationally.  Relatedly, ClearCorrect would also affect the ITC’s jurisdiction under U.S. copyrights, especially against digital importers of streamed data.

The story perhaps does not stop here, for more chapters will likely be written either by the courts or by Congress or perhaps both.

Tags

International Trade Commission (ITC), jurisdiction

Contacts

Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
Email

Copyright © 2016 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.

Related Insights

Conference

IAM Live: Navigating the UPC 2026

November 3, 2026

Paris

Conference

4th Global Patent Litigation FORUM

October 29, 2026

Munich

Conference

13th Annual Summit for Women Leaders in Life Sciences Law

July 29-30, 2026

Boston

Webinar

U.S. Patent Case Law Update 2026

July 23, 2026

Webinar

Webinar

Successful Strategies to Win Alice Motions and Fee Awards in Patent Cases Against Non-Practicing Entities

July 22, 2026

Webinar

Webinar

Early Motions in Trade Secret Litigation – Offensive and Defensive Insights

July 15, 2026

Webinar

Lecture

IPIC/McGill Summer IP Course 2026: Understanding Trademarks

July 14, 2026

Montreal

Federal Circuit IP Blog

“2” Does Not Provide Written Description Support for “1”: Federal Circuit Affirms District Court’s Invalidation of Patent

July 8, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Vacates and Remands Infringement and Damages Judgment After Erroneous Verdict Form and Eligibility Analysis

July 8, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP