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). Matt has participated in over 20 Section 337 investigations. He has experience with many aspects of Section 337 investigations, including complaint and response drafting,
discovery, motions practice, and pre- and post-hearing briefing.

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.

Professional and Community Involvement

  • Executive Committee Member-At-Large, International Trade Commission Trial Lawyers Association
  • Member, Federal Circuit Bar Association
  • Member, American Bar Association
  • Member, American Intellectual Property Lawyers Association

Bar Admissions

  • District of Columbia

Education

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

Representative Engagements

  • Universal Golf Club Shaft and Golf Club Head Connection Adaptors, Inv. No. 337- TA-1320 (Club-Conex v. Top Golf Equipment). Representing complainant Club-Conex asserting patent infringement.
  • Electronic Devices and Semiconductor Devices with Timing-Aware Dummy Fill, Inv. No. 337-TA-1319 (Bell Semiconductor v. AMD, Acer, et al.). Representing respondents AMD and Acer against allegations of patent infringement.
  • Electrical Connectors and Cages, Inv. No. 337-TA-1241 (Amphenol v. Luxshare). Representing complainant Amphenol asserting patent infringement. Obtained a finding of violation before the Administrative Law Judge.
  • Automated Storage and Retrieval Systems, Inv. No. 337-TA-1228 (AutoStore v. Ocado & Tharsus). Representing respondents Ocado and Tharsus against allegations of patent infringement. Obtained a no violation finding before the Administrative Law Judge and at the Commission. The Commission’s determination is pending appeal at the Federal Circuit.
  • Botulinum Toxin Products, Inv. No. 337-TA-1145 (Allergan & Medytox v. Daewoong & Evolus).
    Representing respondent Daewoong against allegations of trade secret misappropriation.
  • 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).
    Representing 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.