San Diego, CA – September 15, 2016 – On August 30, 2016, HoverCam issued a press release indicating that the United States International Trade Commission issued a limited Exclusion Order prohibiting QOMO from importing all document cameras into the United States. HoverCam desires to clarify that the ITC’s Exclusion Order does not apply to all QOMO document cameras, only those subject to the ITC Order.
Specifically, on August 5, 2016, to protect and enforce patents protecting HoverCam document cameras and software, the Exclusion Order prohibits QOMO from importing and selling QOMO document cameras and software that infringe Pathway’s U.S. Patent No. 8,508,751. In pertinent part, the ITC Order provides that “document cameras and software for use therewith that are covered by one or more claims 1-10, 12-18, and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 8,508,751 and that are manufactured abroad by or on behalf … of QOMO . . .are excluded from entry for consumption into the United States . . .” During a 60-day Presidential Review period, QOMO may import document cameras and software covered by Pathway’s ‘751 patent only under bond in the amount of 100% of the entered value of QOMO’s products. The 60-day Presidential Review period expires on October 5, 2016.
The ‘751 patent is directed to Pathway’s innovative methods and devices capable of providing real-time zoom in video and other features at extremely high resolution and frame rates. Previously, the ITC found QOMO in default for failing to answer or respond to a Notice of Investigation and a Complaint by Pathway alleging that QOMO was infringing Pathway’s ‘751 patent. This Exclusion Order, obtained after many months of effort, represents a significant victory for Pathway in its ongoing campaign to protect and enforce its extensive and expanding intellectual property rights.
On September 5, 2016, HoverCam was also successful in convincing the United States Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) that eight out of ten invalidity grounds raised by QOMO in an Inter Partes Review of the ‘751 patent lacked merit. Accordingly, claims 3-10 and 12-17 of the ‘751 remain valid; only claims 1, 2, 18, and 20 are subject to IPR review. HoverCam intends to vigorously prove the validity of claims 1, 2, 18, and 20.