In the Matter of Certain Personal Computers, Monitors, and Components Thereof; Notice of Commission Decision to Review-In-Part an Initial Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 and to Remand Portions of the Investigation to the Administrative Law Judge, 73027 [E5-7026]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 235 / Thursday, December 8, 2005 / Notices
(3) For the investigation so instituted,
the Honorable Sidney Harris is
designated as the presiding
administrative law judge.
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(d) 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 respondents, to find the facts to be
as alleged in the complaint and this
notice and to enter a final determination
containing such findings, and may
result in the issuance of a limited
exclusion order or cease and desist
order or both directed against the
respondent.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: December 2, 2005.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E5–7076 Filed 12–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[ Inv. No. 337–TA–519]
In the Matter of Certain Personal
Computers, Monitors, and
Components Thereof; Notice of
Commission Decision to Review-InPart an Initial Determination Finding
No Violation of Section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930 and to Remand Portions of
the Investigation to the Administrative
Law Judge
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
1. The parties all filed timely responses
to all the petitions
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to reviewin-part the presiding administrative law
judge’s (‘‘ALJ’s’’) initial determination
SUMMARY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:29 Dec 07, 2005
Jkt 208001
(‘‘ID’’) issued on October 6, 2005, in the
above-captioned investigation and to
remand portions of the investigation to
the ALJ to make additional factual
findings and determinations.
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)
205–3065. 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: This
patent-based section 337 investigation
was instituted by the Commission on
August 6, 2004, based on a complaint
filed by Gateway, Inc. of Poway,
California (‘‘Gateway’’). 69 FR 47956
(August 6, 2004). The complainant
alleged violations of section 337 in the
importation and sale of certain personal
computers, monitors, and components
thereof, by reason of infringement of
three U.S. patents. The complainant
named Hewlett-Packard Company of
Palo Alto, California as a respondent.
Claims 9–11 and 15–19 of U.S. Patent
No. 5,192,999 (‘‘the ‘999 patent’’)
remain at issue in this investigation.
The evidentiary hearing was held
from May 23 through May 26, 2005. On
October 6, 2005, the ALJ issued a final
ID finding no violation of section 337.
All the parties to the investigation,
including the Commission investigative
attorney, filed timely petitions for
review of various portions of the final
ID. Respondent’s petition is contingent
upon a Commission determination to
review the ALJ’s findings on the issue
of inequitable conduct. HP’s Petition at
Having reviewed the record in this
investigation, including the parties’
written submissions, the Commission
has determined to: (1) Review the ALJ’s
determination on induced infringement
of Claim 19 and remand for further
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
73027
factual findings and analysis; (2) review
the ALJ’s determination on obviousness
solely for the purpose of clarifying the
ID’s discussion of Sakraida v. AG Pro,
Inc., 425 U.S. 273 (1976); (3) review the
ALJ’s determination on enablement; and
(4) review the issue of inequitable
conduct and remand for further factual
findings and analysis. The Commission
has further determined not to review the
remainder of the ID.
Written Submissions: The
Commission does not request any
written submissions at this time.
This action is taken under the
authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337),
and in sections 210.42–.45 of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure (19 CFR 210.42–.45).
Issued: December 1, 2005.
By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E5–7026 Filed 12–7–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 731–TA–860 (Review)]
Tin- and Chromium-Coated Steel Sheet
From Japan
United States International
Trade Commission.
ACTION: Scheduling of a full five-year
review concerning the antidumping
duty order on tin- and chromium-coated
steel sheet from Japan.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives
notice of the scheduling of a full review
pursuant to section 751(c)(5) of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5))
(the Act) to determine whether
revocation of the antidumping duty
order on tin- and chromium-coated steel
sheet from Japan would be likely to lead
to continuation or recurrence of material
injury within a reasonably foreseeable
time. For further information
concerning the conduct of this review
and rules of general application, consult
the Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, part 201, subparts A through
E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207,
subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part
207).
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 2, 2005.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Olympia DeRosa Hand (202–205–3182)
or Douglas Corkran (202–205–3057),
Office of Investigations, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E
Street SW., Washington, DC 20436.
Hearing-impaired persons can obtain
E:\FR\FM\08DEN1.SGM
08DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 235 (Thursday, December 8, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 73027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-7026]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[ Inv. No. 337-TA-519]
In the Matter of Certain Personal Computers, Monitors, and
Components Thereof; Notice of Commission Decision to Review-In-Part an
Initial Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930 and to Remand Portions of the Investigation to the
Administrative Law Judge
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to review-in-part the presiding
administrative law judge's (``ALJ's'') initial determination (``ID'')
issued on October 6, 2005, in the above-captioned investigation and to
remand portions of the investigation to the ALJ to make additional
factual findings and determinations.
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) 205-3065. 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: This patent-based section 337 investigation
was instituted by the Commission on August 6, 2004, based on a
complaint filed by Gateway, Inc. of Poway, California (``Gateway''). 69
FR 47956 (August 6, 2004). The complainant alleged violations of
section 337 in the importation and sale of certain personal computers,
monitors, and components thereof, by reason of infringement of three
U.S. patents. The complainant named Hewlett-Packard Company of Palo
Alto, California as a respondent. Claims 9-11 and 15-19 of U.S. Patent
No. 5,192,999 (``the `999 patent'') remain at issue in this
investigation.
The evidentiary hearing was held from May 23 through May 26, 2005.
On October 6, 2005, the ALJ issued a final ID finding no violation of
section 337. All the parties to the investigation, including the
Commission investigative attorney, filed timely petitions for review of
various portions of the final ID. Respondent's petition is contingent
upon a Commission determination to review the ALJ's findings on the
issue of inequitable conduct. HP's Petition at
1. The parties all filed timely responses to all the petitions
Having reviewed the record in this investigation, including the
parties' written submissions, the Commission has determined to: (1)
Review the ALJ's determination on induced infringement of Claim 19 and
remand for further factual findings and analysis; (2) review the ALJ's
determination on obviousness solely for the purpose of clarifying the
ID's discussion of Sakraida v. AG Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273 (1976); (3)
review the ALJ's determination on enablement; and (4) review the issue
of inequitable conduct and remand for further factual findings and
analysis. The Commission has further determined not to review the
remainder of the ID.
Written Submissions: The Commission does not request any written
submissions at this time.
This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in sections
210.42-.45 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR
210.42-.45).
Issued: December 1, 2005.
By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E5-7026 Filed 12-7-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P