ITC Section 337

Overview

Alston & Bird’s Section 337 litigation practice draws from the IP, litigation, and international trade groups throughout our domestic offices to match the technical, geographic, and litigation needs of our clients. Section 337 proceedings are held in Washington, D.C. and require specialized administrative skills, so our solid core of highly regarded International Trade Commission (ITC) practitioners is based in Washington, D.C. and works fluidly across our offices.

In its 2025 ITC Section 337 Intelligence Report identifying the top 100 ITC law firms and attorneys, Patexia ranks Alston & Bird the No. 1 best-performing firm overall and No. 5 most active firm overall. The leaders of the firm’s Section 337 practice, Adam Swain and Scott Stevens, have been called out as leading individuals and are each ranked among the top five best-performing attorneys overall. Let our team’s advocacy protect, defend, and leverage your intellectual property assets in this critical venue.

Accolades for Our ITC Section 337 Team

• In May 2017, Alston & Bird won the largest civil penalty award in ITC history against a multinational wearable technology corporation.
• In the 2025 edition of Chambers Global, our ITC practice is recognized in Band 2 for International Trade: Intellectual Property – Section 337.
• In the 2025 edition of Chambers USA, our ITC practice is recognized in Band 2 for International Trade: Intellectual Property – Section 337.
• Named U.S. Firm of the Year – International Trade Commission at the Managing IP Awards in 2022.

Experience

• Defended an international computer company against claims that its computer and mobile device products infringed three patents owned by a major competitor. In a victory for our client, the International Trade Commission determined that none of the three patents asserted by the competitor were infringed, several claims were invalid, and the competitor failed to establish the existence of a domestic industry relating to two of the asserted patents.
• Achieved a resounding victory for a telecommunications client against a major e-commerce company. The e-commerce company was found to infringe a series of our client’s patents related to video streaming technology. The administrative law judge sided with our client in the investigation and recommended a ban on the importation of the infringing streaming devices.
• Earned a landmark win on behalf of a water filtration consumer products company, clearing our client of patent infringement allegations brought by a major competitor involving our client’s branded pour-through water filters. In a sweeping decision, the International Trade Commission found the competitor’s patent invalid for three distinct reasons, based largely on testimony our team extracted from the competitor’s lead inventor.