U.S. local time on July 11, the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) announced a Section 337 investigation into Chinese Sany Group and its crawler crane products in order to determine whether these products infringe U.S. company patents.

　　The investigation is grounded on a complaint filed by Manitowoc Cranes on June 12 this year. The American company accused Chinese Sany Group and its affiliated company Sany America of patent infringement on certain crawler cranes and components. Particularly, the ‘928’ and ‘158’ patents relate to mobile lift cranes and methods of operating mobile lift cranes with a moveable counterweight unit.

　　The complaint also alleges Sany misappropriated Manitowoc Cranes’s trade secrets since the trade secrets are coordinated efforts involving a former Manitowoc Cranes employee, John Lanning, who has moved to Sany in 2010.

　　The company asked the USITC for an exclusion order and cease and desist orders, according to the USITC Thursday on its website.

　　Once the request be approved, the panel will issue remedial orders, such as the cranes in question will be banned in the US market.

　　Today, the U.S. has repeatedly launched 377 against Chinese products; the investigation is the sixth one the USITC has launched so far this year. In earlier cases, technology giants Huawei, ZTE and several other Chinese enterprises were also among the targets of the USITC 337 investigations.

　　“Section 337 investigations” was first named in the “1930 U.S. Tariff Act” Section 337, and was conducted by the U.S. International Trade Commission most often involve claims regarding intellectual property rights, including allegations of patent infringement and trademark infringement by imported goods. Both utility and design patents, as well as registered and common law trademarks may be asserted in these investigations. Other forms of unfair competition involving imported products, such as infringement of registered copyrights, mask works or boat hull designs, misappropriation of trade secrets or trade dress, passing off, and false advertising, may also be asserted. Additionally, antitrust claims relating to imported goods may be asserted. The primary remedy available in Section 337 investigations is an exclusion order that directs Customs to stop infringing imports from entering the United States. In addition, the Commission may issue cease and desist orders against named importers and other persons engaged in unfair acts that violate Section 337.

　　The Chinese Ministry of Commerce was not available for comment Friday. But the ministry said in March that it supports Chinese companies to fight for their rights in the global market. (Global Times, Liang Fei)

　　"We categorically reject the claims made by Manitowoc and stand fully behind our market-leading products,” Sany Heavy’s president Xiang Wenbo said. “Sany will respond actively to this legal action through appropriate legal measures to protect our own intellectual property.”(Forbes)

　　Bai Ming, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation, said Friday that as Chinese companies gain a stronger foothold in the global market, they should get more prepared for such frictions and attach more importance to patent issues.

　　The USITC will make a final determination in the investigation at the earliest practicable time. Within 45 days after institution of the investigation, the USITC will set a target date for completing the investigation. USITC remedial orders in section 337 cases are effective when issued and become final 60 days after issuance unless disapproved for policy reasons by the U.S. Trade Representative within that 60-day period.

(Source: China IP News)