ITC Votes to Institute 337-TA-1525 on trinamiX's Six-Patent Complaint Against Apple Over iPhones and iPads.

The notice

According to the notice, trinamiX Sensing LLC of Austin, Texas and trinamiX GmbH of Germany filed the complaint on September 3, 2026 and supplemented it on September 17, 2026. Apple Inc. is the only respondent. The complainants ask for a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders. The Commission ordered the investigation on October 5, 2026, and the notice was issued October 6. Under 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), an investigation is instituted by publication of the notice in the Federal Register, and this notice is scheduled for publication on October 8, 2026. The Chief Administrative Law Judge will designate the presiding judge, and the Office of Unfair Import Investigations will not participate as a party.

Patents and claims in the investigation

The investigation will determine whether there is a violation of section 337(a)(1)(B) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of the accused products by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1, 5-8, 17, and 21-24 of U.S. Patent 12,530,925; claims 1, 5-9, 11, 17, 20, 21, 23, and 24 of U.S. Patent 12,288,421; claims 1, 7, 11, 13, and 15 of U.S. Patent 12,456,334; claims 1, 4-6, 8-10, 13, and 15 of U.S. Patent 12,361,760; claims 1, 5, 6, 15, 18, and 19 of U.S. Patent 12,298,394; and claims 1, 2, 9, 14, 16, 23, and 28 of U.S. Patent 12,332,352, and whether a domestic industry exists or is in the process of being established under section 337(a)(2). The first four patents are titled Optical Skin Detection for Face Unlock, and the last two are titled Detector for Identifying at Least One Material Property.

The accused products

Under 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the notice's plain language description defines the scope of the investigation. Here it is "iPhones and iPads and components thereof, such as its processor and TrueDepth camera with a Vertical-Cavity Surface-Emitting Laser ('VCSEL'), a flood illumination VCSEL, and a near-infrared camera module, incorporating face authentication, 3D-sensing, and/or material detection capabilities."

Domestic industry and a public interest footnote

The Commission said it is interested in the development of a thorough record on domestic industry to facilitate a holistic review of all relevant considerations. It said the presiding judge may wish to consider what information is needed to decide the complainants' allegations under section 337(a)(3)(A), (B), and (C) based on an industry that exists or is in the process of being established, including how far the allegations rely on expenditures made by third parties and how far expenditures related to the domestic industry articles are made outside the United States by any entity. In a footnote, the notice says Commissioner Pappas would have delegated public interest "so as to build a robust record as to whether or not there would be an impact to United States consumers in light of the role that the patented technology plays in terms of privacy, safety, and security." The notice does not direct the presiding judge to take evidence on the public interest and does not order an early 100-day proceeding. Under 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), Apple's response will be considered if received within 20 days after the Commission serves the complaint and notice.

The parallel Midland case

The same two trinamiX entities sued Apple in the Western District of Texas, Midland/Odessa Division, on September 3, 2026, in trinamiX Sensing LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 7:26-cv-00348. That complaint asserts the six patents in the investigation plus U.S. Patent 12,461,238, which the institution notice does not list. Under 28 U.S.C. 1659(a), at the request of a party to the civil action that is also a respondent in the ITC proceeding, the district court must stay proceedings with respect to any claim that involves the same issues as the ITC proceeding until the Commission's determination becomes final, if the request is made within 30 days after the party is named as a respondent or 30 days after the district court action is filed, whichever is later.

What to watch next

Watch for the Federal Register publication on October 8, the designation of the presiding judge, the target date, and Apple's response to the complaint. Also watch whether Apple asks the Midland court for a section 1659 stay and how that request treats the '238 patent, which is not in the investigation. The investigation can end early, for example if the parties settle or trinamiX withdraws the complaint.