Matthew Duescher

Email: mduescher@fostermurphy.com

Matthew Duescher represents U.S. and foreign clients in Section 337 investigations before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) and before U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).  Mr. Duescher has participated in over 30 Section 337 investigations, including cases involving patent infringement, false advertising, false designation of origin, trade secret misappropriation, and other causes of action.  He has experience with many aspects of Section 337 investigations, including complaint and response drafting, discovery, motions practice, pre- and post-hearing briefing, expedited proceedings, requests for temporary relief, and proceedings before Customs and Border Protection.

Mr. Duescher has lectured on Section 337 practice and developments to clients and bar associations. While in law school, Mr. Duescher worked as a law clerk for the ITC’s Office of Unfair Import Investigations, assisting government attorneys in the litigation of Section 337 matters. Mr. Duescher also worked as a law clerk for an ITC Administrative Law Judge, assisting the ALJ in legal research and the drafting of orders and initial determinations in several Section 337 matters.

Rankings & Recognition

  • Chambers USA: International Trade: Intellectual Property (Section 337) (United States) Up and Coming, 2021-2025
  • Chambers Global: International Trade: Intellectual Property (Section 337) (United States) Associate to Watch, 2025
  • Super Lawyers (Rising Star): 2020-2025

Court Admissions

  • Supreme Court of the United States
  • Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Education

  • J.D., George Mason University School of Law, 2015
  • B.S. (Physics), Carnegie Mellon University, 2011

Bar Admissions

  • District of Columbia

Professional and Community Involvement

  • Vice President, International Trade Commission Trial Lawyers Association
  • Member, Federal Circuit Bar Association
  • Member, American Bar Association
  • Member, American Intellectual Property Lawyers Association

Representative Engagements

  • Hydrodermabrasion Systems, Inv. No. 337-TA-1416 (HydraFacial v. Aesthetics Management Partners, et al.). Represented Aesthetics Management Partners in a patent infringement investigation. Obtained early withdrawal of complaint.
  • Wireless Front-End Modules, Inv. No. 337-TA-1413 (Skyworks v. Kangxi Communication Technologies). Representing Respondent Kangxi Communications Technology in a patent infringement investigation.
  • Disposable Vaporizers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1410 (R.J. Reynolds v. Pastel Cartel, et al.).  Representing the Pastel respondents in a patent infringement investigation involving a rare request for temporary relief. Prevailed at the temporary relief phase, and the investigation is ongoing.
  • Disposable Vaporizers, Inv. No. 337-TA-1381 (R.J. Reynolds v. Pastel Cartel, Funyin, et al.).  Representing the Pastel and Funyin respondents in a novel investigation against allegations of false advertising and violations of the PACT Act. Obtained withdrawal of the complaint before the evidentiary hearing.
  • Universal Golf Club Shaft and Golf Club Head Connection Adaptors, Inv. No. 337-TA-1320, -1354 (Club-Conex v. Top Golf Equipment, et al.).  Represented complainant Club-Conex in two investigations asserting patent infringement.  Obtained limited exclusion orders against respondents in both investigations, followed by a favorable settlement.
  • Electronic Devices and Semiconductor Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-1319, -1340 (Bell Semiconductor v. AMD, Acer, et al.).  Represented respondents AMD and Acer against allegations of patent infringement.  Complainant withdrew the 1319 complaint early in the investigation, and the 1340 investigation resolved favorably for both AMD and Acer.
  • Electrical Connectors and Cages, Inv. No. 337-TA-1241 (Amphenol v. Luxshare).  Represented complainant Amphenol asserting patent infringement.  Obtained a limited exclusion order and cease and desist order against the respondent.
  • Automated Storage and Retrieval Systems, Inv. No. 337-TA-1228 (AutoStore v. Ocado & Tharsus). Represented respondents Ocado and Tharsus against allegations of patent infringement.  Obtained a no violation finding before the Administrative Law Judge and at the Commission.  The dispute settled favorably for Ocado during the pendency of the appeal of the Commission Opinion.
  • Botulinum Toxin Products, Inv. No. 337-TA-1145 (Allergan & Medytox v. Daewoong & Evolus).
    Represented respondent Daewoong against allegations of trade secret misappropriation before the Commission and at the Federal Circuit.  The Commission Opinion was vacated by the Federal Circuit and the dispute concluded shortly thereafter.
  • Magnetic Data Storage Tapes, Inv. No. 337-TA-1012 (Fujifilm v. Sony).
    Magnetic Tape Cartridges, Inv. No. 337-TA-1036 (Sony v. Fujifilm).
    Magnetic Tape Cartridges II, Inv. No. 337-TA-1058 (Sony v. Fujifilm).
    Magnetic Data Storage Tapes II, Inv. No. 337-TA-1076 (Fujifilm v. Sony).
    Represented Sony in a series of investigations and counter-investigations involving allegations of patent infringement in violation, enforcement, and modification proceedings before the Commission and in inter partes proceedings before CBP.
  • Recombinant Factor IX Products, Inv. No. 337-TA-1066 (Bioverativ v. CSL Behring).  Represented complainant Bioverativ asserting patent infringement.
  • Mobile Device Holders, Inv. No. 337-TA-1028 (Nite Ize v. numerous manufacturers).  Represented complainant Nite Ize in patent infringement suit against numerous manufacturers of mobile device holders.  Nite Ize obtained a general exclusion order.
  • Industrial Control System Software, Inv. No. 337-TA-1020 (Rockwell Automation v. 3S-Smart System Software, et al.).  Represented complainant Rockwell in patent infringement suit.  Rockwell obtained a favorable settlement agreement early in the investigation.
  • Semiconductor Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-1010 (Tessera v. Broadcom, et al.).  Represented Broadcom and several other respondents against allegations of patent infringement.
  • Carbon and Alloy Steel, Inv. No. 337-TA-1002 (U.S. Steel against the Chinese Steel Industry).  Represented respondent Masteel Group against allegations of antitrust violations and false designation of origin.  Investigation terminated with findings of no violation by Masteel.
  • Recombinant Factor VIII Products, Inv. No. 337-TA-956 (Baxalta v. Novo Nordisk).  Represented respondent Novo Nordisk against allegations of patent infringement.  Novo Nordisk obtained a favorable settlement agreement.