United States International Trade Commission Begins Review on Chassis and Subassemblies from China Estimated reading time: 5–10 minutes On Wednesday, April 1, 2026, the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) announced the start of a review. This review is about chassis and subassemblies from China. The USITC wants to decide if removing certain trade orders will hurt U.S. industries. The USITC is looking at antidumping and countervailing duties. These duties are special taxes on items from China. The review will see if taking away these duties might cause harm to U.S. companies. The USITC wants feedback from interested parties. They have until May 1, 2026, to reply. In May and July of 2021, antidumping and countervailing orders were placed. These orders aimed to protect U.S. industries. The current review will check if U.S. industries still need this protection. The USITC has set up rules for this review. The rules will help decide if they need a full or short review. The next step depends on how many people reply. The public can watch this process. Many details are online. People can visit websites like https://www.usitc.gov for info. There’s an electronic system to see details related to this review. People and companies in the U.S. that care about the outcome can join. They need to file their intent to participate soon. Those involved will be on a special list. This list helps the USITC know who is part of the review. Former USITC employees can be part of this review. This is allowed even if they worked on similar past issues. There are rules and ethics to follow. For ethics questions, they should contact Charles Smith at the General Counsel’s Office. The USITC will keep some information private. They will follow certain rules to do this. Some people can see this private info if they meet certain criteria. They will use a special order to control who can see what. Those who want to submit opinions and data must make sure their information is accurate. There are rules on how to send in documents. They can see these rules on the USITC website. The USITC wants information from manufacturers, importers, and other important groups. They will look at this info carefully. Whether these duties stay or go will affect many businesses. The review will cover many points. They will look at the amount of goods coming in. How these goods affect prices and their impact on U.S. businesses are key points. All views on possible changes in supply and demand are important. It’s not just about what is happening right now. The USITC wants to know what might happen later too. This review is important for the U.S. economy. It will guide decisions on trade with China. The USITC is working hard to ensure they make the right choice. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

International Trade Commission Begins Review on Non-Refillable Steel Cylinders from China Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced the start of a five-year review process. This review will determine if the removal of existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders on non-refillable steel cylinders from China would continue to harm the U.S. industry. This decision is based on the Tariff Act of 1930, which is used to protect domestic industries from unfair competition. The review process began on April 1, 2026. Interested parties must submit their responses by May 1, 2026. The USITC will receive comments on whether these responses are adequate by June 9, 2026. For more information, details can be obtained by contacting Alexis Yim at 202-708-1446 in the Office of Investigations. Electronic access to documents is also available through the USITC’s website. The original antidumping and countervailing duty orders were issued by the Department of Commerce on May 11, 2021. These orders were designed to protect U.S. industries from unfair trade practices concerning non-refillable steel cylinders from China. The review will assess several factors. These include whether revoking the orders will lead to continued or repeat injury to U.S. producers. Details about the type of merchandise and the domestic industry involved are clearly defined by the USITC. USITC rules and processes will guide the review. These include evaluating how parties respond to the notice of institution. Former USITC employees can appear in this review process, provided they meet specific conditions. Certain information is considered business proprietary information (BPI). The Secretary of the Commission will disclose this under an Administrative Protective Order (APO). All parties must ensure their submitted information is accurate and complete. This applies to submissions throughout the entire review process. Responses must contain specific information. This includes details about their firm and the likely effects of revoking the duties. The USITC has laid out detailed instructions for participants wishing to submit information. U.S. producers, importers, and other interested parties must provide detailed figures about their operations from calendar year 2025 in their responses. The Secretary’s Office will accept only electronic filings during the review process. All documents must be submitted using the Electronic Document Information System (EDIS). Parties unable to provide the requested information must notify the Commission promptly and explain why they cannot provide it. This review is crucial for determining the continuation of duties that protect U.S. industries from unfair trade practices involving Chinese steel cylinders. For more comprehensive details, parties can visit the USITC website. The review ensures that the U.S. industry is not adversely affected by international trade practices. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Receives Complaint on Semiconductor Devices Estimated reading time: 4–6 minutes March 31, 2026 The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) announced that it has received a new complaint. This complaint is about semiconductor devices. A company named GlobalFoundries U.S. Inc. filed it. Details of the Complaint This complaint was filed on March 26, 2026. It talks about violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The complaint mentions certain semiconductor devices and products that contain these devices. GlobalFoundries claims some companies imported them into the United States and sold them here. Companies Mentioned Tower Semiconductor Ltd. from Israel. Tower Partners Semiconductor Co., Ltd. from Japan. Tower Semiconductor Italy S.R.L. from Italy. Tower US Holdings, Inc. from Newport Beach, CA. Tower Semiconductor San Antonio, Inc. from San Antonio, TX. Tower NPB Holdings, Inc. from San Jose, CA. Tower Semiconductor Newport Beach, Inc. from Newport Beach, CA. Newport Fab LLC from Newport Beach, CA. Requested Action GlobalFoundries wants the Commission to take action. The company seeks a limited exclusion order. It also requests cease and desist orders. This means stopping these companies from selling the semiconductor devices during a special 60-day review period. Public Interest Comments The USITC is asking for comments from the public. People can share their thoughts on how these actions might affect public health and welfare in the U.S. They can also share views on the impact on the U.S. economy and consumers. The Commission wants to know: How are these semiconductor devices used in the U.S.? Are there health, safety, or welfare concerns with the requested actions? Can other companies in the U.S. make similar products to replace the imports? Can U.S. companies increase production to replace the imported products in a reasonable time? How will taking these actions affect U.S. consumers? Deadlines for Comments Those who wish to comment have eight days to do so after this notice is published. GlobalFoundries can reply to these comments within three days. Filing Submissions All submissions must be made electronically. They should be filed through the Commission’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS). The docket number for these submissions is “Docket No. 3896”. If someone wants to keep information confidential, they must request it separately. All public documents will be available for inspection. Conclusion The case will continue under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission, confirmed this notice on March 26, 2026. The official document is listed under FR Doc. 2026-06143 in the Federal Register. The Commission is actively seeking feedback on the public interest issues related to this matter. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

Update on U.S. International Trade Commission Investigation on Dental Burs Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has made an important announcement. The Commission decided not to review an initial determination. This means there are changes in an ongoing investigation about dental burs and related kits. The investigation began on January 20, 2026. It was based on a complaint by two companies. These companies are Huwais IP Holding LLC and Versah, LLC. Both are from Jackson, Michigan. They allege violations related to imports, sales, and the infringement of patents and trademarks. The patents mentioned are U.S. Patent Nos. 9,326,778 and 11,712,250. Trademarks include Registration Nos. 6,261,888; 6,261,886; and 4,689,471. The investigation covers many companies around the world. These companies are in places like Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates, the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Italy, and Australia. The Commission’s latest action is to amend the complaint. This amendment adds Research Industries of Sialkot, Pakistan, as a respondent. This decision followed a motion by the complainants on February 23, 2026. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations supported this motion. The Administrative Law Judge overseeing this case decided in favor of the amendment. The decision was made on March 3, 2026, with no objections. The change does not harm public interest or the rights of any parties. The Commission took a vote on March 25, 2026, confirming the decision to amend the complaint and notice of investigation. This is now part of the official records. For further information, Mr. Ronald A. Traud, Esq., from the USITC can be contacted. He is available at the Commission’s main office in Washington, DC. The investigation and its results are guided by section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as revised. The specific rules followed are in Part 210 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. Issued by Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission, on March 25, 2026. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Begins New Investigation on Memory Chips Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes Complaint Filed by MonolithIC 3D Inc. A company named MonolithIC 3D Inc., based in Texas, filed a complaint. They claim that some memory chips being brought into the United States have violated their patents. A patent is a special right given to an inventor for their invention. MonolithIC 3D Inc. believes that these imported memory chips infringe on their own patented technology. Patents Involved The complaint mentions several patents. Some of these are U.S. Patent No. 12,035,531 and U.S. Patent No. 12,125,737. These patents are for specific features and designs related to memory chips. Scope of Investigation The investigation will look into whether these memory chips were imported illegally because they infringe on the company’s patents. The ITC will also check if there is an established industry in the U.S. that uses this patented technology. Companies Being Investigated Several companies are named in this investigation. They include KIOXIA Holdings Corporation and SK hynix Inc., among others. These companies are believed to be importing the chips that may be infringing on the patents. Next Steps The ITC has appointed a Chief Administrative Law Judge to oversee this investigation. The law judge will listen to both sides. They will consider any evidence provided. Responses Required The companies named in the investigation must respond to the complaint. They need to do this within 20 days. If any company fails to respond, it might lose its chance to defend itself. Possible Outcomes If the investigation finds that these companies have violated patents, several things could happen. The Commission might stop these companies from importing more of these chips. They could also issue orders for the companies to cease and desist, meaning they would have to stop certain activities. The ITC will continue to update the public on this investigation. This matter is important for the technology industry and will be closely watched. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Starts Investigation on TOPCon Solar Products Estimated reading time: 5–6 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has started an official investigation. This investigation is about certain TOPCon solar cells, modules, panels, and their components. It is important because it checks if companies are breaking the law by selling these products in the U.S. The investigation started because of a complaint by First Solar, Inc., a company based in Phoenix, Arizona. They believe their U.S. Patent No. 9,130,074, called the ‘074 patent, is being used without permission. This patent is about making solar cells. First Solar thinks other companies are using it illegally. First Solar filed this complaint on February 24, 2026. They added more information to the complaint on March 10, 2026. The Commission is trying to find out if there is a violation of the law. They want to know if companies are bringing these solar products to the U.S. without permission. If the investigation finds problems, they might stop companies from bringing these products into the country. The Commission might also stop them from selling these products in the U.S. Several companies are part of the investigation. These companies are from many countries, including the U.S., Germany, Canada, China, Vietnam, Malaysia, India, Jordan, Korea, and Japan. Some companies on the list are AXITEC, Canadian Solar, JA Solar, JinkoSolar, Mundra Solar, Philadelphia Solar, Hanwha Q CELLS, Runergy, Trina Solar, T1 Energy, Vietnam Sunergy, and Toyo. Each has different addresses and places where they operate. The USITC will tell these companies about the investigation. These companies must respond to the complaint and the investigation notice within 20 days. If they don’t respond, they might lose their chance to defend themselves. This could mean they will not be able to sell their products in the U.S. The Chief Administrative Law Judge will appoint someone to oversee the investigation. The appointed judge will look at all the evidence. They will listen to what everyone has to say and make a decision about the public interest. The investigation is a serious matter. Companies need to respect U.S. laws. They must ensure that they are not using patented technology without permission. The Commission’s decision will help protect inventors and their inventions. The Commission keeps public documents on its electronic docket at https://edis.usitc.gov. People with hearing or mobility issues can contact the USITC for assistance. In conclusion, the USITC’s investigation is crucial. It ensures fair trade and protects intellectual property in the solar energy industry. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Issues Ban on Certain Electrolyte Beverages Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has made an important decision about certain electrolyte drinks. These drinks are banned from being brought into the United States if they misuse certain registered trademarks. The investigation started in February 2025. Complaints came from businesses in Texas and New York, as well as a company in Mexico. They said some drinks use their trademarks without permission. The Commission looked into this claim under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. Eight companies from Mexico were named in the investigation. Some companies settled the matter by agreeing to certain conditions, and two companies had the case against them withdrawn. Four companies did not respond to the investigation or show why they were not guilty. In July 2025, the businesses who complained asked for a decision without a full trial because the companies did not respond. The judge agreed with them. In December, the Commission reviewed part of that decision and agreed that the U.S. industry was being harmed. The Commission decided there was a violation of section 337. They issued a general exclusion order (GEO). The GEO stops the unlicensed import of electrolyte drinks that misuse the identified trademarks. The GEO also includes packaging and labeling of these beverages. The Commission considered public interest but found no reason to stop the order. The decision details how the four companies did not follow certain rules, which led to this GEO. The Commission’s decision ensures that U.S. businesses are protected from unfair imports. The action took place on March 26, 2026, and was acknowledged by the President and the U.S. Trade Representative. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Begins Investigation on In-Vehicle Infotainment Systems Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission has started an investigation about in-vehicle infotainment systems. This investigation starts because of a complaint filed on February 24, 2026. The company Zync Inc., located in San Francisco, California, filed this complaint. The complaint talks about products like infotainment systems used in cars. These systems help passengers enjoy music, maps, and more. According to the complaint, the concern is about some companies using secrets from Zync Inc. without permission. This situation is dangerous as it may harm an industry in the United States. Zync Inc. wants the investigation to lead to certain actions. They wish for an exclusion order and cease and desist orders. These actions would stop certain products from coming into the U.S. if they use stolen secrets. The companies named in the investigation are Bayerische Motoren Werke AG from Germany and BMW of North America, LLC from New Jersey. They are believed to be using Zync Inc.’s technology without permission. The investigation process will have important steps. The investigation was ordered by the Commission on March 25, 2026. The Chief Administrative Law Judge at the US International Trade Commission will oversee the investigation. The respondents need to reply to the complaint. They have 20 days after receiving the complaint to respond. This is necessary under the Commission’s rules. If the companies named do not respond in time, they might lose the chance to explain their side. People who need more information or special assistance can reach out to the Office of Unfair Import Investigations. The U.S. International Trade Commission is committed to following the rules and protecting industries in the United States. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

United States International Trade Commission Announces Full Five-Year Reviews on Oil Country Tubular Goods Estimated reading time: 2–5 minutes The United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has announced the scheduling of full five-year reviews. These reviews focus on oil country tubular goods from five countries: India, South Korea, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam. The purpose is to decide if removing certain trade duties would harm U.S. Industries. Purpose of the Reviews The reviews will determine if canceling countervailing and antidumping duties on tube goods would hurt the U.S. industry. Specifically, the decisions involve countervailing duties for India and Turkey and antidumping duties for all five countries. The ITC aims to see if removing these duties would cause damage within a reasonable time. Additional Information For more information, contact Jesse Sanchez from the Office of Investigations at (202) 205-2402. Persons with hearing or mobility disabilities can also reach out using specified contact numbers. Review Process The ITC decided on November 24, 2025, to conduct full reviews due to the type of responses received. The scheduling follows the Tariff Act of 1930. Participants and representatives must file an entry to appear within 45 days of the notice’s publication. Participation Details Industrial users and consumer organizations can take part by filing an entry of appearance. Those who filed a notice before do not need to file again. A public service list of participants will be maintained. Filing and Disclosure The Secretary’s Office will only accept electronic filings via the Electronic Document Information System. Business proprietary information will be disclosed only to authorized applicants under certain protective measures. Key Dates in 2026 July 8: Nonpublic staff report will be released, followed by a public version. July 23: An in-person hearing is scheduled. July 22: A prehearing conference may be held. July 16: Deadline for prehearing briefs. Parties must follow specific rules and timelines to submit written or oral testimony. Extraordinary Complications The ITC considers these reviews to be complex and has extended the period by up to 90 days for deeper analysis. Reporting and Rules The reviews follow the Tariff Act of 1930’s guidelines and ITC practice rules. All submissions should follow rules on timing and format. Conclusion This step by the ITC is crucial to safeguarding U.S. Industries while considering international trade relationships. The decisions made will directly impact how oil country tubular goods from these countries are managed in U.S. markets. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

Full Reviews Announced for Forged Steel Fittings from India and South Korea Estimated reading time: 1–7 minutes The United States International Trade Commission (ITC) has announced its decision to conduct full reviews of the duties on forged steel fittings from India and South Korea. This decision follows a notice regarding the situation last issued on December 1, 2025. The duty reviews are important to decide if removing certain trade orders would lead to injury in the industry. The orders under review include a countervailing duty order on forged steel fittings from India and antidumping duty orders on the same products from both India and South Korea. The Commission is tasked with understanding if scrapping these duties will harm the U.S. industry in the coming years. On March 6, 2026, the ITC confirmed its plan for full reviews under the Tariff Act of 1930. The reviews are done to see if the removal of these orders will hurt domestic markets. Specifically, they want to know if injury might happen again if the orders no longer exist. The ITC received enough responses from interested parties concerning imports from South Korea. Based on this, it decided to do a comprehensive review. Meanwhile, responses from India did not meet the required adequacy. Even so, the ITC opted for a full review for India, citing the need for administrative efficiency due to their comprehensive review commitment regarding South Korea. The decision means further work ahead. A timeline for these reviews will be given later. An official record of the voting process by Commissioners will be available, allowing transparency in how decisions are reached. Information and documents related to this can be accessed online. The ITC provides options for those who need special assistance or further information. This guarantees that everyone can stay informed and engaged with this process. Lisa Barton, as the Secretary to the Commission, has officially issued this announcement. The related document was filed on March 18, 2026, and can be found in the Federal Register—Volume 91, Number 53. It includes details about why these reviews are important and how they follow the rules set by national laws. This notice ensures that all stakeholders are aware of the ongoing process and what to expect next. The ITC’s work is vital in maintaining fair trade practices while supporting local industries in the United States. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

United States International Trade Commission to Review Trade Practices on Tetrahydrofurfuryl Alcohol from China Estimated reading time: 2–4 minutes The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced the scheduling of an expedited review. This review aims to decide if lifting the antidumping duty order on tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol from China will cause harm to the U.S. industry. What Is Tetrahydrofurfuryl Alcohol? Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol is a chemical used in making other chemicals, polymers, and chemical processing. It is important in various industrial processes. Why Is The Review Happening? The review comes under the Tariff Act of 1930. The goal is to check if ending the extra taxes on this chemical from China would harm U.S. businesses. The Review Timeline The review officially started on February 23, 2026. The USITC decided to have a quicker review because the feedback from U.S. companies was strong, while that from Chinese companies was weak. How Will It Work? The Commission will gather information and write a report. This report will be available to certain people on March 27, 2026. A version for the public will come later. Interested parties can share their thoughts on what the Commission should decide. The deadline for comments is April 2, 2026. Comments cannot include new facts not already shared. Commission’s Rules If writing comments, parties must follow USITC’s rules. They must also share their comments with others involved in the review process. Extra Time for Review The Commission decided this review is very complex. They have chosen to give themselves 90 extra days to finish the review. Authority and Rules This review is under the Tariff Act of 1930. Announcements about it will follow the Commission’s rules. The Secretary to the Commission, Lisa Barton, stated these details in the notice issued on March 17, 2026. The review represents the USITC’s ongoing efforts to protect U.S. industries from unfair trade practices. It ensures that the removal of duties will not cause harm to domestic businesses. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

International Trade Commission Finds Trade Violation in Urine Splash Guards Case Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) found a violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. This was in connection to a case about urine splash guards. The investigation was titled Investigation No. 337-TA-1430. The case started on January 13, 2025. It was based on a complaint from a company called Kids By Parents, Inc. They are based in Potomac, Maryland. The complaint was about certain urine splash guards and components thereof. These were allegedly being imported and sold in the USA while infringing on U.S. Patent No. 7,870,619 and U.S. Patent No. 11,812,901. The ITC found that five companies from China violated U.S. trade law. The companies were Maomaohouse, Le Sengyu, HealthSTEC, Edermurs, and Lishian. These companies are collectively known as the Defaulting Respondents. The ITC issued a General Exclusion Order. This means no Company can import the infringing products. The ITC also issued Cease and Desist Orders. These orders are specifically for Maomaohouse, Le Sengyu, HealthSTEC, and Lishian. The investigation found that the products infringe on two claims of the ‘619 patent and two claims of the ‘901 patent. However, one claim of the ‘901 patent was not proven to be violated. The ITC set a bond of 100% on the infringing products’ value during the Presidential review period. This is to protect the domestic industry. Other companies involved settled before a final decision. These companies are Tigaman, Junyxin, Eurbus, Sunyoka123, and SeLucky. The ITC reviewed the case and decided that a domestic industry requirement was met. They found in favor of Kids By Parents, Inc. The Commission made sure that the public interest factors do not prevent the orders issued. The Commission’s decision was sent to the President and the United States Trade Representative. The decision marks the end of the investigation. The Commission completed its vote on March 12, 2026. This decision shows how serious the ITC is about protecting patents and stopping unfair trade practices. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission to Evaluate Import Relief Effectiveness for Solar Products Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes 2026-03-17 The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) is starting an investigation on solar products. This involves Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic (CSPV) cells. The focus is on how they are partially or fully assembled. The USITC is checking if actions on imports of these products were helpful. The imports relief steps ended on February 6, 2026. The examination is under Section 204(d) of the Trade Act of 1974. This is to see if domestic industries adjusted positively to import competition. Earlier, in 2018, President imposed a safeguard measure on CSPV products. This was in the form of a tariff-rate for imports of solar cells. The purpose was to protect U.S. industries. This measure started on February 7, 2018, and was supposed to last four years. This period was extended in 2022 for another four years. This extension was supported by industry petitions and reports. The measure aimed to stop serious harm to the domestic industry. Now, the USITC must report the effectiveness of these measures. This report will be sent to the President and Congress. The report is required by law, within 180 days after the relief ends. The USITC will hold a public hearing on June 12, 2026. People will share their views and information. This is part of the investigation process. The hearing follows the USITC’s practice and rules. Parties interested in participating have to register their interest. The registration deadline is 21 days after this announcement. Electronic documents must be used for any filings. Confidential business information (CBI) will be protected. It will be shared under specific rules. This is for parties under administrative protective order (APO). Information on hearings and rules are publicly accessible. These rules ensure fair participation. Parties can submit evidence and written statements. This is important for a complete and fair investigation. The investigation follows legal processes entirely. It is treated with seriousness and precision. The goal is to understand and conclude on import relief’s success. By Order of the Commission, Lisa Barton Secretary to the Commission Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. ITC Begins Investigation Into Gyro-Stabilized Electric Unicycles Estimated reading time: 2-4 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has announced the start of an investigation into certain gyro-stabilized electric unicycles. The investigation was initiated after a complaint was filed on January 21, 2026. The complaint came from two companies: Inventist, Inc. from Camas, Washington, and Alien Technology Group, Inc., which is also called Alien Rides, from San Francisco, California. The complaint claims that certain electric unicycles and their parts are being imported into the United States in ways that infringe on U.S. Patent No. 8,807,250 and the claim of U.S. Patent No. D729,698. The companies argue that these actions are against section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. They also claim that an industry for these products exists or is developing in the United States. The complainants have requested that the Commission carry out an investigation and, following this, issue orders to stop the continued importation of these products. They specifically seek a general exclusion order, a limited exclusion order, and cease and desist orders. The U.S. International Trade Commission reviewed the complaint and decided on March 2, 2026, to institute the investigation. The aim is to determine if there is a violation of the Tariff Act concerning the accused products, which include self-balancing electric unicycles. The companies accused of violating the section 337 are based in China. They include Guangzhou Veteran Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd., Dong Guan BEGODE Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd., Inmotion Technologies Co., Ltd., Shenzhen King Song Intelligence Technology Co., Ltd., and Guangzhou JiDongTai Intelligent Equipment Co., Ltd. The parties involved must respond to the complaint as per the Commission’s rules. They have 20 days from when they receive the notification to submit their response. If they fail to respond in time, they may lose their right to dispute the complaint, leading to possible exclusion orders against them. The ITC will oversee this investigation with the Chief Administrative Law Judge assigning a presiding Administrative Law Judge to the case. The progression of this investigation will depend on responses and findings related to the alleged patent infringements. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Receives Complaint from InnoTV Labs Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has announced a new complaint. This complaint is about certain display devices, streaming players, and parts of these products. It is titled “Certain Display Devices, Streaming Players, and Components Thereof,” with docket number 3891. The USITC is asking for comments from the public. They want to know if this complaint could affect the public. They want opinions on the complaint from InnoTV Labs, LLC. They are interested in knowing if the complaint might affect health and welfare in the U.S. They want to know if it will change how the U.S. economy works. They are also wondering if it will affect U.S. consumers. The companies mentioned in the complaint are from several countries. Some are from China. These include Hisense Co., Ltd., Hisense International Co., Ltd., and Hisense Visual Technology Co., Ltd. Other companies are Hisense USA Corporation and Hisense Electronics Manufacturing Company of America, both in Suwanee, Georgia. Additionally, it includes Hisense Monterrey Home Appliance Manufacturing in Mexico. Roku, Inc., located in San Jose, California, is also named. Purple Tag Media Technology has branches in Shanghai and Shenzhen, China, and Purple Tag Mexico, S.A. de C.V., in Mexico. InnoTV Labs desires a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders. They also want a bond during the 60-day review period by the President. This is according to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j). The USITC wants comments on public interest issues about the requested orders. Questions include how these products are used in the U.S. Another question is if there are U.S.-made products that can replace these devices if they are banned. Also, the USITC wants to know if companies can quickly make enough products to replace those potentially banned. Comments must be sent in within eight calendar days of this notice. InnoTV Labs can reply to these comments three days after this period. Written comments should be no more than five pages long. They can only send electronic documents through the USITC’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS). If someone wants to send confidential information, they must ask the USITC. These requests should be detailed. All the non-confidential information will be available for public view at the USITC Office and on EDIS. The notice was issued by Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission, on March 2, 2026. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Receives a Complaint About Certain Display Devices Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) has received a complaint from InnoTV Labs, LLC. The complaint was filed on March 2, 2026. It involves display devices, streaming players, and parts of these products. The complaint claims there are violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. This involves importing these items into the United States. It also covers selling them for import and selling them inside the United States after importing them. The complaint names several companies as respondents. These include Hisense Co., Ltd. of China, Hisense USA Corporation of Suwanee, GA, Roku, Inc. of San Jose, CA, and others. The complaint asks for a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders. It also wants a bond on the respondents’ products during a 60-day Presidential review period. The ITC is asking for public comments on this issue. They want to know if the requested orders will affect public health and welfare. They also want to know if these orders will affect the U.S. economy or U.S. consumers. The ITC is interested in whether other companies can produce similar products in the U.S. if the items in question are excluded. The comments should be written and submitted within eight days after this notice is published in the Federal Register. Replies to these comments can be submitted three days after the initial submissions. Submissions are limited to five pages in length. Only electronic filings will be accepted. No paper copies will be accepted during this time. Details on how to file electronically can be found on the ITC’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS). People submitting documents to the ITC can ask for confidential treatment. They must explain why the information should be kept confidential. Non-confidential information will be available for public inspection. This action follows the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as changed over time. This involves specified sections of the ITC’s own rules. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission, issued the notice on March 2, 2026. The formal document was filed on March 4, 2026. For more details, contact Lisa R. Barton at the U.S. International Trade Commission. Further information about the commission can be found online at www.usitc.gov. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

USITC Schedules Expedited Reviews of Duties on Solar Panels from China and Taiwan Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes On February 17, 2026, the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) announced the scheduling of expedited five-year reviews. These reviews involve antidumping and countervailing duty orders on crystalline silicon photovoltaic products (solar panels) from China and Taiwan. The review comes under the authority of the Tariff Act of 1930. The Commission will examine whether removing these duties would likely lead to material injury to U.S. producers. The USITC originally instituted these reviews on August 1, 2025. It then received responses from domestic and foreign parties. On December 22, 2025, the USITC ruled that responses from U.S. producers were “adequate.” Responses from foreign parties were ruled “inadequate.” Because of the lack of adequate responses from foreign parties, the Commission decided to conduct expedited reviews. This is allowed under Section 751(c)(3) of the Tariff Act (19 U.S.C. § 1675(c)(3)). Commissioner David S. Johanson voted for full reviews instead. The affected duties are: The antidumping duty order on solar panels from Taiwan. The antidumping and countervailing duty orders on solar panels from China. A staff report on the matter is being prepared. It will be placed in the nonpublic record and given to parties on the Administrative Protective Order service list by May 7, 2026. A public version will follow. Parties that submitted adequate information may file written comments. This is to inform the Commission’s final decision. These comments are due by May 12, 2026. They may not contain new factual information. Anyone else, including the general public, may file a short written statement by May 12, 2026. These statements also may not include new factual data. If the U.S. Department of Commerce extends the deadline for its final review results, then the deadline for USITC comments will shift. The new comment deadline will be three business days after Commerce issues its results. All submitted documents must follow the Commission’s rules. Any document that includes business proprietary information must meet special requirements under 19 CFR §§ 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7. Details are available in the Commission’s Handbook on Filing Procedures at www.usitc.gov. Every party to the review must send their filed documents to other parties involved. Each filing must include a certificate of service, or the Secretary will not accept the document. The Commission has also exercised its authority under 19 U.S.C. § 1675(c)(5)(B) to extend the review period. These reviews are declared “extraordinarily complicated,” and so the USITC may extend up to 90 days. This case is officially termed: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-511 and 731-TA-1246-1247 (Second Review). Questions can be directed to Julie Duffy in the Office of Investigations at (202) 708-2579. Hearing-impaired individuals may call 202-205-1810. Issued February 11, 2026, by Secretary to the Commission, Lisa Barton. Document Number: 2026-03031. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. Trade Commission Launches Patent Investigation into Computing Devices Estimated reading time: 4–6 minutes On February 11, 2026, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) voted to begin an investigation under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. This comes after a complaint was filed on January 12, 2026, by Vicor Corporation of Andover, Massachusetts. The complaint was later updated on January 21, January 23, and January 26, 2026. A revised version was submitted on January 27, 2026. The complaint says that certain companies are importing, selling, or offering for sale in the U.S. power converters, circuit board assemblies, and computing systems that contain these parts. Vicor believes these products break the law by infringing on its U.S. Patent No. 12,395,087. According to Vicor, these violations involve numerous claims under the ‘087 patent. Vicor also states that a U.S. industry exists and is being harmed. The ITC agreed to start this investigation to see if a violation of Section 337(a)(1)(B) has happened. This section focuses on products that are imported, sold for import, or sold in the U.S. after import that infringe on intellectual property rights. The products under investigation are: Power converters used in data center servers, artificial intelligence (AI) systems, and cloud computing setups. These power converters provide power to: AI accelerators, Tensor Processing Units (TPUs), Graphics Processing Units (GPUs), and Central Processing Units (CPUs). Also included are circuit board assemblies and computing systems that include these converters. Vicor requests that the ITC issue: A limited exclusion order, Cease and desist orders against the accused companies. The accused parties are: Delta Electronics, Inc. (Taiwan) Delta Electronics (Americas) Ltd. (Fremont, CA) DET Logistics (USA) Corporation (Fremont, CA) Luxshare Precision Industry Co., Ltd. (Dongguan, China) Dongguan Luxshare Technology Co., Ltd. (also known as Luxshare-Tech) (Dongguan, China) Shanghai Peiyuan Electronics Co., Ltd. (also known as MetaPWR Electronics Co., Ltd.) (Shanghai, China) Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (Kirkland, WA) Chengdu Monolithic Power Systems Co., Ltd. (Chengdu, China) MPS International (Shanghai) Ltd. (Shanghai, China) Wistron Corporation (Taipei, Taiwan) Wiwynn Corporation (New Taipei City, Taiwan) Quanta Computer Inc. (Taoyuan, Taiwan) Quanta Cloud Technology Inc. (Taoyuan, Taiwan) Quanta Cloud Technology USA LLC (San Jose, CA) Quanta Computer USA Inc. (Fremont, CA) The Commission assigned the Chief Administrative Law Judge to appoint an Administrative Law Judge for this case. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations will not be part of the case. The accused companies must respond within 20 days of being served with the complaint and the notice of investigation. This is in line with Rule 210.13 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure. If a company does not respond in time, it may lose its right to contest the claims. A result could be the issuing of an exclusion order or cease and desist orders without further warning. For public access, the complaint (excluding confidential information) is available on the Commission’s electronic docket system at https://edis.usitc.gov. Contact Info: Susan Orndoff, U.S. International Trade Commission, Docket Services Division, at (202) 205-1802. For help with EDIS: edis3help@usitc.gov ITC TDD (for hearing impaired): (202) 205-1810 ITC general: https://www.usitc.gov Official Document Number: FR Doc. 2026-03032 Filed: 2026-02-13 Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Ends Solar Panel Investigation Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes On February 13, 2026, the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) announced it will not review an initial determination to end a trade investigation. This decision terminates Investigation Nos. 337-TA-1422 and 337-TA-1425. The investigations focused on certain TOPCon solar cells, modules, panels, and related products. These products were alleged to infringe U.S. Patent No. 9,722,104 and U.S. Patent No. 10,230,009. The complaints were filed by Trina Solar (U.S.), Inc. of Fremont, California; Trina Solar US Manufacturing Module 1, LLC of Wilmer, Texas; and Trina Solar Co., Ltd. of Xinbei District, China. The complaints claimed patent infringement and said that a domestic industry existed. USITC officially opened Investigation No. 337-TA-1422 on November 5, 2024, and Investigation No. 337-TA-1425 on December 9, 2024. The investigations named several companies as respondents. These included: Runergy USA Inc., Pleasanton, CA Runergy Alabama Inc., Huntsville, AL Jiangsu Runergy New Energy Technology Co., Ltd., Yangcheng City, China Adani Solar USA Inc., Irving, TX Adani Green Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad, India CSI Solar Co., Ltd., Suzhou, China Canadian Solar Inc., West Guelph, Canada Canadian Solar (USA) Inc., Walnut Creek, CA Canadian Solar Manufacturing (Thailand) Co., Ltd., Bo Win, Thailand Canadian Solar US Module Manufacturing Corporation, Mesquite, TX Recurrent Energy Development Holdings, LLC, Austin, TX The Commission’s Office of Unfair Import Investigations took part in the investigations. On January 21, 2025, the Commission combined the two investigations. On January 31, 2025, the Commission approved removing Adani Green Energy Ltd. from the case and added Mundra Solar PV Ltd. as a respondent. On February 12, 2025, the target date for completing the investigation was changed to May 20, 2026. On February 13, 2025, the Commission approved ending the case against Recurrent Energy Development Holdings LLC. On June 17, 2025, the Commission updated the name of Trina Solar US Manufacturing Module 1, LLC to T1 G1 Dallas Solar Module (Trina) LLC. On August 26, 2025, the investigation was partially ended for claims 11 of the ‘104 patent and claim 14 of the ‘009 patent. On December 8, 2025, the deadline for completing the investigation was extended to August 18, 2026. On December 9, 2025, more claims were withdrawn: claims 2–5 and 9–10 of the ‘104 patent, and claims 2, 3, 5, 7, 11–13, and 16 of the ‘009 patent. On January 15, 2026, the Administrative Law Judge approved the parties’ joint motion to end the investigation entirely. The judge found the motion followed Rule 210.21(a)(1) and said that ending the investigation was in the public interest. No party reviewed the judge’s decision. As a result, the USITC chose not to review the decision. The investigation is now officially closed. This action is taken under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and Part 210 of the Commission’s rules (19 CFR part 210). The Commission made its decision on February 10, 2026. The document was issued by Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission, on February 11, 2026. It is filed under Federal Register Document number 2026-02949. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

USITC Finds No Section 337 Violation in Vehicle Telematics Patent Dispute Estimated reading time: 5–10 minutes On February 5, 2026, the U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission) issued a final determination in Investigation No. 337-TA-1393. The case involved alleged patent infringement related to vehicle telematics, fleet management, and video-based safety systems. The investigation began on March 18, 2024. Samsara, Inc., based in San Francisco, California, filed a complaint alleging violations of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. Samsara claimed Motive Technologies Inc., also based in San Francisco, infringed on three U.S. patents: U.S. Patent Nos. 11,611,621 (“the ’621 patent”); 11,127,130 (“the ’130 patent”); and 11,190,373 (“the ’373 patent”). The Commission held an evidentiary hearing over several days between November 2024 and March 2025. On September 8, 2025, the presiding Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a Final Initial Determination (FID). The ALJ found no violation of Section 337. Regarding the ’621 patent: Samsara did not prove infringement of claims 1 through 5. Motive proved that claims 1, 2, 4, and 5 are invalid as anticipated. Motive did not prove that claims 2 through 4 are obvious. Samsara met the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement. For the ’130 patent: Samsara did not prove infringement of claims 1 and 5. Motive did not prove that the claims are invalid as anticipated or obvious. Motive proved the claims are patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101. Samsara failed the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement. For the ’373 patent: Samsara proved that claim 15 is infringed by “Fuel Score v1” and “Fuel Score v2,” but not by “Fuel Score v3.” Samsara did not prove infringement of claim 18. Motive did not prove anticipation or obviousness of claims 15 and 18. Motive proved claims 15 and 18 are patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101. Samsara did not meet the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement. The ALJ also stated that Samsara failed to meet the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement for all three patents. A Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding was issued in case the Commission found a violation. It proposed a limited exclusion order, a cease and desist order, and a 100% bond rate during Presidential review. On September 22, 2025, Samsara filed a petition for review of several findings. On the same day, Motive and the Office of Unfair Import Investigations (OUII) filed contingent petitions asking for review of certain favorable findings to Samsara. Motive responded to the petitions on November 19, 2025. Samsara also responded to Motive’s petition. OUII submitted a combined response two days later. After reviewing the records and petitions, the Commission decided to review three issues: Whether claims 1 and 5 of the ’130 patent are ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101. Whether Samsara met the technical prong for the ’373 patent. Whether Samsara met the economic prong for any of the asserted patents. The Commission chose not to make a decision on these three points. It declined to review the rest of the FID. As a result, the Commission found no violation of Section 337. The investigation is now terminated. Authority for the determination comes from Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) and Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR Part 210). The notice was issued by Secretary to the Commission, Lisa Barton. Federal Register Document Number: 2026-02577. Published February 10, 2026. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Receives Complaint from General Motors Estimated reading time: 5–7 minutes February 10, 2026 — The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has received a formal complaint titled “Certain Vehicle Parts, Components Thereof, and Vehicles Containing Same,” Docket No. 3884. The complaint was filed on February 5, 2026, by General Motors LLC and GM Global Technology Operations LLC. The complaint alleges violations of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337). This law bans unfair imports into the U.S., including those that infringe intellectual property rights. The complaint targets certain vehicle parts and vehicles that contain those parts. It claims those items are being imported unlawfully into the United States. The companies named as respondents in the complaint include: AP Auto Parts Industrial Ltd. (Taiwan) ANTRC Industrial Corp. (Taiwan) Auto Power Co., Ltd. (Taiwan) Best Value Auto Body Supply (Melrose Park, IL) CCC Intelligent Solutions Holdings Inc. (Chicago, IL) CCC Intelligent Solutions Inc. (Chicago, IL) DEPO Auto Parts Ind., Co., Ltd. (Taiwan) Maxzone Vehicle Lighting Corp. (Fontana, CA) Forerunner Automotive Industrial Corp. (Taiwan) Gordon Auto Body Parts Co., Ltd. (Taiwan) Grand HC Auto Tooling Corp. (Taiwan) Jiangsu Srumto Auto Parts Co., Ltd. (China) LKQ Corporation (Antioch, TN) Keystone Automotive Industries, Inc. (Antioch, TN) Mitchell International, Inc. (San Diego, CA) Pro Fortune Industrial Co., Ltd. (Taiwan) Quality Collision Parts, Inc. (Warren, MI) Power Auto Parts, Inc. (Warren, MI) Tong Yang Industry Co., Ltd. (Taiwan) Y.C.C. Parts Mfg. Co. Ltd. (Taiwan) General Motors requests that the Commission issue multiple forms of relief. These include: A general exclusion order Limited exclusion orders Cease and desist orders A bond requirement on the allegedly infringing goods during the 60-day Presidential review period under 19 U.S.C. 1337(j) USITC invites the public and interested parties to submit comments. These comments should focus on how the requested actions might affect: Public health and welfare in the U.S. Competitive conditions in the U.S. economy The production of similar products in the U.S. U.S. consumers The Commission is especially interested in comments that: Show how the targeted parts are used in the U.S. Raise any public health or safety concerns Identify local products that could replace the imports Explain whether companies can meet demand if the imports are banned Discuss how U.S. consumers might be affected All written comments on public interest issues must be submitted no later than eight calendar days from the date this notice is published. Replies to public submissions must be filed three days after the original deadline. All documents must be filed electronically using the Commission’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. No paper submissions will be accepted at this time. Persons requesting confidential treatment of documents must follow the rules outlined in 19 CFR 201.6 and provide reasons for confidentiality. All nonconfidential materials will be open for public viewing on EDIS. This notice is issued under the authority of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure at 19 CFR 201.10 and 210.8(c). For questions, contact Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission, at (202) 205-2000. The complaint and public materials related to this matter are available at https://edis.usitc.gov. Issued: February 5, 2026 By order of the Commission, Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission [FR Doc. 2026-02597 Filed 2-9-26; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020-02-P Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. Moves Forward in Trade Case on Fiberglass Door Panels From China Estimated reading time: 3–6 minutes The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has scheduled the final phase of antidumping and countervailing duty investigations on fiberglass door panels from China. These actions are being taken under the Tariff Act of 1930. The Department of Commerce has made preliminary findings. These findings state that fiberglass door panels from China are being sold in the U.S. at less-than-fair-value. The products are also believed to be receiving unfair subsidies from the Chinese government. The investigations are in response to petitions filed on March 20, 2025. The petitions came from the American Fiberglass Door Coalition. The coalition includes three companies: Therma-Tru Corporation based in Maumee, Ohio; PlastPro Doors Inc. from Los Angeles, California; and Owens Corning from Toledo, Ohio. The product under investigation includes fiberglass door panels and sidelites. The panels may be finished or unfinished, painted or unpainted, and may include glass or insulation materials. These products are made with fiberglass skins and may feature wood or composite frames, adhesives, and fasteners. The country of origin is determined by where the fiberglass door skin is pressed. Even if the fiberglass doors are altered in a third country—such as being painted or trimmed—if the skin was pressed in China, the product remains within the scope of the investigation. Products covered by other existing orders are excluded. These include wood mouldings and millwork products from China and float glass products from China and Malaysia. Imports of the subject merchandise are currently classified under tariff code 3925.20.0010. They may also fall under codes 4418.29.4000, 4418.29.8030, 4418.29.8060, or 7019.90.5150. However, the written description of the goods determines the investigation scope, not just the classification code. The USITC will hold a hearing on June 9, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. Requests to appear must be submitted by June 3, 2026. Participation may include videoconferencing if justified. A prehearing conference, if necessary, will be held on June 5, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. All testimony and presentation slides must be submitted by noon on June 8, 2026. Prehearing briefs are due by June 1, 2026. Posthearing briefs must be filed by June 16, 2026. Final party comments on new information are due July 6, 2026. The USITC will place its staff report in the nonpublic record on May 21, 2026. A public version of the report will be released after that date. All filings must be made through the USITC’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) and must comply with commission rules. No in-person paper filings will be accepted. Only parties listed on the service list may file business proprietary information under an Administrative Protective Order (APO). Applications for access must be filed 21 days before the hearing. For questions, contact Tyler Berard at 202-205-3354. Additional information is available at www.usitc.gov or through the commission’s electronic docket at https://edis.usitc.gov. This investigation will determine whether imports of fiberglass door panels from China are harming U.S. industries. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Reviews Patent Violation Findings in Semiconductor Case Estimated reading time: 4–7 minutes On February 2, 2026, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) voted to review in part a final initial determination (Final ID) related to Investigation No. 337-TA-1414. The investigation involves certain semiconductor devices and associated products. The original complaint was filed by Infineon Technologies Americas Corp. (El Segundo, California) and Infineon Technologies Austria AG (Villach, Austria). It was filed under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The case was instituted on August 30, 2024. The complaint alleged that Innoscience (with locations in China and the U.S.) violated U.S. law by importing infringing semiconductor devices. The patents involved in the complaint were: U.S. Patent No. 9,899,481 (the ’481 patent) U.S. Patent No. 8,686,562 (the ’562 patent) U.S. Patent No. 9,070,755 (the ’755 patent) U.S. Patent No. 8,264,003 (the ’003 patent) During the proceedings, claims associated with the ’003 and ’562 patents and one claim of the ’481 patent were terminated from the investigation upon motion by Complainants. On December 2, 2025, the presiding Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found: A violation by Innoscience with respect to claims 1–4, 6, and 17 of the ’481 patent. No violation with respect to the asserted claims of the ’755 patent. That Infineon met both the technical and economic prongs of the domestic industry requirement for the ’481 patent. That Infineon failed to meet those prongs for the ’755 patent. The ALJ recommended remedies including: A limited exclusion order. Cease and desist orders based on Innoscience’s significant U.S. inventory and operations. A bond at 100% during the Presidential review period. On December 15, 2025, Innoscience petitioned the Commission to review findings related to the ’481 patent. On the same day, Infineon requested review of the no-violation finding regarding the ’755 patent. The Commission reviewed the investigation record, the ALJ’s Final ID, both parties’ submissions, and their responses. The Commission has now agreed to review specific findings from the Final ID: Claim construction of “lateral transistor devices” Infringement analysis Domestic industry technical and economic prongs Validity of relevant claims under the ’481 patent The Commission will not review other parts of the Final ID. The Commission called for written submissions addressing specific issues including: Whether claims 1–3 and 6 of the ’481 patent are obvious when combining prior art references Nega and Roberts. Parties are to evaluate if Respondents met their burden. If a prima facie case is found, the Commission asks whether secondary considerations rebut the finding and whether the matter should be remanded to the ALJ. The ability to quantitatively and qualitatively assess Infineon’s domestic industry efforts, taking into account global investments and operations. The Commission seeks additional information on these topics: Identification of accused products under remedial orders in Investigation 337-TA-1366. U.S. market share of the accused and domestic industry products. Whether other suppliers can meet U.S. demand if an exclusion or cease and desist order issues. Availability of substitute products in the market. Parties are required to submit written responses no later than February 17, 2026, with replies due by February 24, 2026. Page limits are: 30 pages for opening submissions by parties 15 pages for reply submissions by parties 10 pages for submissions by third parties or government agencies Confidential materials must be clearly marked and properly submitted. Infineon is requested to: Indicate the remedy it seeks Submit proposed remedial orders State the expiration date of the ’481 patent Identify applicable HTSUS subheadings Provide importer details for identified products If the Commission finds a violation and issues a remedy, it will be subject to Presidential review for 60 days. During that time, the accused products may enter the U.S. only under bond, as set by the Commission. The legal authority for these actions is found in 19 U.S.C. 1337 and 19 CFR Part 210. This notice was issued by Secretary Lisa Barton and published in the Federal Register on February 5, 2026, under Document No. 2026-02297. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Receives Complaint on Laptops, Routers, and Gateways Estimated reading time: 2–3 minutes Published 2026-02-05Federal Register Volume 91, Number 24 The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has received a new complaint. The complaint is titled: “Certain Laptops, Routers and Gateways, and Components Thereof,” Docket Number 3882. The complaint was filed by AX Wireless, LLC. It was received by the Commission on February 2, 2026. The complaint says that companies imported certain products into the U.S. that may violate Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. These products include laptops, routers, gateways, and their parts. The complaint names the following companies as respondents: ASUSTeK Computer Inc. in Taiwan ASUS Computer International, Inc. in Fremont, CA TP-Link Systems Inc. in Irvine, CA D-Link Corporation in Taiwan D-Link Systems, Inc. in Irvine, CA Ubiquiti Inc. in New York, NY AX Wireless, LLC is asking the Commission to: Issue a limited exclusion order Issue cease and desist orders Impose a bond on the accused products during the Presidential review period The bond would apply for the 60 days of Presidential review under 19 U.S.C. 1337(j). The Commission asks for public comments. These comments should cover any public interest concerns. The Commission wants to know: (i) How the products are used in the United States (ii) Any public health, safety, or welfare concerns (iii) If there are similar products made in the U.S. (iv) If the complainant or others can replace the products in a reasonable time (v) How the actions would impact U.S. consumers The deadline to send comments is eight calendar days after this notice is published. Comments must be no more than five pages long, including attachments. Replies to comments must be filed within three calendar days after the initial deadline. All filings must be made through the Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. No paper filings will be accepted. Documents submitted with confidential information must request confidential treatment under 19 CFR 201.6. All non-confidential submissions will be available for the public to view on EDIS. For more details or questions, contact Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission, at (202) 205-2000. This notice was issued on February 2, 2026. Authority: Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337), 19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c). Document Number: 2026-02299BILLING CODE: 7020-02-P Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. International Trade Commission Receives Complaint Involving Off-Road Vehicles Estimated reading time: 2–4 minutes Date: 2026-02-05 Source: Federal Register / Vol. 91, No. 24 / Pages 5261–5262 The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) has officially received a complaint titled “Certain Off-Road Vehicles and Components Thereof,” Docket No. 3883. The complaint was filed on February 2, 2026. It was submitted by Polaris Inc., Polaris Industries Inc., and Polaris Sales Inc. The complaint was made under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337). It claims that certain off-road vehicles and parts made abroad are being sold in the U.S. in a way that may violate U.S. trade laws. The complaint names two companies: Zhejiang CFMOTO Power Co., Ltd. of China CFMOTO Powersports, Inc. of Plymouth, Minnesota Polaris asks the Commission to issue: A limited exclusion order Cease and desist orders A bond requirement during the 60-day Presidential review period under 19 U.S.C. 1337(j) The Commission is asking the public and interested parties to send in comments. These comments should talk about any public interest concerns the complaint brings up. The Commission wants feedback about: (i) How the off-road vehicles or parts in the complaint are used in the U.S. (ii) Any U.S. public health, safety, or welfare issues tied to the orders being requested (iii) What U.S.-made products—by Polaris, their licensees, or others—could replace those involved in the complaint (iv) If Polaris or other suppliers could fill demand in a reasonable time if the vehicles or parts are banned (v) How this would affect U.S. consumers All comments must be submitted by eight calendar days after the notice was published. Polaris may send replies to submitted comments three calendar days after the comment deadline. Each submission, including any attachments, must be five (5) pages or less. All comments must be filed electronically through the Commission’s Electronic Document Information System (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Paper documents will not be accepted at this time. Persons filing documents marked confidential must request confidential treatment. These requests must include a full explanation under 19 CFR 201.6. Confidential materials may be shared with: USITC staff and contract workers for official uses U.S. Government employees and contract workers, for cybersecurity purposes All non-confidential documents will be available to the public via EDIS. This action is taken under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and Commission Rules 19 CFR 201.10 and 210.8(c). Issued by: Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission Date Issued: February 2, 2026 Federal Register Document Number: 2026-02300 BILLING CODE: 7020-02-P For more details or help accessing EDIS, visit https://edis.usitc.gov or email [protected email address]. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

Full Reviews Announced for Oil Country Tubular Goods Imports Estimated reading time: 2–4 minutes Date: 2026-02-04 Source: Federal Register, Volume 91, Number 23, Page 5110 Document Number: 2026-02210 Agency: United States International Trade Commission The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) has decided to conduct full five-year reviews of trade orders related to oil country tubular goods (OCTG). These reviews are for the countervailing duty (CVD) orders on OCTG from India and Turkey. They also apply to the antidumping duty (AD) orders on OCTG from India, South Korea, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam. The reviews will examine if removing these trade orders would likely cause injury to the U.S. industry again within a reasonably foreseeable time. This decision was made under the authority of Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930. The decision follows section 751(c) of the same act, also known as the five-year (sunset) review provision. The Commission voted to conduct full reviews on November 24, 2025. These reviews follow the USITC’s notice of institution published on July 1, 2025 (90 FR 28768). The USITC determined that both the domestic and respondent interested party responses from Ukraine were adequate. Therefore, a full review will be conducted for OCTG imports from Ukraine. Although respondent parties from India, Turkey, South Korea, and Vietnam submitted inadequate responses, the USITC decided to proceed with full reviews for these countries as well. This choice was made to promote administrative efficiency. The schedule for the full reviews will be provided later. Persons seeking further information may contact Peter Stebbins at 202-205-20239, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired individuals may use the Commission’s TDD terminal at 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility impairments should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. More information and public records can be found at https://www.usitc.gov and the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. The reviews will follow the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, found at 19 CFR parts 201 and 207. Due to a lapse in government funding, previous schedules were delayed. This review process resumes following that period. This notice has been issued by order of the Commission. Issued: January 30, 2026 Signed: Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission Filed: February 3, 2026, at 8:45 a.m. Billing Code: 7020-02-P Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

U.S. Ends Review of Anti-Dumping Order on PET Sheet from South Korea Estimated reading time: 1–3 minutes On January 12, 2026, the United States International Trade Commission (USITC) officially ended a five-year review on Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) sheet from South Korea. The review began on August 1, 2025. The purpose was to see if ending the anti-dumping duty order on PET sheets from South Korea would lead to harm to U.S. industries. However, the review process faced delays. On November 14, 2025, the U.S. Department of Commerce extended all deadlines. This was due to a government shutdown and a lack of funding. The extension lasted 47 days. On November 24, 2025, Commerce added another 21-day extension. This was caused by a backlog of documents in the online system named ACCESS. On January 12, 2026, Commerce published an official notice. It stated that the anti-dumping duty order on PET sheet from South Korea was revoked. The revocation date was also January 12, 2026. The reason given was that no U.S. domestic party filed a notice saying they wanted to keep participating in the review process. As a result, the USITC ended the review. There will be no further investigation. Anyone seeking more information should contact Rachel Devenney at 202-205-3172. Hearing-impaired persons may dial 202-205-1810. Those needing special help accessing the USITC building may call 202-205-2000. Public records for this matter are available online at the Commission’s docket system: https://edis.usitc.gov. This action follows Section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)) and is published under Section 207.69 of the Commission’s rules (19 CFR 207.69). Issued by order of the Commission on January 30, 2026. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.

Federal Trade Agency Requests Public Comments in Wireless Module Investigation Estimated reading time: 3–5 minutes On January 23, 2026, the administrative law judge (ALJ) at the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) issued an Initial Determination. The ruling found a violation of Section 337 in Investigation No. 337-TA-1413. The ALJ also issued a Recommended Determination on the remedy and bonding. The Commission is now asking for public comments based on the proposed actions. These may include a general or limited exclusion order. These orders would apply to certain wireless front-end modules and devices that include them. The devices in question were imported, sold for importation, or sold after importation by the following companies: Kangxi Communication Technologies (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. of Shanghai, China Grand Chip Labs, Inc. of Tustin, California Ruijie Networks Co., Ltd. of Fuzhou, China In addition to exclusion orders, the ALJ recommended cease and desist orders directed at all three companies. The Commission seeks input on how the proposed orders could impact the public. The public and government agencies may submit responses by February 24, 2026. Submissions must be no longer than five pages, including any attachments. They must be filed electronically. Comments should mention the investigation number, “Inv. No. 337-TA-1413,” clearly on the cover or first page. Key public interest topics that the Commission wants comments on are: (i) How the affected wireless modules and products are used in the U.S. (ii) Any concerns about public health, safety, or welfare related to these products. (iii) U.S.-made products that could replace the targeted devices if excluded. (iv) Whether suppliers in the U.S. can meet demand in a short, reasonable time. (v) How the exclusion orders would affect consumers in the U.S. The request for comments is made under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) and the Commission’s rules (19 CFR part 210). The Commission may choose not to exclude the products if the exclusion would negatively affect U.S. public health, the economy, or consumers. Comments containing confidential information must follow the Commission’s rules. Any such submissions must be marked clearly and filed together with a non-confidential version. All submissions—unless marked as confidential—will be available for public viewing on the Commission’s Electronic Docket Information System (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For assistance, contact Houda Morad, Esq. in the Office of the General Counsel at (202) 708-4716. For help with EDIS access, email edismail@usitc.gov. For general Commission information, visit https://www.usitc.gov. This notice was issued by order of the Commission on January 26, 2026. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission, signed the notice. It was published in the Federal Register on January 29, 2026 (Volume 91, Number 19, Pages 3927–3928). Document Number: 2026-01729. Billing Code: 7020-02-P. Legal Disclaimer This article includes content collected from the Federal Register (federalregister.gov). The content is not an official government publication. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For case-specific consultation, please contact us. Read our full Legal Disclaimer, which also includes information on translation accuracy.