Certain Cases for Portable Electronic Devices; Institution of an Advisory Opinion Proceeding, 64214-64215 [2014-25551]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
64214
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 208 / Tuesday, October 28, 2014 / Notices
as possible and which will guide the
management of the Seashore over the
next 20+ years.
The responsible official for this FEIS/
GMP is the Regional Director, NPS
Southeast Region, 100 Alabama Street
SW., 1924 Building, Atlanta, Georgia
30303.
Dated: October 1, 2014.
Stan Austin,
Regional Director, Southeast Region.
[FR Doc. 2014–25584 Filed 10–27–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–JD–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 337–TA–055, 087, 105,
112, 287, 295]
Certain Novelty Glasses; Certain CoinOperated Audio Visual Games and
Components Thereof; Certain CoinOperated Audio Visual Games and
Components Thereof (Viz., Rally-X and
Pac-Man); Certain Cube Puzzles;
Certain Strip Lights; Certain Novelty
Teleidoscopes; Request for Written
Submissions on Whether Certain
Commission Exclusion Orders Should
Be Rescinded, in Whole or in Part,
Based on Changed Conditions of Fact
or Law or the Public Interest
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission is requesting submissions
on whether the exclusion orders issued
at the conclusion of the following six
Commission investigations should be
rescinded, in whole or in part, based on
changed conditions of fact or law, or the
public interest, pursuant to 19 CFR
210.76: Certain Novelty Glasses, Inv.
No. 337–TA–055, Exclusion Order (July
11, 1979); Certain Coin-Operated Audio
Visual Games and Components Thereof,
Inv. No. 337–TA–087, Exclusion Order
(June 25, 1981); Certain Coin-Operated
Audio Visual Games and Components
Thereof (Viz., Rally-X and PAC MAN),
Inv. No. 337–TA–105, Exclusion Order
(January 15, 1982); Certain Cube
Puzzles, Inv. No. 337–TA–112,
Exclusion Order (December 30, 1982);
Certain Strip Lights, Inv. No. 337–TA–
287, Exclusion Order (September 28,
1989); and Certain Novelty
Teleidoscopes, Inv. No. 337–TA–295,
Exclusion Order (April 11, 1990).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Clint Gerdine, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
asabaliauskas on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:06 Oct 27, 2014
Jkt 235001
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
708–2310. Copies of non-confidential
documents filed in connection with this
investigation are or will be available for
inspection during official business
hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the
Office of the Secretary, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E
Street SW., Washington, DC 20436,
telephone (202) 205–2000. General
information concerning the Commission
may also be obtained by accessing its
Internet server at https://www.usitc.gov.
The public record for this investigation
may be viewed on the Commission’s
electronic docket (EDIS) at https://
edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired
persons are advised that information on
this matter can be obtained by
contacting the Commission’s TDD
terminal on (202) 205–1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: U.S.
Customs and Border Protection (‘‘CBP’’)
has notified the Commission that the six
above-identified exclusion orders may
be candidates for rescission based on
changed conditions of fact or law. Each
of the above-identified exclusion orders
issued over twenty (20) years ago and
each resulted from a Commission
investigation alleging a violation of
section 337 based on at least trademark
or trade dress infringement. CBP’s
preliminary investigation has indicated
that the trademarks or trade dress at
issue in the exclusion orders are no
longer used in commerce or
complainant has stopped making
required compliance filings. See EDIS
Document Nos. 542137–42. The
Commission therefore is requesting
submissions from the public, including
the current owners of the trademarks or
trade dress at issue, on whether these
exclusion orders should be rescinded
based on changed conditions of fact or
law, or the public interest, pursuant to
19 CFR 210.76.
The public interest factors that will be
considered by the Commission in
determining whether to rescind the
exclusion orders include the following:
(1) The public health and welfare, (2)
competitive conditions in the U.S.
economy, (3) U.S. production of articles
that are like or directly competitive with
those that are subject to investigation,
and (4) U.S. consumers.
Written Submissions: The parties to
the investigations, the current rights’
holders or successors-in-interest to the
trademarks or trade dress at issue,
interested government agencies, and any
other interested parties are encouraged
to file written submissions on whether
the Commission should rescind the
exclusion orders at issue based on
changed conditions of fact or law or the
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
public interest. The written submissions
must be filed no later than close of
business on December 22, 2014. Reply
submissions must be filed no later than
the close of business on January 20,
2015. No further submissions on these
issues will be permitted unless
otherwise ordered by the Commission.
Persons filing written submissions
must file the original document
electronically on or before the deadlines
stated above and submit 8 true paper
copies to the Office of the Secretary by
noon the next day pursuant to
Commission rule 210.4(f), 19 CFR
210.4(f). Submissions should refer to the
investigation number (e.g., ‘‘Inv. No.
337–TA–055’’) in a prominent place on
the cover page and/or the first page. (See
Handbook for Electronic Filing
Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/
secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/
handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf).
Any person desiring to submit a
document (or portion thereof) to the
Commission in confidence must request
confidential treatment unless the
information has already been granted
such treatment during the proceedings.
All such requests should be directed to
the Secretary of the Commission and
must include a full statement of the
reasons why the Commission should
grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 210.6.
Documents for which confidential
treatment by the Commission is sought
will be treated accordingly. All
nonconfidential written submissions
will be available for public inspection at
the Office of the Secretary.
The authority for the Commission’s
determination is contained in section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in Part
210 of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR part
210.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: October 22, 2014.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014–25546 Filed 10–27–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 337–TA–867/861
(Advisory Opinion Proceeding)]
Certain Cases for Portable Electronic
Devices; Institution of an Advisory
Opinion Proceeding
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\28OCN1.SGM
28OCN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 208 / Tuesday, October 28, 2014 / Notices
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to institute
an advisory opinion proceeding in the
above-captioned investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–3042. Copies of non-confidential
documents filed in connection with this
investigation are or will be available for
inspection during official business
hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the
Office of the Secretary, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E
Street SW., Washington, DC 20436,
telephone (202) 205–2000. General
information concerning the Commission
may also be obtained by accessing its
Internet server at https://www.usitc.gov.
The public record for this investigation
may be viewed on the Commission’s
electronic docket (EDIS) at https://
edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired
persons are advised that information on
this matter can be obtained by
contacting the Commission’s TDD
terminal on (202) 205–1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Commission instituted Inv. No. 337–
TA–861 on November 16, 2012, based
on a complaint filed by Speculative
Product Design, LLC of Mountain View,
California (‘‘Speck’’). 77 FR 68828 (Nov.
16, 2012). The complaint alleged
violations of section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the
importation into the United States, the
sale for importation, and the sale within
the United States after importation of
certain cases for portable electronic
devices by reason of infringement of
various claims of United States Patent
No. 8,204,561 (‘‘the ’561 patent’’). The
complaint named several respondents.
The Commission instituted Inv. No.
337–TA–867 on January 31, 2013, based
on a complaint filed by Speck. 78 FR
6834 (Jan. 31, 2013). That complaint
also alleged violations of section 337 of
the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337)
in the importation into the United
States, the sale for importation, and the
sale within the United States after
importation of certain cases for portable
electronic devices by reason of
infringement of various claims of the
’561 patent. The complaint named
several respondents. On January 31,
2013, the Commission consolidated the
two investigations. Id.
All the participating respondents
were terminated from the consolidated
investigations as a result of settlement
agreements, consent motion
stipulations, or withdrawal of the
asabaliauskas on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:06 Oct 27, 2014
Jkt 235001
complaint as to them. A number of the
named respondents defaulted. On
February 21, 2014, the ALJ issued his
final initial determination finding a
violation of section 337 as to claims 4,
5, 9, and 11 of the ’561 patent by the
defaulting respondents and
recommended issuance of a general
exclusion order (‘‘GEO’’). Based on
evidence of a pattern of violation and
difficulty ascertaining the source of the
infringing produces, the Commission
agreed with the ALJ and issued a GEO
directed to cases for portable electronic
devices that infringe one of claims 4, 5,
9, and 11 of the ’561 patent.
On September 4, 2014, Otter Products,
LLC of Fort Collins, Colorado (‘‘Otter’’)
filed a request with the Commission
asking for institution of an advisory
opinion proceeding to declare that its
Symmetry Series Products are not
covered by the general exclusion order.
Specifically, Otter requests that the
proceeding consider: (1) Whether, under
section 337 and the Administrative
Procedure Act, the GEO should apply to
Otter’s imports absent a determination
by the Commission in a violation or
enforcement proceeding that Otter’s
products infringe; (2) whether Otter’s
products are covered by one or more of
claims 4, 5, 9, and 11 of the ’561 patent;
and (3) that the Commission consider
the validity of the ’561 patent as part of
this proceeding. On October 1, 2014,
complainant Speck filed an opposition
to Otter’s request.
The Commission has determined that
Otter’s request complies with the
requirements for institution of an
advisory opinion proceeding under
Commission Rule 210.79 to determine
whether Otter’s Symmetry Series
products infringe one or more of claims
4, 5, 9, and 11 of the ’561 patent. The
Commission has determined to reject
Otter’s argument that the GEO should
apply to only products that were
specifically before the Commission. See
Hyundai Elecs. Indus. Co. v. U.S. Int’l
Trade Comm’n, 899 F.2d 1204, 1210
(Fed. Cir. 1990) (internal citations
omitted) (‘‘the Commission can impose
a general exclusion order that binds
parties and non-parties alike and
effectively shifts to would-be importers
of potentially infringing articles, as a
condition of entry, the burden of
establishing noninfringement.’’); Multi
Level Touch Control Lighting Switches,
USITC Inv. No. 337–TA–225, 1987 ITC
Lexis 274, *6 (Jul. 16, 1987) (‘‘It is in the
nature of general exclusion orders that
they may apply to articles not before the
Commission during the investigation.’’)
The Commission has also determined to
continue its longstanding practice of not
considering the validity of the
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64215
underlying intellectual property in
advisory proceedings. See Certain Rare
Earth Magnets and Magnetic Materials
and Articles Containing Same, Inv. No.
337–TA–413, Denial of Request for
Advisory Opinion at 1 (Nov. 1, 2010);
Multi–Level Touch Control Lighting
Switches, Inv. No. 337–TA–225 at *5–6.
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined to institute an advisory
opinion proceeding to determine only
whether Otter’s Symmetry Series
products infringe one or more of claims
4, 5, 9, and 11 of the ’561 patent. The
Commission has determined to refer
Otter’s request to the Office of Unfair
Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’). The
parties will furnish OUII with
information as requested, and OUII shall
investigate and issue a report to the
Commission within ninety (90) days of
the date of publication of this notice in
the Federal Register. The Commission
will issue an advisory opinion within 45
days of receipt of OUII’s written report.
The following entities are named as
parties to the proceeding: (1)
Complainant Speck and (2) Otter.
The authority for the Commission’s
determination is contained in sections
335 and 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended (19 U.S.C. 1335, 1337), and
in part 210 of the Commission’s Rules
of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part
210).
Issued: October 22, 2014.
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014–25551 Filed 10–27–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of Proposed
Consent Decree Under the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act
On October 21, 2014, the Department
of Justice lodged a proposed Consent
Decree with the United States District
Court for the District of Oregon in a
lawsuit entitled United States v. Justine
V.R. Russell, in her capacity as Personal
Representative of the Estate of Roger
Milliken, Dr. Ora K. Smith, and Sue
Beauregard Rife, in her capacity as
Personal Representative of the Estate of
William A. Bowes, Civil Action No.
2:14–cv–01660–SU.
The United States filed this lawsuit
under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980, (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et
E:\FR\FM\28OCN1.SGM
28OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 208 (Tuesday, October 28, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64214-64215]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25551]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 337-TA-867/861 (Advisory Opinion Proceeding)]
Certain Cases for Portable Electronic Devices; Institution of an
Advisory Opinion Proceeding
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 64215]]
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to institute an advisory opinion proceeding
in the above-captioned investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3042. Copies of non-
confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are
or will be available for inspection during official business hours
(8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436,
telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission
may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed
on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.
Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter
can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202)
205-1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted Inv. No. 337-TA-
861 on November 16, 2012, based on a complaint filed by Speculative
Product Design, LLC of Mountain View, California (``Speck''). 77 FR
68828 (Nov. 16, 2012). The complaint alleged violations of section 337
of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the
United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United
States after importation of certain cases for portable electronic
devices by reason of infringement of various claims of United States
Patent No. 8,204,561 (``the '561 patent''). The complaint named several
respondents.
The Commission instituted Inv. No. 337-TA-867 on January 31, 2013,
based on a complaint filed by Speck. 78 FR 6834 (Jan. 31, 2013). That
complaint also alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into the United States, the
sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after
importation of certain cases for portable electronic devices by reason
of infringement of various claims of the '561 patent. The complaint
named several respondents. On January 31, 2013, the Commission
consolidated the two investigations. Id.
All the participating respondents were terminated from the
consolidated investigations as a result of settlement agreements,
consent motion stipulations, or withdrawal of the complaint as to them.
A number of the named respondents defaulted. On February 21, 2014, the
ALJ issued his final initial determination finding a violation of
section 337 as to claims 4, 5, 9, and 11 of the '561 patent by the
defaulting respondents and recommended issuance of a general exclusion
order (``GEO''). Based on evidence of a pattern of violation and
difficulty ascertaining the source of the infringing produces, the
Commission agreed with the ALJ and issued a GEO directed to cases for
portable electronic devices that infringe one of claims 4, 5, 9, and 11
of the '561 patent.
On September 4, 2014, Otter Products, LLC of Fort Collins, Colorado
(``Otter'') filed a request with the Commission asking for institution
of an advisory opinion proceeding to declare that its Symmetry Series
Products are not covered by the general exclusion order. Specifically,
Otter requests that the proceeding consider: (1) Whether, under section
337 and the Administrative Procedure Act, the GEO should apply to
Otter's imports absent a determination by the Commission in a violation
or enforcement proceeding that Otter's products infringe; (2) whether
Otter's products are covered by one or more of claims 4, 5, 9, and 11
of the '561 patent; and (3) that the Commission consider the validity
of the '561 patent as part of this proceeding. On October 1, 2014,
complainant Speck filed an opposition to Otter's request.
The Commission has determined that Otter's request complies with
the requirements for institution of an advisory opinion proceeding
under Commission Rule 210.79 to determine whether Otter's Symmetry
Series products infringe one or more of claims 4, 5, 9, and 11 of the
'561 patent. The Commission has determined to reject Otter's argument
that the GEO should apply to only products that were specifically
before the Commission. See Hyundai Elecs. Indus. Co. v. U.S. Int'l
Trade Comm'n, 899 F.2d 1204, 1210 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (internal citations
omitted) (``the Commission can impose a general exclusion order that
binds parties and non-parties alike and effectively shifts to would-be
importers of potentially infringing articles, as a condition of entry,
the burden of establishing noninfringement.''); Multi Level Touch
Control Lighting Switches, USITC Inv. No. 337-TA-225, 1987 ITC Lexis
274, *6 (Jul. 16, 1987) (``It is in the nature of general exclusion
orders that they may apply to articles not before the Commission during
the investigation.'') The Commission has also determined to continue
its longstanding practice of not considering the validity of the
underlying intellectual property in advisory proceedings. See Certain
Rare Earth Magnets and Magnetic Materials and Articles Containing Same,
Inv. No. 337-TA-413, Denial of Request for Advisory Opinion at 1 (Nov.
1, 2010); Multi-Level Touch Control Lighting Switches, Inv. No. 337-TA-
225 at *5-6.
Accordingly, the Commission has determined to institute an advisory
opinion proceeding to determine only whether Otter's Symmetry Series
products infringe one or more of claims 4, 5, 9, and 11 of the '561
patent. The Commission has determined to refer Otter's request to the
Office of Unfair Import Investigations (``OUII''). The parties will
furnish OUII with information as requested, and OUII shall investigate
and issue a report to the Commission within ninety (90) days of the
date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. The
Commission will issue an advisory opinion within 45 days of receipt of
OUII's written report. The following entities are named as parties to
the proceeding: (1) Complainant Speck and (2) Otter.
The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in
sections 335 and 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C.
1335, 1337), and in part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure (19 CFR part 210).
Issued: October 22, 2014.
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014-25551 Filed 10-27-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
