UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN LOCATION-SHARING
`SYSTEMS, RELATED SOFTWARE,
`COMPONENTS THEREOF, AND
`PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME
`
`
`ORDER NO. 23:
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1347
`
`
`GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND MOVING
`RESPONDENTS’ RESPONSES TO THE COMPLAINT OF AGIS
`SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC AND ADVANCED GROUND
`INFORMATION
`SYSTEMS,
`INC. AND NOTICE OF
`INVESTIGATION
`
`(June 14, 2023)
`
`
`
`
`
`On May 30, 2023, Respondents ASUSTeK Computer Inc. ASUS Computer International,
`
`BLU Product, Inc., HMD America, Inc., HMD Global, HMD Global Oy, Kyocera Corporation,
`
`Lenovo Group Ltd., Lenovo (United States), Inc., Motorola Mobility LLC, OnePlus Technology
`
`(Shenzen) Co., Ltd., Panasonic Holdings Corporation, Panasonic Corporation of North America,
`
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Sony Corporation, TCL
`
`Communication Technology Holdings Limited, TCL Electronics Holdings Limited, TCL
`
`Technology Group Corporation, TCT Mobile (US) Inc., Xiaomi Corporation, Xiaomi H.K. Ltd.,
`
`Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd., and Xiaomi Inc. (collectively, “Moving Respondents”) moved
`
`(1347-011) for leave to amend their responses to the complaint and notice of investigation to add
`
`a defense of inequitable conduct. Pursuant to Ground Rule 5.1, Moving Respondents certified that
`
`Complainants AGIS Software Development LLC and Advanced Ground Information Systems,
`
`Inc. (collectively, “AGIS”) “oppose the motion, but to not intend to file a response.” Mot. at cover.
`
`Moving Respondents certified that the Commission Investigative Staff and Respondent Google
`
`LLC do not oppose this motion.
`
`

`

`Moving Respondents’ proposed amended responses to the Complaint and Notice of
`
`Investigation add a defense of inequitable conduct that is essentially identical to the defense
`
`Google moved to amend, alleging inequitable conduct of U.S. Patent No. 8,213,970 (“the ’970
`
`patent”). Mot. at 1. I granted Google’s motion to amend its response to the complaint and notice
`
`of investigation on April 27, 2023. Order No. 11 (Apr. 27, 2023). Exhibits 1a–1j to the motion
`
`contain the proposed amended responses, and Exhibits 2a–2j the motion contain redlines showing
`
`a comparison of the initial responses and the proposed amended responses. Although AGIS
`
`informed Moving Respondents that it opposed this motion, it did not file any response to this
`
`motion during its time to respond to the motion.
`
`For the reasons set forth in Order No. 11, Moving Respondents’ motion is granted. By
`
`electing not to file a response to Moving Respondents’ motion, AGIS has waived any opposition
`
`to this motion. As I explained in Order No. 11, disposition of the issues in this investigation on the
`
`merits will be facilitated, and therefore good cause exists to allow this amendment. See 19 C.F.R.
`
`§ 210.42(b)(2). Given that Google has raised the same defense and AGIS has been on notice of
`
`the defense since then, there can be no prejudice to AGIS from the belated motion to amend from
`
`Moving Respondents. The defense is also not futile, for the reasons explained in Order No. 11.
`
`Further, I note that although claim 2 of the ’970 patent is no longer being asserted against Google
`
`or Moving Respondents, “inequitable conduct regarding any single claim renders the entire patent
`
`unenforceable.” Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., 649 F.3d 1276, 1288 (Fed. Cir.
`
`2011) (en banc). There has been no prejudice to either the public interest or the parties identified
`
`for the same reasons I explained in Order No. 11.
`
`Moving Respondents are ordered to file their amended response to the Complaint and
`
`Notice of Investigation on EDIS after receiving this order.
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`Z
`
`oeF. Moore
`
`
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`ne
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`