Certain Air Mattress Systems, Components Thereof, and Methods of Using the Same; Commission Final Determination of Violation of Section 337; Issuance of a Limited Exclusion Order; Termination of Investigation, 23593-23595 [2017-10476]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 23, 2017 / Notices
viewed on the Commission’s electronic
docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Office of the Secretary, Docket Services
Division, U.S. International Trade
Commission, telephone (202) 205–1802.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Authority: The authority for institution of
this investigation is contained in section 337
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19
U.S.C. 1337 and in section 210.10 of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2017).
Scope of Investigation: Having
considered the complaint, the U.S.
International Trade Commission, on
May 17, 2017, ORDERED THAT—
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, an investigation be instituted
to determine whether there is a
violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of
section 337 in the importation into the
United States, the sale for importation,
or the sale within the United States after
importation of certain vacuum cleaning
devices and components thereof such as
spare parts by reason of infringement of
one or more of claims 1–3, 7, 12, and 42
of the ’490 patent; claims 1–3, 7, 11, 12,
17, 19, 20, 28, and 34 of the ’308 patent;
claims 1–3, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, and 17–
19 of the ’090 patent; claims 1, 2, 4, 8,
11, 12, 21, 22, and 25 of the ’553 patent;
claims 1, 10, 11, and 14–16 of the ’233
patent; and claims 1, 2, 8, 9, 12, and 13
of the ’924 patent, and whether an
industry in the United States exists as
required by subsection (a)(2) of section
337;
(2) For the purpose of the
investigation so instituted, the following
are hereby named as parties upon which
this notice of investigation shall be
served:
(a) The complainant is:
iRobot Corporation, 8 Crosby Drive,
Bedford, Massachusetts 01730.
(b) The respondents are the following
entities alleged to be in violation of
section 337, and are the parties upon
which the complaint is to be served:
Bissell Homecare, Inc., 2345 Walker
Ave. NW., Grand Rapids, Michigan
49544.
Hoover Inc., 7005 Cochran Road,
Glenwillow, Ohio 44139.
Royal Appliance Manufacturing Co.
Inc., d/b/a TTI Floor Care North
America, Inc., 7005 Cochran Road,
Glenwillow, Ohio 44139.
Bobsweep, Inc., 1121 Bay St., Suite 709,
Toronto, Ontario M5S3L9, Canada.
Bobsweep USA, 2360 Corporate Circle,
Suite 400, Henderson, Nevada 89074.
The Black & Decker Corporation, 701 E.
Joppa Rd., Towson, Maryland 21286.
Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc., 701 E. Joppa
Rd., Towson, Maryland 21286.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:15 May 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
Shenzhen ZhiYi Technology Co., Ltd.,
d/b/a iLife, 3rd Floor Bld B, Hytera
Technology Park, No. 3, 4th of
Baolong Road, Longgang, Shenzhen
518000, China.
Matsutek Enterprises Co., Ltd., 2F, 2,
Lane 15 Tzu Chiang Street, New
Taipei City, Taiwan 23678.
Suzhou Real Power Electric Appliance
Co., Ltd., No 9 Shi Yang Rd, Suzhou
New District, Suzhou 215151, China.
Shenzhen Silver Star Intelligent
Technology Co., Ltd., Building D,
Huiqing Technology Park, DAFU
Industrial Area, Guanguang Road,
Guanlan Town, Shenzhen, China.
(3) For the investigation so instituted,
the Chief Administrative Law Judge,
U.S. International Trade Commission,
shall designate the presiding
Administrative Law Judge.
The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations will not participate as a
party in the investigation.
Responses to the complaint and the
notice of investigation must be
submitted by the named respondents in
accordance with section 210.13 of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to
19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such
responses will be considered by the
Commission if received not later than 20
days after the date of service by the
Commission of the complaint and the
notice of investigation. Extensions of
time for submitting responses to the
complaint and the notice of
investigation will not be granted unless
good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of a respondent to file a timely
response to each allegation in the
complaint and in this notice may be
deemed to constitute a waiver of the
right to appear and contest the
allegations of the complaint and this
notice, and to authorize the
administrative law judge and the
Commission, without further notice to
the respondent, to find the facts to be as
alleged in the complaint and this notice
and to enter an initial determination
and a final determination containing
such findings, and may result in the
issuance of an exclusion order or a cease
and desist order or both directed against
the respondent.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: May 17, 2017.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2017–10477 Filed 5–22–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23593
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–971]
Certain Air Mattress Systems,
Components Thereof, and Methods of
Using the Same; Commission Final
Determination of Violation of Section
337; Issuance of a Limited Exclusion
Order; Termination of Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission (‘‘the Commission’’) has
determined that there is a violation of
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (19 U.S.C. 1337) (‘‘section
337’’) by respondents Sizewise Rentals
LLC of Kansas City, Missouri; American
National Manufacturing Inc. of Corona,
California; and Dires LLC and Dires LLC
d/b/a Personal Comfort Beds of Orlando,
Florida (collectively, ‘‘Respondents’’) in
the above-captioned investigation. The
Commission has issued a limited
exclusion order (‘‘LEO’’) directed to
products of the Respondents and has
terminated the investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–3115. 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 this investigation
on November 20, 2015, based on a
complaint filed by Select Comfort
Corporation of Minneapolis, Minnesota
and Select Comfort SC Corporation of
Greenville, South Carolina (collectively,
‘‘Select Comfort,’’ or ‘‘Complainants’’).
80 FR 72738 (Nov. 20, 2015). The
complaint alleges violations of section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
23594
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 23, 2017 / Notices
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 air mattress systems,
components thereof, and methods of
using the same by reason of
infringement of certain claims of U.S.
Patent Nos. 5,904,172 (‘‘the ’172
patent’’) and 7,389,554 (‘‘the ’554
patent’’). Id. In addition to the private
parties named as respondents, the
Commission named the Office of Unfair
Import Investigations as a party in this
investigation. Id.
Pursuant to Commission Rule
210.50(b)(1), 19 CFR 210.50(b)(1), the
Commission ordered that the presiding
administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’):
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
[S]hall take evidence or other information
and hear arguments from the parties and
other interested persons with respect to the
public interest in this investigation, as
appropriate, and provide the Commission
with findings of fact and a recommended
determination on this issue, which shall be
limited to the statutory public interest factors
set forth in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1), (f)(1), (g)(1).
80 FR 72738 (Nov. 20, 2015).
The evidentiary hearing on the
question of violation of section 337 was
held August 8–12, 2016. The final ID on
violation was issued on November 18,
2016. The ALJ issued his recommended
determination on remedy, the public
interest and bonding on the same day.
The ALJ found no violation of section
337 in this investigation. The ALJ
recommended that should the
Commission find a violation of section
337 in the present investigation, it issue
an LEO prohibiting the importation of
Respondents’ air controllers and air
mattress systems found to infringe the
asserted patents. The ALJ also
recommended the inclusion of a
provision for the ’554 patent, whereby
Respondents could certify that certain
imports are not covered by the LEO. The
ALJ did not recommend that the
Commission issue a cease and desist
order in this investigation. The ALJ
further recommended a zero bond
during the period of Presidential review.
All parties to this investigation filed
timely petitions for review of various
portions of the final ID, as well as timely
responses to the petitions.
On December 13, 2016, Respondents
filed a ‘‘Motion For a Limited ReOpening of the Record for Consideration
of Prior Art Not Identified By
Complainants During Discovery.’’ Both
the IA and Complainants filed timely
responsive pleadings opposing
Respondents’ motion. The Commission
has determined to deny Respondents’
motion to re-open the record.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:15 May 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
On December 19, 2016, both
Complainants and Respondents filed
their respective Public Interest
Statement pursuant to 19 CFR
210.50(a)(4). Responses from the public
were likewise received by the
Commission pursuant to notice. See
Notice of Request for Statements on the
Public Interest (Nov. 29, 2016).
The Commission determined to
review various portions of the final ID
and issued a Notice to that effect dated
January 23, 2017 (‘‘Notice of Review’’).
82 FR 8623 (Jan. 27, 2017). In the Notice
of Review, the Commission also set a
schedule for the filing of written
submissions on the issues under review,
including certain questions posed by the
Commission, and on remedy, the public
interest, and bonding. The parties have
briefed, with initial and reply
submissions, the issues under review
and the issues of remedy, the public
interest, and bonding.
Having examined the record in this
investigation, including the parties’
submissions filed in response to the
Notice of Review, the Commission has
determined as follows:
(1) To reverse (a) the ID’s finding that
Respondents’ P5000, P6000, and Arco
products do not meet the ‘‘guides’’ and
‘‘stops’’ limitation of claim 2 of the ’172
patent; (b) the ID’s finding that the Gen
3 Arco and Platinum 5000/6000
controllers do not meet the ‘‘guides’’
and ‘‘stops’’ limitation of claim 12 of the
’172 patent; and (c) the ID’s finding that
the Gen 3 Arco and Platinum 5000/6000
controllers do not infringe claim 12 of
the ’172 patent;
(2) To affirm the ID’s finding that the
’172 Accused Products do not meet the
claim limitation ‘‘pressure monitor
means being operably coupled to the
processor and being in fluid
communication with the at least one
bladder for continuously monitoring the
pressure in the at least one bladder’’ in
claims 2, 6, 20, 22, and 24 of the ’172
patent;
(3) To (a) modify the ID’s finding that
the ’172 Accused Products do not
infringe claim 9 of the ’172 patent by
striking the words ‘‘For the reasons
stated above in the discussion of claim
2’’ in the first full paragraph on page 23
of the ID and, instead, find that the
Accused Products do not meet the
‘‘continuously monitoring’’ limitation of
claim 9 and therefore do not infringe
claim 9 for the reasons detailed in the
accompanying Commission Opinion;
and (b) affirm the ID’s finding of no
induced infringement of claim 9 of the
’172 patent;
(4) To take no position on the ID’s
discussion in the last paragraph on page
20 and the first paragraph on page 21 of
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the ID. See Beloit Corporation v. Valmet
Oy, 742 F.2d 1421, 1423 (Fed. Cir.1984)
(‘‘Beloit’’);
(5) To modify the ID’s finding
regarding non-infringement of claim 16
of the ’554 patent by striking the words
‘‘For the reasons stated above in the
discussion of claim 1,’’ in the fourth
paragraph on page 70 of the ID and
instead find that the ’554 Accused
Products do not meet the ‘‘air
posturizing sleep surface’’ limitation of
claim 16 and therefore do not infringe
claim 16 for the reasons detailed in the
accompanying Commission Opinion;
(6) To reverse the ID’s determination
that the ’554 Domestic Industry
Products do not practice the ’554 patent
and thus do not satisfy the technical
prong of the domestic industry
requirement with respect to the ’554
patent and, instead, determine that for
the reasons detailed in the
accompanying Commission Opinion,
Complainants have satisfied the
technical prong with respect to the ’554
patent based only on the U15 and U11
products practicing claim 16 of the ’554
patent;
(7) To take no position on the ID’s
determination on whether Complainants
satisfied the economic prong with
regard to the ’554 patent. See Beloit, 742
F.2d at 1423.
(8) To reverse the ID’s determination
regarding the economic prong of the
domestic industry requirement with
respect to the ’172 patent, and find that
the economic prong of the domestic
industry requirement is satisfied for the
’172 patent.
Accordingly, the Commission finds
that there is a violation of section 337
with respect to the ’172 patent in this
investigation. The Commission has
determined that the appropriate relief in
this investigation includes an LEO
prohibiting the unlicensed entry of
infringing air mattress systems,
components thereof, and methods of
using the same that are covered by
claims 12 or 16 of the ’172 patent and
that are manufactured abroad by or on
behalf of, or imported by or on behalf
of Respondents, or their affiliated
companies, parents, subsidiaries, or
other related business entities, or their
successors or assigns.
The Commission has further
determined that the public interest
factors enumerated in section 337(d)(l)
(19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(l)) do not preclude
issuance of the LEO. Finally, the
Commission has determined that the
amount of a bond should be set to zero
(0) percent of entered value during the
period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C.
1337(j)). The Commission’s order was
delivered to the President and the
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 98 / Tuesday, May 23, 2017 / Notices
In this action, the United States, on
behalf of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, together with the
State of Texas, filed a Complaint and
proposed Consent Decree pertaining to
Clean Air Act violations at a bulk
chemical storage tank facility located on
the Houston Ship Channel that is owned
and operated by Vopak Terminals North
America Inc. and Vopak Logistic
By order of the Commission.
Services USA Inc. (collectively,
Issued: May 17, 2017.
‘‘Vopak’’). In the joint Complaint, the
Lisa R. Barton,
U.S. and the State of Texas allege
Secretary to the Commission.
violations of (1) the New Source
[FR Doc. 2017–10476 Filed 5–22–17; 8:45 am]
Performance Standards (‘‘NSPS’’)
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
requirements under Section 111 of the
Clean Air Act (‘‘CAA’’) and the
implementing regulations, promulgated
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
at 40 CFR part 60, subparts A, Ka, and
Kb; (2) the National Emission Standards
Foreign Claims Settlement
for Hazardous Air Pollutants
Commission
requirements under Section 112 of the
[F.C.S.C. Meeting and Hearing Notice No.
CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7412, and the
5–17]
implementing regulations promulgated
at 40 CFR part 63, subparts A, DD, and
Sunshine Act Meeting
EEEE; (3) the operating permit
requirements of Title V of the CAA, and
The Foreign Claims Settlement
Commission, pursuant to its regulations the implementing regulations; (4) the
federally enforceable Texas State
(45 CFR part 503.25) and the
Implementation Plan; and (5) the
Government in the Sunshine Act (5
Facility’s operating permit, issued by
U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice in
the Texas Commission on
regard to the scheduling of open
Environmental Quality.
meetings as follows:
Under the proposed settlement,
WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 2017: 10:00 a.m.—
Vopak agrees to pay $2.5 million in civil
Issuance of Proposed Decisions in
penalties, split evenly between the
claims against Iraq.
United States and the State of Texas and
STATUS: Open.
$40,000 in attorney’s fees to the State of
All meetings are held at the Foreign
Texas. In addition, the settlement
Claims Settlement Commission, 600 E
requires Vopak to implement a range of
Street NW., Washington, DC. Requests
injunctive relief measures, including: (1)
for information, or advance notices of
Constructing and operating a flare and
intention to observe an open meeting,
other emission controls at its
may be directed to: Patricia M. Hall,
Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, wastewater treatment system; (2)
implementing an advanced tank
600 E Street NW., Suite 6002,
inspection program at its tank terminal;
Washington, DC 20579. Telephone:
(3) engaging a third party auditor to
(202) 616–6975.
review Vopak’s waste minimization
Brian M. Simkin,
practices and to monitor Vopak’s
Chief Counsel.
compliance with the settlement; and (4)
[FR Doc. 2017–10665 Filed 5–19–17; 4:45 pm]
undertaking various other measures to
BILLING CODE 4410–BA–P
bring the facility into compliance with
the Clean Air Act.
The publication of this notice opens
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
a period for public comment on the
consent decree. Comments should be
Notice of Lodging of Proposed
addressed to the Acting Assistant
Consent Decree Under the Clean Air
Attorney General, Environment and
Act
Natural Resources Division, and should
refer to United States and State of Texas
On May 17, 2017, the Department of
v. Vopak Terminal Deer Park Inc. and
Justice lodged a proposed consent
Vopak Logistics Services USA Inc., Civil
decree with the United States District
Action No. 4:17–cv–1518, D.J. Ref. No.
Court for the Southern District of Texas
in the lawsuit entitled United States and 90–5–2–1–11406. All comments must be
submitted no later than thirty (30) days
State of Texas v. Vopak Terminal Deer
after the publication date of this notice.
Park Inc. and Vopak Logistics Services
Comments may be submitted either by
USA Inc., Civil Action No. 4:17–cv–
email or by mail:
1518.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
United States Trade Representative on
the day of its 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).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:15 May 22, 2017
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23595
To submit
comments:
Send them to:
By email .......
pubcomment-ees.enrd@
usdoj.gov.
Assistant Attorney General,
U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O.
Box 7611, Washington, DC
20044–7611.
By mail .........
During the public comment period,
the consent decree may be examined
and downloaded at this Justice
Department Web site: https://
www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees.
We will provide a paper copy of the
consent decree upon written request
and payment of reproduction costs.
Please mail your request and payment
to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ—
ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC
20044–7611.
Please enclose a check or money order
for $24.50 (25 cents per page
reproduction cost) payable to the United
States Treasury.
Thomas P. Carroll,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental
Enforcement Section, Environment and
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 2017–10467 Filed 5–22–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training
Administration
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity
Act (WIOA) 2017; Lower Living
Standard Income Level (LLSIL)
Employment and Training
Administration (ETA), Labor.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Title I of the Workforce
Innovation and Opportunity Act
(WIOA) requires the U.S. Secretary of
Labor (Secretary) to update and publish
the LLSIL tables annually, for uses
described in the law (including
determining eligibility for youth). WIOA
defines the term ‘‘low income
individual’’ as one who qualifies under
various criteria, including an individual
in a family with total family income for
a six-month period that does not exceed
the higher level of the poverty line or 70
percent of the LLSIL. This issuance
provides the Secretary’s annual LLSIL
for 2017 and references the current 2017
Health and Human Services ‘‘Poverty
Guidelines.’’
SUMMARY:
This issuance is effective May
23, 2017.
For Further Information or Questions
on LLSIL: Please contact Samuel Wright,
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23593-23595]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10476]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-971]
Certain Air Mattress Systems, Components Thereof, and Methods of
Using the Same; Commission Final Determination of Violation of Section
337; Issuance of a Limited Exclusion Order; Termination of
Investigation
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission (``the Commission'') has determined that there is a
violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19
U.S.C. 1337) (``section 337'') by respondents Sizewise Rentals LLC of
Kansas City, Missouri; American National Manufacturing Inc. of Corona,
California; and Dires LLC and Dires LLC d/b/a Personal Comfort Beds of
Orlando, Florida (collectively, ``Respondents'') in the above-captioned
investigation. The Commission has issued a limited exclusion order
(``LEO'') directed to products of the Respondents and has terminated
the investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3115. 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 this investigation
on November 20, 2015, based on a complaint filed by Select Comfort
Corporation of Minneapolis, Minnesota and Select Comfort SC Corporation
of Greenville, South Carolina (collectively, ``Select Comfort,'' or
``Complainants''). 80 FR 72738 (Nov. 20, 2015). The complaint alleges
violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
[[Page 23594]]
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 air mattress systems, components thereof, and
methods of using the same by reason of infringement of certain claims
of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,904,172 (``the '172 patent'') and 7,389,554
(``the '554 patent''). Id. In addition to the private parties named as
respondents, the Commission named the Office of Unfair Import
Investigations as a party in this investigation. Id.
Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(b)(1), 19 CFR 210.50(b)(1), the
Commission ordered that the presiding administrative law judge
(``ALJ''):
[S]hall take evidence or other information and hear arguments
from the parties and other interested persons with respect to the
public interest in this investigation, as appropriate, and provide
the Commission with findings of fact and a recommended determination
on this issue, which shall be limited to the statutory public
interest factors set forth in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1), (f)(1), (g)(1).
80 FR 72738 (Nov. 20, 2015).
The evidentiary hearing on the question of violation of section 337
was held August 8-12, 2016. The final ID on violation was issued on
November 18, 2016. The ALJ issued his recommended determination on
remedy, the public interest and bonding on the same day. The ALJ found
no violation of section 337 in this investigation. The ALJ recommended
that should the Commission find a violation of section 337 in the
present investigation, it issue an LEO prohibiting the importation of
Respondents' air controllers and air mattress systems found to infringe
the asserted patents. The ALJ also recommended the inclusion of a
provision for the '554 patent, whereby Respondents could certify that
certain imports are not covered by the LEO. The ALJ did not recommend
that the Commission issue a cease and desist order in this
investigation. The ALJ further recommended a zero bond during the
period of Presidential review.
All parties to this investigation filed timely petitions for review
of various portions of the final ID, as well as timely responses to the
petitions.
On December 13, 2016, Respondents filed a ``Motion For a Limited
Re-Opening of the Record for Consideration of Prior Art Not Identified
By Complainants During Discovery.'' Both the IA and Complainants filed
timely responsive pleadings opposing Respondents' motion. The
Commission has determined to deny Respondents' motion to re-open the
record.
On December 19, 2016, both Complainants and Respondents filed their
respective Public Interest Statement pursuant to 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4).
Responses from the public were likewise received by the Commission
pursuant to notice. See Notice of Request for Statements on the Public
Interest (Nov. 29, 2016).
The Commission determined to review various portions of the final
ID and issued a Notice to that effect dated January 23, 2017 (``Notice
of Review''). 82 FR 8623 (Jan. 27, 2017). In the Notice of Review, the
Commission also set a schedule for the filing of written submissions on
the issues under review, including certain questions posed by the
Commission, and on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. The
parties have briefed, with initial and reply submissions, the issues
under review and the issues of remedy, the public interest, and
bonding.
Having examined the record in this investigation, including the
parties' submissions filed in response to the Notice of Review, the
Commission has determined as follows:
(1) To reverse (a) the ID's finding that Respondents' P5000, P6000,
and Arco products do not meet the ``guides'' and ``stops'' limitation
of claim 2 of the '172 patent; (b) the ID's finding that the Gen 3 Arco
and Platinum 5000/6000 controllers do not meet the ``guides'' and
``stops'' limitation of claim 12 of the '172 patent; and (c) the ID's
finding that the Gen 3 Arco and Platinum 5000/6000 controllers do not
infringe claim 12 of the '172 patent;
(2) To affirm the ID's finding that the '172 Accused Products do
not meet the claim limitation ``pressure monitor means being operably
coupled to the processor and being in fluid communication with the at
least one bladder for continuously monitoring the pressure in the at
least one bladder'' in claims 2, 6, 20, 22, and 24 of the '172 patent;
(3) To (a) modify the ID's finding that the '172 Accused Products
do not infringe claim 9 of the '172 patent by striking the words ``For
the reasons stated above in the discussion of claim 2'' in the first
full paragraph on page 23 of the ID and, instead, find that the Accused
Products do not meet the ``continuously monitoring'' limitation of
claim 9 and therefore do not infringe claim 9 for the reasons detailed
in the accompanying Commission Opinion; and (b) affirm the ID's finding
of no induced infringement of claim 9 of the '172 patent;
(4) To take no position on the ID's discussion in the last
paragraph on page 20 and the first paragraph on page 21 of the ID. See
Beloit Corporation v. Valmet Oy, 742 F.2d 1421, 1423 (Fed. Cir.1984)
(``Beloit'');
(5) To modify the ID's finding regarding non-infringement of claim
16 of the '554 patent by striking the words ``For the reasons stated
above in the discussion of claim 1,'' in the fourth paragraph on page
70 of the ID and instead find that the '554 Accused Products do not
meet the ``air posturizing sleep surface'' limitation of claim 16 and
therefore do not infringe claim 16 for the reasons detailed in the
accompanying Commission Opinion;
(6) To reverse the ID's determination that the '554 Domestic
Industry Products do not practice the '554 patent and thus do not
satisfy the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement with
respect to the '554 patent and, instead, determine that for the reasons
detailed in the accompanying Commission Opinion, Complainants have
satisfied the technical prong with respect to the '554 patent based
only on the U15 and U11 products practicing claim 16 of the '554
patent;
(7) To take no position on the ID's determination on whether
Complainants satisfied the economic prong with regard to the '554
patent. See Beloit, 742 F.2d at 1423.
(8) To reverse the ID's determination regarding the economic prong
of the domestic industry requirement with respect to the '172 patent,
and find that the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement
is satisfied for the '172 patent.
Accordingly, the Commission finds that there is a violation of
section 337 with respect to the '172 patent in this investigation. The
Commission has determined that the appropriate relief in this
investigation includes an LEO prohibiting the unlicensed entry of
infringing air mattress systems, components thereof, and methods of
using the same that are covered by claims 12 or 16 of the '172 patent
and that are manufactured abroad by or on behalf of, or imported by or
on behalf of Respondents, or their affiliated companies, parents,
subsidiaries, or other related business entities, or their successors
or assigns.
The Commission has further determined that the public interest
factors enumerated in section 337(d)(l) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(l)) do not
preclude issuance of the LEO. Finally, the Commission has determined
that the amount of a bond should be set to zero (0) percent of entered
value during the period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)). The
Commission's order was delivered to the President and the
[[Page 23595]]
United States Trade Representative on the day of its 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).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: May 17, 2017.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2017-10476 Filed 5-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
