The situation
A China-based manufacturer was drawn into a U.S. IP dispute in which the opposing party pursued parallel ITC Section 337 investigation and U.S. federal patent litigation, alleging involvement in the manufacture, importation, or sale of accused products. The parallel proceedings created significant operational and reputational uncertainty, and the client needed a fast, evidence-based path to reduce exposure and stabilize cross-border operations.
What we did
1. Rapid fact verification — We conducted targeted verification of the client's relationship to the accused products and established the core position: the client did not manufacture or sell the accused products. We identified verifiable gaps and inaccuracies in the allegations.
2. Audit-ready evidence package — We organized evidence designed for quick review and cross-checking — packaging/label verification, product-chain clarifications, entity-relationship documentation — enabling opposing counsel to efficiently reassess the factual basis.
3. Counsel-to-counsel communications — We supported formal communications with opposing counsel, presented key facts and evidence, and managed milestones across the parallel proceedings to reduce disruption and control costs.
The result
- Fact clarification moved the matter into a workable resolution pathway
- Client mitigated and cleared dispute-related risk
- Operational uncertainty and reputational pressure significantly reduced
- Internal controls around entity information, labeling, and supply-chain documentation strengthened — reducing recurrence likelihood
Results depend on the specific facts of each matter; past outcomes do not guarantee similar results.