On September 16, 2025, the USITC said it would review parts of an initial ruling in GoPro’s patent case against Insta360, including findings on one design patent and two utility patents. The administrative law judge had found a violation involving the design patent but none involving five utility patents; the Commission sought further briefing on selected issues and remedy.
Sources
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/09/16/2025-17827/certain-cameras-camera-systems-and-accessories-used-therewith-notice-of-commission-determination-to
On July 11, 2025, the ALJ issued the Final ID finding a violation of section 337 by Insta360 with respect to D'435 and no violation with respect to the five utility patents. Final ID at 274-75. Specifically, the Final ID found: (1) claims 1 and 5 of the '894 patent were not infringed, were not invalid, and were satisfied for the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement; (2) claims 13 and 14 of the '840 patent were not infringed, claim 13 was not invalid but claim 14 was invalid, and claims 13 and 14 were satisfied for the technical prong; (3) claims 4 and 8 of the '832 patent were infringed, were invalid, and were satisfied for the technical prong; (4) claims 1, 2, 5, and 6 of the '052 patent were infringed (for the wide-angle lens products only), were invalid, and were satisfied for the technical prong; (5) claim 1 of the '413 was not infringed, was invalid, and was satisfied for the technical prong; and (6) the claim of D'413 was infringed, was not invalid, and was satisfied for the technical prong. Id.