The cameras were brought to China to be refurbished, and Jazz Photo then reimported them into the United States for sale.

The Federal Circuit, in an opinion written by Judge Pauline Newman, concluded that Jazz Photo was correct.

The court clarified the line between reconstruction - building a new copy of a patented invention - and permissible repair.

In April 2014, the Federal Circuit sua sponte called for briefing and amicus curiae participation in an en banc consideration of whether Jazz Photo should be overruled in light of the recent Supreme Court decision in the Kirtsaeng case.

[4] The Federal Circuit, en banc, reaffirmed its holding from Jazz Photo in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Impression Products, Inc.[5][6]