In the Matter of Certain Automated Mechanical Transmission Systems for Medium-Duty and Heavy-Duty Trucks and Components Thereof; Notice of Commission Decision Not to Review an Enforcement Initial Determination and an Initial Advisory Opinion; Denial of Motion for Clarification of Remedial Order and Posting of Bond, 16345 [E6-4733]

Agencies

• INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 62 (Friday, March 31, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 16345]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-4733]



[[Page 16345]]

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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337-TA-503 (Consolidated Enforcement and Advisory Opinion 
Proceedings)]


In the Matter of Certain Automated Mechanical Transmission 
Systems for Medium-Duty and Heavy-Duty Trucks and Components Thereof; 
Notice of Commission Decision Not to Review an Enforcement Initial 
Determination and an Initial Advisory Opinion; Denial of Motion for 
Clarification of Remedial Order and Posting of Bond

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 the Enforcement Initial 
Determination (``EID'') and Initial Advisory Opinion (``IAO'') issued 
by the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') in the above-
captioned proceedings. The Commission has also determined to deny the 
complainant's motion to clarify the Commission's existing cease and 
desist order and to require retroactive posting of bond.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rodney Maze, 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 section 337 investigation was 
instituted by the Commission on January 7, 2004, based on a complaint 
filed by Eaton Corporation (``Eaton'') of Cleveland, Ohio. 69 FR 937 
(January 7, 2004). The complaint, as supplemented, alleged violations 
of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 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 automated 
mechanical transmission systems (``AMTS'') for medium-duty and heavy-
duty trucks, and components thereof, by reason of infringement of claim 
15 of U.S. Patent No. 4,899,279 (``the `279 patent''); claims 1-20 of 
U.S. Patent No. 5,335,566 (``the `566 patent''); claims 2-4 and 6-16 of 
U.S. Patent No. 5,272,939; claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 5,624,350; 
claims 1, 3, 4, 6-9, 11, 13, 14, 16 and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 6,149,545 
(``the `545 patent''); and claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 6,066,071.
    The complaint and notice of investigation named three respondents 
ZF Meritor, LLC of Maxton, North Carolina, ZF Freidrichshafen AG 
(``ZFAG'') of Freidrichshafen, Germany, and ArvinMeritor, Inc. 
(``ArvinMeritor'') of Troy, Michigan. Claim 15 of the `279 patent, 
claim 4 of the `566 patent, and claims 1, 3, 6, 7, 11, 13, 16, and 17 
of the `545 patent remained at issue when the ALJ issued his final ID.
    On January 7, 2005, the ALJ issued his final ID on violation and 
his recommended determination on remedy. The ALJ found a violation of 
section 337 by reason of infringement of claim 15 of the `279 patent by 
respondents. He did not find a violation based on infringement of the 
asserted claims of the remaining `545 and `566 patents. Petitions for 
review were filed by Eaton, the respondents, and the Commission 
investigative attorney (``IA'') on January 21, 2005. All the parties 
filed responses to the petitions on January 28, 2005.
    On February 24, 2005, the Commission determined not to review the 
ALJ's final ID on violation, thereby finding a violation of section 
337. 70 FR 10112 (March 2, 2005). On April 7, 2005, the Commission 
issued a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order covering 
AMTS for medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks, and components thereof that 
infringe claim 15 of the `279 patent. 70 FR 19094 (April 13, 2005).
    On April 21, 2005, the respondents filed a request for advisory 
opinion proceedings concerning a redesigned AMTS which respondents 
assert does not fall within the scope of the Commission's remedial 
orders. Eaton filed a complaint for enforcement proceedings on May 11, 
2005, naming ZFAG and ArvinMeritor as respondents. On June 6, 2005, the 
Commission issued a notice that it had determined to institute 
consolidated formal enforcement and advisory opinion proceedings.
    On August 19, 2005, Eaton filed a motion requesting that the 
Commission issue an order clarifying that the existing cease and desist 
order bars the respondents from importing their redesigned AMTS during 
the pendency of the above-captioned proceedings. The same motion 
requested that the Commission require the respondents to post a bond 
for the redesigned AMTS that it imported during the period of 
Presidential review, see 19 U.S.C. Sec.  1337(j).
    On August 31, 2005, the respondents and the IA filed oppositions to 
Eaton's motion.
    On January 10, 2006, the presiding ALJ issued an EID and IAO 
finding that the respondents' redesigned AMTS do not infringe claim 15 
of the `279 patent and therefore do not fall within the Commission's 
remedial orders. No petitions for review of the EID or IAO were filed. 
The Commission has determined not to review the EID or IAO. The 
Commission has also determined to deny Eaton's motion regarding the 
existing cease and desist order and posting of bond because it has 
found that the redesigned AMTS are not covered by the remedial orders 
issued in this investigation.
    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 Sec. Sec.  210.75 and 210.79 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (19 CFR 210.75 and 210.79).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: March 27, 2006.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E6-4733 Filed 3-30-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P