Uavs & Drones

Anti-Drone System

Drone Communications Links

Davigations and Controls

Energies and Powers

Drone Task Load

Drone Launch & Recovery Systems

Drone Materials & Manufacturing

Drone Part Others

drone news today drone guide drone reviews drone supplier news drone show news drone news 2018
Here: Home > drone news > drone news today

All Three U.S. Patents Filed Against DJI Are Invalid

  2020-05-22

introduce:On May 22, the United States John law firm (Finnegan), according to the agency of the U.S. department of commerce international trade commission (ITC) of Shenzhen under the terms of the 337 items and some related entities  launched an investigation i

On May 22, the United States John law firm (Finnegan), according to the agency of the U.S. department of commerce international trade commission (ITC) of Shenzhen under the terms of the 337 items and some related entities launched an investigation into the case of important progress, DJI drone three patents accused of infringement of the right to request later by Beijing time on May 21, have all declared null and void. As a result, DJI's operations and sales in the United States have not been affected by the nearly two-year 337 investigation.

According to earlier reports, the case was initiated by Autel Robotics, a subsidiary of Shenzhen Daotong in the US, on August 30, 2018. ITC started its investigation on October 2, 2018 based on the three patents claimed by Autel (us patent no. US7, 979,174, US9, 260,184 and US10, 044,013, respectively). With the three patents, Autel is trying to prevent dji from selling drones in the United States that have intelligent operations (such as obstacle avoidance) (' 174 patent), electric paddle blades (' 184 patent) or batteries that are attached to drones (' 013 patent), according to the law firm.


During its investigation, dji identified a number of issues in the case, the law firm said. On March 2, 2020, chief administrative judge (CALJ) Bullock issued a preliminary ruling in favor of DJI (ID). In ID, CALJ determined that dji did not violate '174 patents, and Daotong did not have any domestic industrial practices related to' 174 patents. At the same time, '174 patents were anticipated or apparent by prior art, and the judge held that the claims were abstract and did not satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 101 is therefore invalid. CALJ ruled that many of the alleged DJI products did not infringe 184 patents, and he also ruled that '013 patent claims were invalid for several reasons.

The ITC is now deciding whether to review CALJ's ID. The law firm believes that the commission is unlikely to enforce any exclusion or injunction based on the three patents that are no longer valid. As a result, DJI's operations and sales in the us will not be affected by the 337 investigation.

DJI responded to the 337 investigation on behalf of US law firm John f. Kennedy, and US law firm K&S participated in the bilateral review of US10, 044,013 and US9, 260,184 patents on behalf of DJI.

Relate news

    Home | About us | Contact Us | sitemap | Rank | Advertising | gift | guestbook | RSS