Finnegan prevails in two hoverboard battles at the ITC for Hangzhou Chic

In decisions announced less than three months apart, Finnegan achieved victories in the International Trade Commission (ITC) in two separate Section 337 cases for client Hangzhou Chic Intelligent Technology Co. (“Chic”). Razor and Segway filed two separate complaints with the ITC alleging patent infringement, each naming dozens of hoverboard companies as proposed respondents (Razor itself was a respondent in the Segway 337 investigation). In their respective complaints, both Razor and Segway asked for a general exclusion order (GEO). If successful, either complainant would have shut down the entire hoverboard industry. Many respondents chose not to defend and took default judgments or signed consent orders. But Finnegan, representing Chic, led joint defense groups consisting of a handful of remaining respondents and litigated both cases through trial and subsequent Commission review. In the Razor investigation, Chief Administrative Law Judge Bullock found that Chic and the remaining respondents did not infringe the asserted patent, and that Razor did not satisfy the domestic industry requirement. The Commission affirmed that decision. Similarly, in the Segway investigation, ALJ Shaw found that Chic and other remaining respondents did not infringe the two asserted Segway patents and that no domestic industry existed with respect to those patents either. The Commission also affirmed that decision.