Firm News🔒 SSL Verified

"August 18, 2026— A Kellogg Hansen team secured a resounding victory on behalf of firm client Corning Incorporated before the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC). The initial determination of an ITC Administrative Law Judge was made public in a trade secrets case brought by Corning against a Chinese state-owned glass manufacturer and its distributors.  The decision is: Certain Glass Substrates for Liquid Crystal Displays, Products Containing the Same, and Methods for Manufacturing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1433 (ITC) (public version August 17, 2026, EDIS Doc. ID 891874). The subject matter of the case is liquid-crystal display (“LCD”) glass, which is used in TVs, monitors, notebook and laptop computers, and tablets.  Corning is an American glassmaker with a 175-year history of innovation that includes the glass for Edison’s lightbulb, windows for Apollo 11’s moon lander, and fiber optic cables for AI data centers. Corning invented a glassmaking technology called fusion draw that forms millimeter-thin, perfectly flat glass substrates for LCDs.  Designing the technology and bringing it to market took Corning decades and cost more than a billion dollars.  Corning’s glass is the leading product in the worldwide LCD glass substrate market, generating revenue that supports Corning’s continued investments in new discoveries. Corning named the following entities as respondents: Caihong Display Devices Co., Ltd., d/b/a Irico Display Devices Co., Ltd.; Hisense USA Corporation; HKC Corporation Ltd.; HKC Overseas Ltd.; LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.; TCL China Star Optoelectronics, Technology Co., Ltd. (“CSOT”); TTE Technology, Inc., d/b/a TCL North America (“TCL”); VIZIO, Inc.; and Xianyang CaiHong Optoelectronics, Technology Co., Ltd. (“CHOT”). According to court records and evidence presented at the hearing, Caihong was a Chinese state-owned enterprise that, in the early 2000s, made outmoded cathode ray tubes.  As cathode ray tubes became obsolete, Caihong sought to produce LCD glass, but it lacked the technology.  Caihong acquired engineering drawings reflecting stolen designs of Corning’s fusion draw technology and created copies of the drawings bearing its own logo.  Within just two years of forming its LCD glass business, Caihong began producing LCD glass using Corning’s stolen designs and operational know-how.  Respondent Caihong Display, which was a part of the Caihong family, became the controlling shareholder of the LCD glass business soon thereafter and operates it to this day. The ALJ held a five-day evidentiary hearing in February 2026.  Several respondents settled prior to the hearing (HKC, VIZIO, and LG).  One respondent (Hisense) settled during the hearing after Corning’s fact witnesses testified. In her now-public initial determination, the ALJ held that Caihong Display and all remaining respondents violated Section 337 for their roles in misappropriating and using Corning’s trade secrets. The ALJ has recommended that the Commission exclude the remaining respondents’ importation into the United States of products made with Caihong LCD glass for a period of years.  In addition, she recommended that the Commission order TV-maker TCL to cease and desist from selling products it previously had imported into the U.S.  On the current schedule, subject to Commission review, the exclusion orders and cease desist order will go into effect in January 2027. During the evidentiary hearing, Caihong Display claimed that it independently developed LCD glassmaking technology without using Corning’s stolen trade secrets.  The ALJ rejected that claim.  She found a “lack of persuasive evidence of independent development” for both Caihong’s initial manufacturing equipment and “later generation Caihong” equipment.  Instead of independent development, she found “the evidence of record shows that Caihong’s [initial generation equipment] and subsequent generation products benefited from misappropriation of certain of Corning’s Design Trade Secrets.” Caihong Display’s General Manager and CFO, both senior executives, testified by deposition and by video from China, respectively.  The ALJ found the evidence “casts doubt on the credibility” of Caihong’s General Manager, who testified that Caihong never received Corning’s proprietary information or technology secrets.  The ALJ found the testimony of Caihong Display’s CFO was “not sufficiently credible” to support Caihong Display’s equitable defenses. The ALJ found that all the additional respondents (CHOT, CSOT, and TCL) were on notice of Caihong Display’s misappropriation but wrongfully continued to import or sell for importation into the U.S. products using Caihong LCD glass.  Yesterday’s public decision puts all prospective users on notice that Caihong\'s LCD glass has been initially found to have been made using misappropriated Corning trade secrets.  If companies sell or market goods that use Caihong’s LCD glass with knowledge that Caihong made it with Corning’s trade secrets, they could face elevated legal, compliance, and supply-chain risk for use of misappropriated trade secrets. Corning’s counsel John Thorne said, “We are proud of the results that we have obtained on behalf of Corning.  I’m particularly proud that, in addition to four of our partners, five associates presented and cross-examined witnesses during the evidentiary hearing.  Additional associates also took and defended depositions and argued critical motions.  This ruling is a testament to our firm’s founding ethos that talented young attorneys can be trusted to produce outstanding results for our clients.”  The ITC’s NEXT Advocates Program encourages parties to provide opportunities for less-experienced attorneys to argue substantive motions and to examine witnesses at the evidentiary hearing. The trial team included: John Thorne, Gregory G. Rapawy, Joseph S. Hall, Thomas W. Traxler, Jacob E. Hartman, Bethan R. Jones, Hannah D.C. DePalo, Matthew N. Drecun, Eric J. Maier, D. Chanslor Gallenstein, Matthew J. Wilkins, Nataliia Gillespie, Jahvonta A. Mason, and Sean P. Quirk..."

"August 4, 2026— Anyone who follows the Supreme Court knows the routine: refreshing the Court’s website, waiting for orders, opinions, or docket updates. Kellogg Hansen partner Scott H. Angstreich turned that frustration into SCOTUSWatch, an iOS and Android app that delivers real-time alerts and eliminates the guesswork. What started as a simple script has evolved into a powerful platform used by hundreds of lawyers, journalists, and Court watchers. Built using AI-assisted coding tools, SCOTUSWatch sends push notifications to users’ devices, lets users track up to 30 different dockets, and provides quick (optional) AI-generated summaries of Court opinions and orders. The app at its core is an example of how practical legal technology can emerge from a real-world need and how innovation can help lawyers, students, journalists, and Court watchers stay informed more efficiently. Read more about SCOTUSWatch: I Stopped Refreshing the Supreme Court\'s Website — Lawyers Who Code | PacerPro Read the whole Lawyers Who Code series here. Download SCOTUSWatch on iOS or Android. Scott H. Angstreich litigates regulatory matters before courts and agencies on behalf of communications companies and their trade associations, energy companies, and tech companies. His practice encompasses regulatory, litigation, and appellate matters, with a particular focus on administrative law and telecommunications, and he advises clients on compliance with complex regulatory schemes and contracts..."

"July 29, 2026— Kellogg Hansen associate Jimmy A. Ruck served as a panelist on BARBRI’s continuing legal education program, “Personal Injury From Failure to Warn: Drug Label Litigation Under State Law and Impossibility Preemption.” Alongside partners from firms around the country, Jimmy discussed how courts address the drug manufacturer’s impossibility preemption defense in personal injury lawsuits in the wake of recent decisions. Drawing on his experience successfully litigating preemption cases, Jimmy advised plaintiffs on developing fact and discovery strategies to survive summary judgment and how to navigate complex legal issues at the intersection of administrative law and science. The CLE focused on ongoing challenges in litigating state‑law failure‑to‑warn claims when drug manufacturers argue that FDA action makes compliance with state law labeling duties impossible. In particular, the panel discussed the impact of the Third Circuit’s decision in In re Fosamax (Alendronate Sodium) Products Liability Litigation, an appeal Kellogg Hansen won. Jimmy represents both plaintiffs and defendants in trial and appellate courts.  At the trial level, he handles every phase of litigation, from the complaint stage to examining witnesses at trial.  At the appellate level, he has briefed in multiple courts of appeals and in the United States Supreme Court, and successfully argued a precedent-setting victory in a federal court of appeals.  Jimmy has particular experience with complex commercial disputes, securities, and antitrust litigation, representing clients in the financial, telecommunications, and technology industries. The full CLE program is available here: Personal Injury From Failure to Warn: Drug Label Litigation Under State Law and Impossibility Preemption - Product Info - Barbri - Barbri Portal  .."