TOM REE!

ccanmomsrnterosstee

m~=~*m~e~s~<
""'
CO MMZTT EON E

tssrrzsrttrsrt
Pwcmzi esursss (soil
_.r._..n....i..._

Qinnnrrsnof tiisiinttrh %tntee

~ l'UMl1\.'*li'i.Sl4$IiF%

Wmrr

ction of epressntettnrs
.

Pi+oue:t&eit2tBoo=1o

wssimarou, ncornce

',,,f,}','f,,,_.,,.,

We?Lormwww Homerms Bwuww

Wnswuercas. Di,2931B4239
PHt17iEI202l1Z5-3l3l

wtiijiiiiil,

E335 15

game; Q33; 379,543

Guam.nv moo

'

WMW

ions2?,zen

wu-m.raud,house.gov

The Honorable Deanna Tanner Okun Chairman United States International Trade Commission 500 E Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20436
Re: ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-703

Dear Madame Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and Commissioners:

I write to you today regarding the pending claim brought before the International Trade Commission (ITC) by Eastman Kodak Company against Apple and Research In Motion (RIM). The resolution of this claim by the full Commission is a matter of urgency to my constituency in upstate New York, and is fully supported by my commitment to robust protection of intellectual property and sound trade policy.

This complaint was initially brought to the Commission nearly two and a half years ago, on January 14, 2010, and has been subject to a number of delays in contravention of the requirement that investigations he completed in "the earliest practicable time. "
As the Commission may be aware, Kodak led for protection under Chapter l 1 of the Bankruptcy Code in January of this year. The successful restructuring of the company is a matter of deep concern to residents of New York State and the congressional district that l serve. For over 130 years, Kodak has maintained its worldwide headquarters in Rochester, N.Y. and remains a cornerstone of innovation and economic development in the area. e

It is my understanding that there remains a continuing conict in decisions on the validity of the Kodak patent at issue at the Commission. Initial determinations in this investigation plainly contradict those of another Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) concerning the exact same Kodak patent, the positions consistently taken by the professional staff of the Office of Unfair C Import Investigations (OUII), as well as a recent nding by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) of validity of this patents claims as originally granted.
Given these discrepancies, and the importance of certainty around this case, it is my strong view that this matter should be heard by the full Commission without further delay. L

2 appwciazcyam atmw-ionta lmmer. Ema do not heaime to cow: yaw staff centact my afwaif you mqnire
Sincerely,
,=-,..v*"

me emiuwe

om Reed Member of Congress

CC:

The Honorable Irving A. Williamson The Honorable Shara L. Aranoff The Honorable Daniel R. Pearson The Honorable Dean A. Pinkert The Honorable David S. Johanson