The U.S. International Trade Commission is seeking public-interest comments before deciding whether to impose import-related remedies involving certain Wi-Fi routers, mesh devices and components associated with ASUS and Plume.

An administrative law judge issued an initial determination on Aug. 6 finding a violation in investigation 337-TA-1454 and recommending remedies. The commission has not yet made a final violation finding or issued an exclusion order.

Graphic summarizes proposed limited exclusion and cease-and-desist remedies in investigation 337-TA-1454.
The administrative judge recommended a limited exclusion order for certain covered imports and cease-and-desist orders for Plume and ASUS Computer International if the commission finds a violation.Boho News graphic from cited primary dataView source

If the commission ultimately finds a violation, the judge recommended a limited exclusion order covering certain products imported by or for ASUSTeK Computer, ASUS Computer International and Plume Design.

The recommendation also includes cease-and-desist orders directed to Plume and ASUS Computer International. A recommendation is not an operative border order; the commission must review the record and determine the remedy.

Public submissions are limited to five pages and due by the close of business on Sept. 8, 2026, according to the notice.

The commission is asking how a possible remedy could affect public health and welfare, competitive conditions in the U.S. economy, production of substitutes in the United States and U.S. consumers.

Graphic lists the USITC public-interest factors and September 8, 2026 comment deadline.
The commission is asking about health and welfare, competition, U.S. substitutes and capacity, and effects on consumers; submissions are due Sept. 8.Boho News graphic from cited primary dataView source

It also wants information about whether directly competitive products are available, whether domestic suppliers have capacity to replace excluded imports and how long substitution could take.

The case concerns certain devices and components, not every router sold under the named brands. Product coverage depends on the asserted patents, adjudicated claims and the final scope of any commission order.

Section 337 proceedings can lead to exclusion orders enforced at the border, but the public-interest stage gives the commission a separate record on the consequences of relief before it acts.

The notice does not predict the commission's final decision or a timetable for any order taking effect. Interested parties need the investigation docket and commission rules for filing and confidential-treatment requirements.