12 unchanged sentences
The ruling states that Ascletis Defendants misappropriated our trade secrets while under a Confidential Disclosure Agreement and engaged in discovery misconduct, warranting monetary and non-monetary sanctions.
−Removed: On May 29, 2025, the full ITC Commission affirmed the substantial majority of the ITC Chief Administrative Law Judge’s determinations in favor of Viking, including monetary and non-monetary sanctions.
−Removed: On September 26, 2025, the Ascletis Defendants filed a notice of appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, challenging the ITC Commission’s affirmance.
−Removed: That same day, we also filed a notice of appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, challenging a narrow portion of the ITC Commission’s decision disagreeing with the determination of the ITC Chief Administrative Law Judge.
+Added: On May 29, 2025, the full ITC affirmed the substantial majority of the ITC Chief Administrative Law Judge’s determinations in favor of Viking, including monetary and non-monetary sanctions.
+Added: On September 26, 2025, the Ascletis Defendants filed a notice of appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, challenging the ITC’s affirmance.
+Added: That same day, we also filed a notice of appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, challenging a narrow portion of the ITC’s decision disagreeing with the determination of the ITC Chief Administrative Law Judge.
We plan to continue to vigorously pursue, as necessary, all of our legal remedies in these litigations, but there is no guarantee that we will be successful in these efforts.
Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.