In the Matter of Certain Systems for Detecting and Removing Viruses or Worms, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same; Notice of Commission Decision Not To Review a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Request for Written Submissions on the Issues of Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding, 40731-40732 [05-13838]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 134 / Thursday, July 14, 2005 / Notices
while supporting sanctions by the ALJ
sua sponte. On April 1, 2005, Verve
filed a reply to the IA’s response.
On April 11, 2005, the ALJ issued
Order No. 40 denying all of the
respondents’ motions for sanctions and
ordering Verve to show cause why
sanctions should not be imposed by the
ALJ. On May 5, 2005, Verve filed a
response to the show cause order. On
May 16, 2005, the respondents filed a
joint reply to Verve’s response.
On June 7, 2005, the ALJ issued Order
No. 48 imposing, sua sponte, monetary
sanctions on Verve, its principals, and
its counsel. On June 13, 2005, Verve
filed a motion to stay the enforcement
of Order No. 48, pending its appeal of
the order to the Commission.
Meanwhile, on June 8, 2005, the ALJ
issued an ID (Order No. 49) granting
Verve’s motion for withdrawal of the
complaint and termination of the
investigation. On June 14, 2005, the
respondents filed a joint petition for
review of Order No. 40 and the ID. On
June 21, 2005, the IA and Verve filed
separate responses opposing the
respondents’ petition for review.
Having examined Order No. 40, the
ID, and the parties’ submissions, the
Commission determined not to review
the order and the ID. The Commission
also granted Verve’s motion to stay
enforcement of Order No. 48, pending
appeal to the Commission. Finally, the
Commission determined to treat Order
No. 48 and the ID as having been issued
concurrently. Pursuant to Commission
Rule 210.25(d), the Commission has set
forth a briefing schedule for appeal of
Order No. 48. Petitions for review of
Order No. 48 must be filed no later than
July 29, 2005. Responses to the petitions
must be filed no later than August 12,
2005.
The authority for the Commission’s
determinations are contained in section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in
sections 210.42, 210.43, and 210.25(d)
of the Commission’s Rules of Practice
and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42, 210.43,
and 210.25(d)).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: July 8, 2005.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05–13839 Filed 7–13–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:32 Jul 13, 2005
Jkt 205001
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Inv. No. 337–TA–510]
In the Matter of Certain Systems for
Detecting and Removing Viruses or
Worms, Components Thereof, and
Products Containing Same; Notice of
Commission Decision Not To Review a
Final Initial Determination Finding a
Violation of Section 337; Request for
Written Submissions on the Issues of
Remedy, the Public Interest, and
Bonding
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined not to
review a final initial determination
(‘‘ID’’) issued by the presiding
administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) in the
above-captioned investigation on May 9,
2005, finding a violation of section 337
of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337.
Notice is also hereby given that the
Commission is requesting briefing on
the issues of remedy, the public interest,
and bonding.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean
H. Jackson, Esq., Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202–
205–3104. Copies of the public version
of the ID and all nonconfidential
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. Hearingimpaired persons are advised that
information on this matter can be
obtained by contacting the
Commission’s TDD terminal on 202–
205–1810. 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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Commission instituted this investigation
on June 3, 2004, based on a complaint
filed by Trend Micro Inc. of Cupertino,
California (‘‘Trend Micro’’). 69 FR
32044–45 (2004). The complaint alleged
violations of section 337 in the
importation into the United States, the
sale for importation into the United
States, or the sale within the United
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40731
States after importation of certain
systems for detecting and removing
viruses or worms, components thereof,
and products containing same by reason
of infringement of claims 1–22 of U.S.
Patent No. 5,623,600 (‘‘the ’600 patent’’).
The notice of investigation named
Fortinet, Inc. (‘‘Fortinet’’) as the sole
respondent.
On October 12, 2004, the ALJ issued
Order No. 6 terminating the
investigation as to claims 2, 5–6, 9–10,
and 16–22 of the ’600 patent based upon
Trend Micro’s unopposed motion to
withdraw these claims. The
Commission did not review Order No. 6,
hence the claims of the ’600 patent in
issue are claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 11–
15.
On December 14, 2004, the ALJ issued
Order No. 13 granting complainant
Trend Micro’s motion for a summary
determination that it satisfies the
economic prong of the domestic
industry requirement. Order No. 13 was
not reviewed by the Commission.
An evidentiary hearing was held from
January 24, 2005, to January 28, 2005.
On March 29, 2005, a second
evidentiary hearing was conducted and
additional exhibits received into
evidence.
On May 9, 2005, the ALJ issued his
final ID and recommended
determinations on remedy and bonding.
He found a violation of section 337
based on his determinations that claims
4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 of the ’600
patent are not invalid or unenforceable,
and that they are infringed by
respondent’s products. The ALJ also
found that an industry exists that is
related to the ’600 patent, and that the
respondent has imported infringing
product. The ALJ further found that
claims 1 and 3 of the ’600 patent are
anticipated by prior art.
On May 20, 2005, respondent Fortinet
filed a petition for review of the final ID
and complainant Trend Micro filed a
contingent petition for review. The IA
did not file a petition. On May 27, 2005,
Fortinet filed a response to Trend
Micro’s contingent petition for review,
and Trend Micro filed a response to
Fortinet’s petition for review. On June 2,
2005, the IA filed a response to Trend
Micro’s and Fortinet’s petitions for
review.
Having examined the record in this
investigation, including the ALJ’s final
ID, the petitions for review, and the
responses thereto, the Commission has
determined not to review the ID, thereby
finding a violation of section 337.
In connection with the final
disposition of this investigation, the
Commission may issue (1) an order that
could result in the exclusion of the
E:\FR\FM\14JYN1.SGM
14JYN1
40732
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 134 / Thursday, July 14, 2005 / Notices
subject articles from entry into the
United states, and/or (2) a cease and
desist order that could result in the
respondent being required to cease and
desist from engaging in unfair action in
the importation and sale of such
articles. Accordingly, the Commission is
interested in receiving written
submissions that address the form of
remedy, if any, that should be ordered.
If a party seeks exclusion of an article
from entry into the United States for
purposes other than entry for
consumption, the party should so
indicate and provide information
establishing that activities involving
other types of entry are either adversely
affecting it or likely to do so. For
background, see In the Matter of Certain
Devices for Connecting Computers via
Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360,
USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994)
(Commission Opinion).
When the Commission contemplates
some form of remedy, it must consider
the effects of that remedy upon the
public interest. The factors the
Commission will consider include the
effect that an exclusion order and/or
cease and desist orders would have on
(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. The
Commission is therefore interested in
receiving written submissions that
address the aforementioned public
interest factors in the context of this
investigation.
If the Commission orders some form
of remedy, the President has 60 days to
approve or disapprove the
Commission’s action. During this
period, the subject articles would be
entitled to enter the United States under
a bond, in an amount determined by the
Commission and prescribed by the
Secretary of the Treasury. The
Commission is therefore interested in
receiving submissions concerning the
amount of the bond that should be
imposed.
Written Submissions: The parties to
the investigation, interested government
agencies, and any other interested
persons are encouraged to file written
submissions on the issues of remedy,
the public interest, and bonding. Such
submissions should address the ALJ’s
recommended determination on remedy
and bonding. Complainant and the
Commission investigative attorney are
also requested to submit proposed
remedial orders for the Commission’s
consideration. Complainant is further
requested to state the expiration date of
the ‘600 patent and the HTSUS numbers
VerDate jul<14>2003
18:32 Jul 13, 2005
Jkt 205001
under which the infringing products are
imported. The main written
submissions and proposed remedial
orders must be filed no later than July
18, 2005. Response submissions must be
filed no later than July 25, 2005. No
further submissions will be permitted
unless otherwise ordered by the
Commission.
Persons filing written submissions
must file the original document and 12
true copies thereof with the Office of the
Secretary on or before the deadlines
stated above. Any person desiring to
submit a document (or portions 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 210.5. Documents
for which confidential treatment is
granted by the Commission will be
treated accordingly. All nonconfidential written submissions will be
available for public inspection at the
Office of the Secretary.
This action is taken under the
authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337),
and sections 210.42, 210.43, and 210.50
of the Commission’s Interim Rules of
Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42,
210.43, and 210.50).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: July 8, 2005.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05–13838 Filed 7–13–05; 8:45 am]
from Japan)—briefing and vote. (The
Commission is currently scheduled to
transmit its determination to the
Secretary of Commerce on or before
August 15, 2005; Commissioners’
opinions are currently scheduled to be
transmitted to the Secretary of
Commerce on or before August 22,
2005.)
5. Inv. Nos. 104–TAA–7 and AA1921–
198–200 (Second Review) (Sugar from
the European Union; Sugar from
Belgium, France, and Germany)—
briefing and vote. (The Commission is
currently scheduled to transmit its
determination and Commissioners’
opinions to the Secretary of Commerce
on or before August 29, 2005.)
6. Outstanding action jackets: None.
In accordance with Commission
policy, subject matter listed above, not
disposed of at the scheduled meeting,
may be carried over to the agenda of the
following meeting.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: July 12, 2005.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05–13939 Filed 7–12–05; 10:36 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE
UNITED STATES
Hearings of the Judicial Conference
Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil
Procedure
Judicial Conference of the
United States; Advisory Committee on
Rules of Civil Procedure.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed
Amendments and Open Hearings.
AGENCY:
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
SUMMARY: The Judicial Conference
Advisory Committee on Rules of Civil
Procedure has proposed amendments to
the following rules:
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[USITC SE–05–027]
Government in the Sunshine Act
Meeting Notice
United
States International Trade Commission.
TIME AND DATE: August 11, 2005, at 11
a.m.
PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20436. Telephone:
(202) 205–2000.
STATUS: Open to the public.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
1. Agenda for future meetings: None.
2. Minutes.
3. Ratification List.
4. Inv. No. 731–TA–1094
(Preliminary) (Metal Calendar Slides
AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Proposed Style Amendments to the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
The Judicial Conference Advisory
Committee on Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure has completed its style
revision of the Civil Rules in accordance
with uniform drafting guidelines. The
restyling of the Civil Rules is the third
in a series of comprehensive revisions to
simplify, clarify, and make more
uniform all of the federal procedural
rules.
Proposed Amendments Separate From
Style Revision Project
The proposed changes are intended to
be primarily stylistic only. However, the
Advisory Committee’s extensive style
review revealed ambiguities and
E:\FR\FM\14JYN1.SGM
14JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 134 (Thursday, July 14, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40731-40732]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-13838]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Inv. No. 337-TA-510]
In the Matter of Certain Systems for Detecting and Removing
Viruses or Worms, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same;
Notice of Commission Decision Not To Review a Final Initial
Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Request for Written
Submissions on the Issues of Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined not to review a final initial determination
(``ID'') issued by the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') in
the above-captioned investigation on May 9, 2005, finding a violation
of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337. Notice is
also hereby given that the Commission is requesting briefing on the
issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean H. Jackson, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-3104. Copies of the public
version of the ID and all nonconfidential 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. Hearing-impaired persons
are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by
contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. 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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation
on June 3, 2004, based on a complaint filed by Trend Micro Inc. of
Cupertino, California (``Trend Micro''). 69 FR 32044-45 (2004). The
complaint alleged violations of section 337 in the importation into the
United States, the sale for importation into the United States, or the
sale within the United States after importation of certain systems for
detecting and removing viruses or worms, components thereof, and
products containing same by reason of infringement of claims 1-22 of
U.S. Patent No. 5,623,600 (``the '600 patent''). The notice of
investigation named Fortinet, Inc. (``Fortinet'') as the sole
respondent.
On October 12, 2004, the ALJ issued Order No. 6 terminating the
investigation as to claims 2, 5-6, 9-10, and 16-22 of the '600 patent
based upon Trend Micro's unopposed motion to withdraw these claims. The
Commission did not review Order No. 6, hence the claims of the '600
patent in issue are claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 11-15.
On December 14, 2004, the ALJ issued Order No. 13 granting
complainant Trend Micro's motion for a summary determination that it
satisfies the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement.
Order No. 13 was not reviewed by the Commission.
An evidentiary hearing was held from January 24, 2005, to January
28, 2005. On March 29, 2005, a second evidentiary hearing was conducted
and additional exhibits received into evidence.
On May 9, 2005, the ALJ issued his final ID and recommended
determinations on remedy and bonding. He found a violation of section
337 based on his determinations that claims 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14 and
15 of the '600 patent are not invalid or unenforceable, and that they
are infringed by respondent's products. The ALJ also found that an
industry exists that is related to the '600 patent, and that the
respondent has imported infringing product. The ALJ further found that
claims 1 and 3 of the '600 patent are anticipated by prior art.
On May 20, 2005, respondent Fortinet filed a petition for review of
the final ID and complainant Trend Micro filed a contingent petition
for review. The IA did not file a petition. On May 27, 2005, Fortinet
filed a response to Trend Micro's contingent petition for review, and
Trend Micro filed a response to Fortinet's petition for review. On June
2, 2005, the IA filed a response to Trend Micro's and Fortinet's
petitions for review.
Having examined the record in this investigation, including the
ALJ's final ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto,
the Commission has determined not to review the ID, thereby finding a
violation of section 337.
In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the
Commission may issue (1) an order that could result in the exclusion of
the
[[Page 40732]]
subject articles from entry into the United states, and/or (2) a cease
and desist order that could result in the respondent being required to
cease and desist from engaging in unfair action in the importation and
sale of such articles. Accordingly, the Commission is interested in
receiving written submissions that address the form of remedy, if any,
that should be ordered. If a party seeks exclusion of an article from
entry into the United States for purposes other than entry for
consumption, the party should so indicate and provide information
establishing that activities involving other types of entry are either
adversely affecting it or likely to do so. For background, see In the
Matter of Certain Devices for Connecting Computers via Telephone Lines,
Inv. No. 337-TA-360, USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994) (Commission
Opinion).
When the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must
consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The
factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an
exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders would have on (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. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving written
submissions that address the aforementioned public interest factors in
the context of this investigation.
If the Commission orders some form of remedy, the President has 60
days to approve or disapprove the Commission's action. During this
period, the subject articles would be entitled to enter the United
States under a bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and
prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is
therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of
the bond that should be imposed.
Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation, interested
government agencies, and any other interested persons are encouraged to
file written submissions on the issues of remedy, the public interest,
and bonding. Such submissions should address the ALJ's recommended
determination on remedy and bonding. Complainant and the Commission
investigative attorney are also requested to submit proposed remedial
orders for the Commission's consideration. Complainant is further
requested to state the expiration date of the `600 patent and the HTSUS
numbers under which the infringing products are imported. The main
written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later
than July 18, 2005. Response submissions must be filed no later than
July 25, 2005. No further submissions will be permitted unless
otherwise ordered by the Commission.
Persons filing written submissions must file the original document
and 12 true copies thereof with the Office of the Secretary on or
before the deadlines stated above. Any person desiring to submit a
document (or portions 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 210.5. Documents for which confidential treatment
is granted by the Commission will be treated accordingly. All non-
confidential written submissions will be available for public
inspection at the Office of the Secretary.
This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and sections 210.42,
210.43, and 210.50 of the Commission's Interim Rules of Practice and
Procedure (19 CFR 210.42, 210.43, and 210.50).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: July 8, 2005.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-13838 Filed 7-13-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
