Appeal to the full Commission

The ALJ’s final ID can be appealed to the full Commission provided a petition for review is filed within 10 days of the issuance of the ALJ’s final ID. The other parties may file responses to such a petition. Any issues not raised in a petition for review are deemed waived. The Commission’s decision on whether to grant a petition for review is due no later than 45 days after the issuance of the ID. The standard on review is whether the final ID contains a clearly erroneous finding of material fact, an erroneous legal conclusion, or affects Commission policy. The Commission can also vote to review an ALJ’s final ID, sua sponte.

If a petition for review is denied, the ALJ’s final ID is adopted and becomes the ITC’s final determination. If a petition for review is granted, the parties will typically be given a briefing schedule, a list of the specific issues that are under review, and one or more questions or topics that the Commission wishes to have addressed. Those portions of the ALJ’s ID that are not under review are deemed to be adopted and become part of the ITC’s final determination. At its discretion, the Commission can adopt, modify, or reverse the ALJ’s final ID. In rare instances, the Commission may put aside a finding of violation if such a determination would be contrary to the public interest.

Appeal of the Commission’s final determination

Final Commission determinations are appealable to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) as are district court determinations. The notice of appeal must be filed within 60 days of the final determination. The ITC’s factual findings are reviewed by the CAFC under a substantial evidence test rather than the clearly erroneous test applied to district court findings. Thus, Commission factual findings are given more deference that district court findings. Commission legal conclusions, however, are given no deference and are reviewed under the same de novo standard of review as are district court legal conclusions.

Post-decision Presidential review

If the ITC determines that a respondent has engaged in unfair trade practices, it will issue injunctive relief that becomes effective after the expiration of a 60 day Presidential review period. During this review period, the President can veto the ITC determination for policy reasons, however such vetos are extremely rare. The respondent may continue importation of the accused articles during the Presidential review period by posting a bond in an amount determined by the Commission based upon the findings and recommendations of the ALJ. The complainant may seek to obtain the bond proceeds if the President does not exercise his veto.

Termination of an investigation

Any party may move to terminate an investigation at any time based upon a consent order or settlement agreement such as a licence agreement. Typically, such motions are filed jointly by the opposing parties. Motions to terminate based upon a settlement agreement are generally granted if the agreement is not found to be contrary to the public interest, ie, if the agreement is not found to have an anticompetitive effect.

http://www.buildingipvalue.com/n_us/163_166.htm

I could find nothing to substantiate that District Court Rulings trump ITC final initial determinations that are being petitioned for review by the Commission. It appears that if the Commission refuses to review or they review and agree with the ALJ's finding of non infringement , then the only course of action is an appeal to the US Court of Appeals.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"But ITC determinations of patent issues are not given preclusive effect by federal courts.195 This position rests on two grounds. First, the Federal Circuit maintains that federal district courts have original and exclusive jurisdiction over patent cases under 28 U.S.C. § 1338, and that the ITC’s authority under § 337 is limited to investigating unfair practices in import trade.196 Second, the legislative history for the Trade Act of 1974 states that ITC decisions are not entitled to preclusive effect.197 In the Senate Report, Congress stated:"

I'm not sure how what you've posted would prove that the NDCA holds sway over ITC determinations. That's because it's not true. All it says is that ITC determinations are not given preclusive effect. However, it DOES NOT say that district court rulings are.

Again, it's the CAFC that will "break the tie" if the ITC doesn't reverse.

Be real.