SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Commission instituted this investigation on August 30, 2024, based on a complaint filed by Infineon Technologies Americas Corp. of El Segundo, California, and Infineon Technologies Austria AG of Villach, ( printed page 25925) Austria (collectively, “Complainants” or “Infineon”). 89 FR 70667-68 (Aug. 30, 2024). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain semiconductor devices and products containing the same by reason of infringement of claims 1-4, 6, 9, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 9,899,481 (“the '481 patent”); claims 1, 2, 8-10, and 13-15 of U.S. Patent No. 8,686,562 (“the '562 patent”); claims 1-4, 8, and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 9,070,755 (“the '755 patent”); and claims 1, 2, and 10 of U.S. Patent No. 8,264,003 (“the '003 patent”). Id. at 70667. The complaint further alleges that a domestic industry exists. Id. The Commission's notice of investigation named as respondents Innoscience (Suzhou) Technology Company, Ltd. of Lili Town, China; Innoscience (Suzhou) Semiconductor Co., Ltd. of Lili Town, China; Innoscience (Zhuhai) Technology Company, Ltd. of Zhuhai, China; and Innoscience America, Inc. of Santa Clara, California (collectively, “Respondents” or “Innoscience”). Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is not participating in the investigation. Id.

On November 4, 2024, the Commission determined not to review an initial determination granting Complainants' unopposed motion to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to correct the corporate title of Respondent Innoscience (Suzhou) Technology Co., Ltd. to Innoscience (Suzhou) Technology Holding Co., Ltd. See Order No. 7 (Oct. 10, 2024), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Nov. 4, 2024). On April 29, 2025, the Commission determined not to review an initial determination granting Complainants' unopposed motion to terminate the investigation as to all asserted claims of the '003 patent and claim 9 of the '481 patent. See Order No. 27 (Apr. 3, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Apr. 29, 2025). And on May 20, 2025, the Commission determined not to review an initial determination granting Complainants' unopposed motion to terminate the investigation as to all asserted claims of the '562 patent. See Order No. 46 (Apr. 30, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (May 20, 2025).

On December 2, 2025, the ALJ issued the final initial determination (“FID”) finding a violation of section 337 by Innoscience with respect to the '481 patent, and no violation with respect to the '755 patent. The FID found, inter alia, that (1) Infineon proved infringement and satisfaction of the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement (“technical prong”) for claims 1-4, 6, and 17 of the '481 patent, and that Innoscience did not show any of those claims invalid; (2) Infineon failed to show infringement or satisfy the technical prong for claims 1-4, 8, and 9 of the '755 patent, and Innoscience did not show any of the asserted claims of the '755 patent invalid. The FID also founds that Infineon satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement for the '481 patent.

The ALJ also issued a recommended determination (“RD”) on remedy and bonding. The RD recommended that, if the Commission were to find a violation, it should issue a limited exclusion order as well as and cease and desist orders against the Respondents based on their significant U.S. inventory and significant U.S. operations. The RD further recommended that the Commission impose a bond of one hundred (100%) percent.

On December 15, 2025, Innoscience filed a petition for review of the FID's finding of violation as to the '481 patent. That same day, Infineon filed a petition for review of the FID's finding of no violation as to the '755 patent. The parties filed responses to the petitions on December 23, 2025.

On January 2, 2026, Respondents submitted public interest comments pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(a)(4) (19 CFR 210.50(a)(4)). No submissions were filed by third parties in response to the Commission's Federal Register notice seeking submissions on the public interest. See90 FR 56798-99 (Dec. 8, 2025).

On February 2, 2026, the Commission determined to review the FID's findings regarding the '481 patent relating to the construction of the term “lateral transistor device,” infringement, validity, technical prong, and economic prong. 91 FR 5259-61 (Feb. 5, 2026). The Commission determined not to review the FID's findings regarding the '755 patent. See id. at 5260. The Commission requested briefing from the parties on certain issues under review and potential remedial orders, and from the parties, interested government agencies, and other interested persons on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Id. at 5260-61.

On February 17, 2026, the parties filed their respective written submissions on the issues under review and remedy, public interest, and bonding. On February 24, 2026, the parties filed their reply submissions. The Commission did not receive any submissions from third-parties regarding the public interest.

Having examined the record in this investigation, including the FID, the parties' submissions to the ALJ, the petitions for review and responses thereto, and the parties' submissions to the Commission and responses thereto, the Commission has determined to find a violation of section 337. As set forth in the simultaneously-issued Commission opinion, the Commission has determined to adopt a modified construction of the term “lateral transistor device” and affirm with modified reasoning the FID's infringement analysis. The Commission affirms in part with modified reasoning, takes no position in part, and reverses in part the FID's invalidity analysis, and finds that Innoscience has proven claims 1-3 and 6 of the '481 patent invalid as obvious. The Commission also affirms in part and reverses in part the FID's finding that Infineon satisfied the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement. Finally, the Commission affirms with supplemental reasoning that Infineon satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement. Therefore, the Commission finds a violation of section 337 as to claims 4 and 17 of the '481 patent.

The Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is an LEO prohibiting the unlicensed entry of infringing semiconductor devices and products containing the same manufactured by or on behalf of Respondents or any of their affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, or other related business entities, or their successors or assigns. The Commission has also determined to issue CDOs to each Respondent.

The Commission has further determined that the public interest factors enumerated in subsections (d)(l) and (f)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(l), (f)(1)) do not preclude issuance of the above-referenced remedial orders. Additionally, the Commission has determined to impose a bond in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) as to the infringing products imported during the period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)). The investigation is terminated.

The Commission vote for this determination took place on May 7, 2026.

The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).