Domestic Marketing and Distribution of an Imported Product May Satisfy the Economic Prong of the Domestic-Industry Requirement
Contributed by Knobbe Martens. Originally published on Patexia; republished here as part of the LexDana archive.
Written by:Susan E. Pratt, Ph.D. and Nathan D. Reeves
Before Prost, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from the U.S. International Trade Commission.
Summary: Warehousing, quality control, distribution, sales, and marketing expenses incurred in connection with an imported product may constitute “significant employment of labor or capital” that satisfies the economic prong of the ITC’s domestic-industry requirement.
Lashify filed an ITC complaint alleging that multiple respondents were importing products that infringe Lashify’s patents pertaining to eyelash extensions and related accessories. In determining whether Lashify had established a domestic industry, the ITC declined to consider Lashify’s expenditures for the warehousing, quality control, distribution, sales and marketing of its products because those products were imported. Accordingly, the ITC found that Lashify had not satisfied the economic prong of the domestic-industry requirement. Lashify appealed.
Before the Federal Circuit, the ITC argued that the economic prong could not be satisfied by domestic expenditures on sales marketing, warehousing, quality control, or distribution of imported products for which no additional steps are taken in the U.S. to make them saleable. The Federal Circuit disagreed, ruling that the ITC’s limitations had no basis in the statute. The court explained that “clause (B) covers significant use of ‘labor’ and ‘capital’ without any limitation on the use within an enterprise to which those items are put.” The Federal Circuit therefore vacated and remanded to the ITC for reconsideration under the proper standard.
Editor: Sean Murray
More insights
The Solar IP Landscape in the u.s. And China Is Heating Up
Written by : Michael E. Salamy Key Takeaway : Recent developments in the U.S. and China highlight that strong patent strategy and IP risk management are critical for companies operating in the solar supply chain. In March 2026, the U.S. International Trade…
Fresh From the Bench: Latest Precedential Patent Cases
CASE OF THE WEEK Actelion Pharms. Ltd. v. Mylan Pharms. Inc. , Appeal No. 2024-1641 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2026) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a judgment that Mylar’s proposed generic hypertension drug would not infringe patents…
Fresh From the Bench: Latest Precedential Patent Cases
CASE OF THE WEEK Apple Inc. v. ITC , Appeal No. 2024-1285 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 19, 2026) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit upheld a major ruling from the International Trade Commission against Apple Inc. in its patent dispute with Masimo Corporation,…