Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Systems, Products Containing the Same, and Components Thereof; Commission's Final Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the Investigation, 73211-73212 [2015-29857]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 226 / Tuesday, November 24, 2015 / Notices mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES like or directly competitive articles in the United States consumers, it finds that such articles should not be excluded from entry. 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1). A similar provision applies to cease and desist orders. 19 U.S.C. 1337(f)(1). The Commission is interested in further development of the record on the public interest in its investigations. Accordingly, members of the public are invited to file submissions of no more than five (5) pages, inclusive of attachments, concerning the public interest in light of the administrative law judge’s Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding issued in this investigation on November 17, 2015. Comments should address whether issuance of an exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders in this investigation could affect the public health and welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers. In particular, the Commission is interested in comments that: (i) Explain how the articles potentially subject to the recommended orders are used in the United States; (ii) identify any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the recommended orders; (iii) indicate the extent to which like or directly competitive articles are produced in the United States or are otherwise available in the United States, with respect to the articles potentially subject to the recommended orders; (iv) indicate whether Complainant, Complainant’s licensees, and/or third party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the recommended orders within a commercially reasonable time; and (v) explain how the recommended orders would impact consumers in the United States. Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business on December 28, 2015. 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 (‘‘Inv. No. 337– TA–936’’) 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). VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:20 Nov 23, 2015 Jkt 238001 Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202–205– 2000). 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 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is sought will be treated accordingly. A redacted non-confidential version of the document must also be filed simultaneously with any confidential filing. All non-confidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS. This action is taken under authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and Part 210 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210). By order of the Commission. Issued: November 18, 2015. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2015–29805 Filed 11–23–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–926] Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Systems, Products Containing the Same, and Components Thereof; Commission’s Final Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has found a violation of section 337 in this investigation and has (1) issued a limited exclusion order prohibiting importation of infringing marine sonar imaging systems, products containing the same, and components thereof and (2) issued cease and desist orders directed to the domestic respondents. The investigation is terminated. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the General SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 73211 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 (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 this investigation on August 21, 2014, based on a complaint filed by Johnson Outdoors lnc. of Racine, Wisconsin and Johnson Outdoors Marine Electronics, Inc. of Eufaula, Alabama (collectively, ‘‘Johnson Outdoors’’). 79 FR 49536 (Aug. 21, 2014). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (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 marine sonar imaging systems, products containing the same, and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1, 2, 17, 25, 26, 31, 32, 35, 36, 41–43, 53, and 56 of U.S. Patent No. 7,652,952 (‘‘the ’952 patent’’); claims 1, 5, 7, 8, 21, 22, 24, 25, 28, and 29 of U.S. Patent No. 7,710,825 (‘‘the ’825 patent’’); and claims 14, 18, 21–23, 25, and 33 of U.S. Patent No. 7,755,974 (‘‘the ’974 patent’’). Id. The notice of investigation named the following respondents: Garmin International, Inc.; Garmin North America, Inc.; Garmin USA, Inc. all of Olathe, Kansas; and Garmin Corporation of New Taipei City, Taiwan (collectively, ‘‘Garmin’’). Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is not a party to the investigation. On January 30, 2015, the parties entered into a stipulation that the domestic industry requirement was met. The parties also agreed to a stipulation regarding importation of Garmin accused products. That same day, Johnson Outdoors filed two unopposed motions for summary determination: (1) That Garmin’s importation and sales satisfy the importation requirement and (2) that Johnson Outdoors satisfies the E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM 24NON1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 73212 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 226 / Tuesday, November 24, 2015 / Notices domestic industry requirement. On March 24, 2015, the ALJ granted Johnson Outdoors’ summary determination motions in Order Nos. 14 and 15, respectively. The Commission determined not to review these orders. See Notice of Commission Determination Not to Review Two Initial Determinations Granting Unopposed Motions for Summary Determinations of Importation and the Existence of a Domestic Industry That Practices the Asserted Patents (April 22, 2015). On July 13, 2015, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a violation of section 337 by Garmin in connection with claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, and 33 of the ’974 patent. The ID found no violation of section 337 in connection with the asserted claims of the ’952 and ’825 patents; and claim 25 of the ’974 patent. Specifically, the ID found that the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction over the accused products, and in personam jurisdiction over Garmin. ID at 21. The ID further found that the accused products infringe asserted claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, and 33 of the ’974 patent but do not infringe the asserted claims of the ’952 and ’825 patents or claim 25 of the ’974 patent. See ID at 55–57, 58–59, and 60–62. The ID also found that Garmin failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that the asserted claims of the ’952, ’825, or ’974 patents were anticipated or rendered obvious by the cited prior art references. See id. at 68–80, 89–100. Finally, the ID found that the ’952, ’825, and ’974 patents are not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct and that the ’952 patent is not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(f) for derivation. ID at 80–83, 100–109. On July 27, 2015, Garmin filed a petition for review of the ID. That same day, Johnson Outdoors filed a contingent petition for review of the ID. On August 4, 2015, the parties filed responses to the petitions. On August 25, 2015, the Commission determined to review the final ID on all issues petitioned. 80 FR 55872–74 (Sept. 17, 2015). Specifically, the Commission asked the parties to discuss any impact on the ID’s findings if it were to construe the claim term ‘‘mounted to a boat’’ to mean ‘‘proximately secured to the boat in a fixed manner.’’ On September 21, 2015, the parties filed written submissions on the issues under review, remedy, the public interest, and bonding. On September 28, 2015, the parties filed reply submissions. Having examined the record of this investigation, including the final ID, and the parties’ submissions, the VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:20 Nov 23, 2015 Jkt 238001 Commission has determined to modify the ID’s construction of the claim term ‘‘mounted to a boat,’’ a claim term recited in each of the asserted claims of the ’952, ’974, and ’825 patents (save for asserted claim 29 of the ’825 patent), which the ID construed as ‘‘attached to a bottom surface of the boat.’’ Instead, the Commission adopts the construction proposed by complainants before the ALJ and construes the limitation to mean ‘‘proximately secured to the boat in a fixed manner.’’ The Commission finds that the record evidence supports the ID’s findings on infringement and invalidity based on this construction. The Commission has determined to affirm the ID’s finding of no violation of section 337 in connection with the asserted claims of the’952 patent, ’825 patent, and claim 25 of the ’974 patent. The Commission further finds a violation of Section 337 with respect to claims 14, 18, 21–23, and 33 of the ’974 patent. The Commission adopts the ID’s findings to the extent they are not inconsistent with the Commission opinion issued herewith. Having found a violation of section 337 in this investigation, the Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is: (1) A limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of marine sonar imaging systems, products containing the same, and components thereof that infringe one or more of claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, and 33 of the ’974 patent that are manufactured by, or on behalf of, or are imported by or on behalf of Garmin or any of its affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, agents, or other related business entities, or their successors or assigns; and (2) cease and desist orders prohibiting domestic respondents Garmin International, Inc.; Garmin North America, Inc.; and Garmin USA, Inc. from conducting any of the following activities in the United States: Importing, selling, marketing, advertising, distributing, transferring (except for exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for, marine sonar imaging systems, products containing the same, and components thereof covered by claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23 and 33 of the ’974 patent. The proposed cease and desist orders include the following exemptions: (1) If in a written instrument, the owner of the patents authorizes or licenses such specific conduct, or such specific conduct is related to the importation or sale of covered products by or for the United States. The Commission has also determined that the public interest factors enumerated in section 337(d) and (f) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d) and (f)) do not preclude PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 issuance of the limited exclusion order or cease and desist orders. Finally, the Commission has determined that a bond in the amount of zero is required to permit temporary importation during the period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)) of marine sonar imaging systems, products containing the same, and components thereof that are subject to the remedial orders. The Commission’s orders and opinion were delivered to the President and to the United States Trade Representative on the day of their issuance. 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). Issued: November 18, 2015. By order of the Commission. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2015–29857 Filed 11–23–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division United States et al. v. Springleaf Holdings, Inc., et al.; Proposed Final Judgment and Competitive Impact Statement Notice is hereby given pursuant to the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. 16(b)–(h), that a proposed Final Judgment, Asset Preservation Stipulation and Order, and Competitive Impact Statement have been filed with the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in United States et. al. v. Springleaf Holdings, Inc., et. al., Civil Action No. 15–1992 (RMC). On November 13, 2015, the United States filed a Complaint alleging that the proposed acquisition by Springleaf Holdings, Inc. of OneMain Financial Holdings, LLC would violate Section 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 18. The proposed Final Judgment, filed at the same time as the Complaint, requires Springleaf Holdings to divest 127 branches in Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Washington and West Virginia. Copies of the Complaint, proposed Final Judgment and Competitive Impact Statement are available for inspection on the Antitrust Division’s Web site at https://www.justice.gov/atr, and at the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court for the District of E:\FR\FM\24NON1.SGM 24NON1

Agencies

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 226 (Tuesday, November 24, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73211-73212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-29857]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-926]

Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Systems, Products Containing the
Same, and Components Thereof; Commission's Final Determination Finding
a Violation of Section 337; Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order and
Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has found a violation of section 337 in this investigation
and has (1) issued a limited exclusion order prohibiting importation of
infringing marine sonar imaging systems, products containing the same,
and components thereof and (2) issued cease and desist orders directed
to the domestic respondents. The investigation is terminated.

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
(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 this investigation
on August 21, 2014, based on a complaint filed by Johnson Outdoors lnc.
of Racine, Wisconsin and Johnson Outdoors Marine Electronics, Inc. of
Eufaula, Alabama (collectively, ``Johnson Outdoors''). 79 FR 49536
(Aug. 21, 2014). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (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 marine sonar imaging
systems, products containing the same, and components thereof by reason
of infringement of one or more of claims 1, 2, 17, 25, 26, 31, 32, 35,
36, 41-43, 53, and 56 of U.S. Patent No. 7,652,952 (``the '952
patent''); claims 1, 5, 7, 8, 21, 22, 24, 25, 28, and 29 of U.S. Patent
No. 7,710,825 (``the '825 patent''); and claims 14, 18, 21-23, 25, and
33 of U.S. Patent No. 7,755,974 (``the '974 patent''). Id. The notice
of investigation named the following respondents: Garmin International,
Inc.; Garmin North America, Inc.; Garmin USA, Inc. all of Olathe,
Kansas; and Garmin Corporation of New Taipei City, Taiwan
(collectively, ``Garmin''). Id. The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations is not a party to the investigation.
On January 30, 2015, the parties entered into a stipulation that
the domestic industry requirement was met. The parties also agreed to a
stipulation regarding importation of Garmin accused products. That same
day, Johnson Outdoors filed two unopposed motions for summary
determination: (1) That Garmin's importation and sales satisfy the
importation requirement and (2) that Johnson Outdoors satisfies the

[[Page 73212]]

domestic industry requirement. On March 24, 2015, the ALJ granted
Johnson Outdoors' summary determination motions in Order Nos. 14 and
15, respectively. The Commission determined not to review these orders.
See Notice of Commission Determination Not to Review Two Initial
Determinations Granting Unopposed Motions for Summary Determinations of
Importation and the Existence of a Domestic Industry That Practices the
Asserted Patents (April 22, 2015).
On July 13, 2015, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a violation
of section 337 by Garmin in connection with claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23,
and 33 of the '974 patent. The ID found no violation of section 337 in
connection with the asserted claims of the '952 and '825 patents; and
claim 25 of the '974 patent. Specifically, the ID found that the
Commission has subject matter jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction over
the accused products, and in personam jurisdiction over Garmin. ID at
21. The ID further found that the accused products infringe asserted
claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, and 33 of the '974 patent but do not
infringe the asserted claims of the '952 and '825 patents or claim 25
of the '974 patent. See ID at 55-57, 58-59, and 60-62. The ID also
found that Garmin failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence
that the asserted claims of the '952, '825, or '974 patents were
anticipated or rendered obvious by the cited prior art references. See
id. at 68-80, 89-100. Finally, the ID found that the '952, '825, and
'974 patents are not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct and that
the '952 patent is not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(f) for derivation.
ID at 80-83, 100-109.
On July 27, 2015, Garmin filed a petition for review of the ID.
That same day, Johnson Outdoors filed a contingent petition for review
of the ID. On August 4, 2015, the parties filed responses to the
petitions.
On August 25, 2015, the Commission determined to review the final
ID on all issues petitioned. 80 FR 55872-74 (Sept. 17, 2015).
Specifically, the Commission asked the parties to discuss any impact on
the ID's findings if it were to construe the claim term ``mounted to a
boat'' to mean ``proximately secured to the boat in a fixed manner.''
On September 21, 2015, the parties filed written submissions on the
issues under review, remedy, the public interest, and bonding. On
September 28, 2015, the parties filed reply submissions.
Having examined the record of this investigation, including the
final ID, and the parties' submissions, the Commission has determined
to modify the ID's construction of the claim term ``mounted to a
boat,'' a claim term recited in each of the asserted claims of the
'952, '974, and '825 patents (save for asserted claim 29 of the '825
patent), which the ID construed as ``attached to a bottom surface of
the boat.'' Instead, the Commission adopts the construction proposed by
complainants before the ALJ and construes the limitation to mean
``proximately secured to the boat in a fixed manner.'' The Commission
finds that the record evidence supports the ID's findings on
infringement and invalidity based on this construction. The Commission
has determined to affirm the ID's finding of no violation of section
337 in connection with the asserted claims of the'952 patent, '825
patent, and claim 25 of the '974 patent. The Commission further finds a
violation of Section 337 with respect to claims 14, 18, 21-23, and 33
of the '974 patent. The Commission adopts the ID's findings to the
extent they are not inconsistent with the Commission opinion issued
herewith.
Having found a violation of section 337 in this investigation, the
Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is: (1) A
limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of marine
sonar imaging systems, products containing the same, and components
thereof that infringe one or more of claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, and 33
of the '974 patent that are manufactured by, or on behalf of, or are
imported by or on behalf of Garmin or any of its affiliated companies,
parents, subsidiaries, agents, or other related business entities, or
their successors or assigns; and (2) cease and desist orders
prohibiting domestic respondents Garmin International, Inc.; Garmin
North America, Inc.; and Garmin USA, Inc. from conducting any of the
following activities in the United States: Importing, selling,
marketing, advertising, distributing, transferring (except for
exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for, marine
sonar imaging systems, products containing the same, and components
thereof covered by claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23 and 33 of the '974 patent.
The proposed cease and desist orders include the following exemptions:
(1) If in a written instrument, the owner of the patents authorizes or
licenses such specific conduct, or such specific conduct is related to
the importation or sale of covered products by or for the United
States.
The Commission has also determined that the public interest factors
enumerated in section 337(d) and (f) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d) and (f)) do not
preclude issuance of the limited exclusion order or cease and desist
orders. Finally, the Commission has determined that a bond in the
amount of zero is required to permit temporary importation during the
period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)) of marine sonar
imaging systems, products containing the same, and components thereof
that are subject to the remedial orders. The Commission's orders and
opinion were delivered to the President and to the United States Trade
Representative on the day of their issuance.
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).

Issued: November 18, 2015.

By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015-29857 Filed 11-23-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.