Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993-Controlnet International, Ltd, 55920-55921 [05-19007]

Download as PDF 55920 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 184 / Friday, September 23, 2005 / Notices 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 (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 patent-based investigation, which concerns allegations of unfair acts in violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the importation and sale of certain settop boxes, on March 21, 2001. 66 FR 15887 (March 21, 2001). Complainants Gemstar-TV Guide International, Inc. of Pasadena, California, and StarSight Telecast, Inc. of Fremont, California (collectively, ‘‘Gemstar’’), named Pioneer Corporation, Pioneer North America, Inc., Pioneer Digital Technologies, Inc., and Pioneer New Media Technologies, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Pioneer’’); EchoStar Communications Corporation and SCI Systems, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Echostar’’); and Scientific-Atlanta, Inc. (‘‘ScientificAtlanta’’) as respondents. Gemstar alleged that these respondents infringed certain claims of its patents, including: U.S. Patent No. 4,706,121 (‘‘the ’121 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 5,479,268 (‘‘the ‘268 patent’’); and U.S. Patent No. 5,809,204 (‘‘the ’204 patent’’). The presiding administrative law judge (‘‘the ALJ’’) issued his final initial determination (‘‘final ID’’) on June 21, 2002, in which he concluded that there was no violation of section 337, based on the following findings: (a) Complainants had failed to establish that asserted claims 18–24, 26–28, 31– 33, 36, 42–43, 48–50, 54, 57, 59–61, and 66 of the ’121 patent; claims 1, 3, 8, and 10 of the ’268 patent; and claims 1, 3, 8, and 10 of the ’204 patent are infringed by respondents; (b) respondents had failed to establish that the asserted claims are not valid; (c) respondents had established that the ’121 patent is unenforceable for failure to name a coinventor; (d) complainants had engaged in patent misuse with respect to the ’121 VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:21 Sep 22, 2005 Jkt 205001 patent; (e) no industry existed in the United States, as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337, that exploits each of the ’121, ’268, and ’204 patents in issue; and (f) there had been an importation of the set-top boxes which are the subject of this investigation. On July 5, 2002, all parties to the investigation, including the Commission investigative attorney, filed petitions for review of various portions of the final ID. On August 29, 2002, the Commission issued notice that it had determined to review in part, to take no position in part, and to not review in part the ALJ’s final ID. Specifically, the Commission determined to review the issue of the technical prong of the domestic industry as it relates to claim 42 of ’204 patent for the purpose of making a finding as to claim 42 of that patent. This finding had been omitted by the ALJ. The Commission also determined to take no position on the issue of patent misuse and not to review the remainder of the final ID. Finally, the Commission determined to affirm three ALJ rulings (involving ALJ Order No. 62, an ALJ ruling excluding evidence concerning the doctrine of equivalents, and an ALJ ruling limiting the testimony time of one witness) that were appealed to the Commission by the complainants. In light of these determinations, the Commission determined that there was no violation of section 337 in this investigation. Gemstar appealed the Commission’s final determination to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (‘‘the Federal Circuit’’ or ‘‘the Court’’). During the course of the appeal, Gemstar settled with Pioneer and EchoStar, and these respondents were dismissed from the appeal. On September 16, 2004, the Federal Circuit issued its decision in the appeal, in which the Commission’s final determination was affirmed in part, vacated in part, and reversed in part, and the case remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s opinion. Gemstar-TV Guide International, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, 383 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2004). On November 29, 2004, the Court denied Scientific-Atlanta’s petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc. On January 11, 2005, the Court denied Scientific-Atlanta’s motion to stay issuance of the mandate and simultaneously issued its mandate, returning the case to the Commission, with Scientific-Atlanta as the sole respondent. On February 8, 2005, the Commission issued an order seeking comments from PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 the parties as to how they believed the Commission should proceed with the remanded investigation. The original 30-day deadline for receiving comments from the parties was extended twice, to June 13, 2005. On that date the private parties filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation based on a settlement agreement, including a patent license agreement. On June 23, 2005, the Commission investigative attorney filed a response supporting the joint motion. On August 5, 2005, the private parties filed a public version of the joint motion. Having examined the joint motion to terminate the investigation, the response thereto, and other relevant documents of record in this investigation, the Commission has determined to grant the joint motion, terminating this investigation in its entirety. 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 section 210.21 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.21). Issued: September 19, 2005. By order of the Commission. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 05–19036 Filed 9–22–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Controlnet International, Ltd Notice is hereby given that, on September 1, 2005, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), ControlNet International, Ltd. (‘‘ControlNet’’) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, McNaughton-McKay Electric Company, Madison Heights, MI; IDC Corporation, Dimondale, MI; and Kawasaki Robotics (USA), Inc., Wixom, MI have withdrawn as parties to this venture. No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM 23SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 184 / Friday, September 23, 2005 / Notices activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and ControlNet intends to file additional written notification disclosing all changes in membership. On February 3, 2005, ControlNet filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on March 1, 2005 (70 FR 9979). The last notification was filed with the Department on May 18, 2005. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on June 13, 2005 (70 FR 34150). Dorothy B. Fountain, Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. 05–19007 Filed 9–22–05; 8:45am] No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and ODVA intends to file additional written notification disclosing all changes in membership. On June 21, 1995, ODVA filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on February 15, 1996 (61 FR 6039). The last notification was filed with the Department on May 18, 2005. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on June 13, 2005 (70 FR 34151). Dorothy B. Fountain, Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division. [FR Doc. 05–19008 Filed 9–12–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–11–M BILLING CODE 4410–11–M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Antitrust Division Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993—Open Devicenet Vendor Association, Inc. Notice is hereby given that, on September 1, 2005, pursuant to section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Open DeviceNet Vendor Association, Inc. (‘‘ODVA’’) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act’s provisions limiting recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, National Semiconductor Corporation, Santa Clara, CA; Siemens Energy & Automation, Inc., Alpharetta, GA; Wizardry Inc., Gardnerville, NV; Bihl+Wiedemann GmbH, Mannheim, Germany; Ametek, Inc., Paoli, PA; Spyder Controls Corporation, Lacombe, Alberta, Canada; and Keyence Corporation, Osaka, Japan have been added as parties to this venture. Also, Jeongil Intercom Co., Ltd., Kyunggi-do, Republic of Korea; Embedded Systems Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Agilicom, Tours, France; and Micro Mo Electronics, Inc., Clearwater, FL have withdrawn as parties to this venture. The following member has changed its name: Max Stegmann GmbH to Sick Stegmann GmbH, Donaueschingen, Germany. VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:21 Sep 22, 2005 Jkt 205001 Office of the Secretary Submission for OMB Review: Comment Request September 15, 2005. The Department of Labor (DOL) has submitted the following public information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35). A copy of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by contacting the Department of Labor (DOL). To obtain documentation, contact Darrin King on 202–693–4129 (this is not a toll-free number) or e-mail: king.darrin@dol.gov. Comments should be sent to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for the Employment Standards Administration (ESA), Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, 202–395–7316 (this is not a tollfree number), within 30 days from the date of this publication in the Federal Register. The OMB is particularly interested in comments which: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 55921 proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Agency: Employment Standards Administration. Type of Review: Extension of currently approved collection. Title: Payment of Compensation Without Award. OMB Number: 1215–0022. Form Number: LS–206. Frequency: On occasion. Type of Response: Reporting. Affected Public: Business or other forprofit. Number of Respondents: 700. Estimated Annual Responses: 24,500. Average Response Time: 15 minutes. Total Annual Burden Hours: 6,125. Total Annualized capital/startup costs: $0. Total Annual Costs (operating/ maintaining systems or purchasing services): $10,903. Description: The Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP) administers the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act. The Act provides benefits to workers injured in maritime employment on the navigable waters of the United States or in an adjoining area customarily used by an employer in loading, unloading, repairing or building a vessel. Under Sections 914(b) and (c) of the Longshore Act, a self-insured employer or insurance carrier is required to pay compensation within 14 days after the employer has knowledge of the injury or death. Upon making the first payment, the employer or carrier shall immediately notify the district director of payment. Form LS–206 has been designated as the proper form on which report of first payment is to be made. The LS–206 is also used by OWCP district offices to determine the payment status of a given case. Ira L. Mills, Departmental Clearance Officer. [FR Doc. 05–19014 Filed 9–22–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4510–CF–P E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM 23SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 184 (Friday, September 23, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55920-55921]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-19007]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Controlnet International, Ltd

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 1, 2005, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), ControlNet International, 
Ltd. (``ControlNet'') has filed written notifications simultaneously 
with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose 
of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, McNaughton-McKay Electric Company, Madison Heights, MI; 
IDC Corporation, Dimondale, MI; and Kawasaki Robotics (USA), Inc., 
Wixom, MI have withdrawn as parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned

[[Page 55921]]

activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and ControlNet intends to file 
additional written notification disclosing all changes in membership.
    On February 3, 2005, ControlNet filed its original notification 
pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice 
published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of 
the Act on March 1, 2005 (70 FR 9979).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on May 18, 
2005. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
section 6(b) of the Act on June 13, 2005 (70 FR 34150).

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 05-19007 Filed 9-22-05; 8:45am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M

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