Review your content's performance and reach.

Become your target audience’s go-to resource for today’s hottest topics.

Understand your clients’ strategies and the most pressing issues they are facing.

Keep a step ahead of your key competitors and benchmark against them.

Questions? Please contact [email protected]

On December 13, 2021, Chief ALJ Charles E. Bullock issued a notice of his initial determination (“ID”) finding no violation of section 337 in Certain Automated Storage and Retrieval Systems, Robots, and Components Thereof (Inv. No. 337-TA-1228).

By way of background, this investigation was instituted on November 2, 2021 based on a complaint filed by AutoStore Technology AS, AutoStore AS and AutoStore System Inc. (collectively, “AutoStore”) alleging violations of section 337 by Respondents Ocado Group Plc of the United Kingdom, Ocado Central Services Ltd. of the United Kingdom, Ocado Innovation Ltd. of the United Kingdom, Ocado Operating Ltd. of the United Kingdom, Ocado Solutions, Ltd. of the United Kingdom, Ocado Solutions USA Inc. of Tysons Corner, Virginia, and Printed Motor Works Ltd. of the United Kingdom (collectively, “Ocado” or “Respondents”) due to the importation/sale of f certain automated storage and retrieval systems, robots, and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,093,525 (“the ’525 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 10,294,025 (“the ’025 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 10,474,140 (“the ’140 patent”); U.S. Patent No. 10,494,239 (“the ’239 patent”); and U.S. Patent No. 10,696,478 (“the ’478 patent”). Ocado’s motion to stay the investigation pending resolution of IPR/PGR proceedings was previously denied by ALJ Dee Lord on March 9, 2021. See our March 14, 2021 post for more details regarding the ALJ’s decision.

According to the notice, the Chief ALJ found no violation of section 337 with respect to the importation/sale of robots, grid systems (including tracks on top to allow for the movement of the robots), storage bins, controllers, and components (including software), with respect to the ’525 patent, the ’239 patent, the ’478 patent, or the ’025 patent based on the following conclusions of law:

We will post the public version of the ID when it becomes available.

If you would like to learn how Lexology can drive your content marketing strategy forward, please email [email protected] .

"I am a big fan. The information is very useful indeed."

© Copyright 2006 - 2021 Law Business Research