In the Matter of Certain Flash Memory Devices, and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Such Devices and Components; Notice of Commission Decision Not to Review the Administrative Law Judge's Final Initial Determination That There is No Violation of Section 337; Termination of Investigation, 78465 [06-9916]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 250 / Friday, December 29, 2006 / Notices of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of November 6, 2006 (71 FR 64983). The conference was held in Washington, DC, on November 21, 2006, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission transmitted its determinations in these investigations to the Secretary of Commerce on December 15, 2006. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 3900 (December 2006), entitled Coated Free Sheet Paper from China, Indonesia, and Korea: Investigation Nos. 701–TA– 444–446 (Preliminary) and 731-TA– 1107–1109 (Preliminary). Issued: December 26, 2006. By order of the Commission. Marilyn R. Abbott Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E6–22419 Filed 12–28–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–552] In the Matter of Certain Flash Memory Devices, and Components Thereof, and Products Containing Such Devices and Components; Notice of Commission Decision Not to Review the Administrative Law Judge’s Final Initial Determination That There is No Violation of Section 337; Termination of Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. pwalker on PROD1PC69 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the United States International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) issued by the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) finding no violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and to terminate the investigation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean 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 non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available le 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 VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:15 Dec 28, 2006 Jkt 211001 information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at http://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at http:// 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 4, 2005, based on a complaint filed by Toshiba Corporation of Tokyo, Japan (‘‘Toshiba’’) under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337. 70 FR 67192– 193 (November 4, 2005). The complainant alleged violations of section 337 in the importation and sale of certain flash memory devices and components thereof, and products containing such devices and components, by reason of infringement of claims 1–4 of U.S. Patent No. 5,150,178 (‘‘the ‘178 patent’’); claims 1, 6 and 7 of U.S. Patent No. 5,270,969 (‘‘the ‘969 patent’’); and claims 1 and 4 of U.S. Patent No. 5,517,449 (‘‘the ‘449 patent’’). The complainant named Hynix Semiconductor of Ischon-si, Republic of Korea, and Hynix Semiconductor America, Inc. of San Jose, California (collectively ‘‘Hynix’’) as respondents. On November 21, 2005, Toshiba moved for leave to amend the complaint to add claim 5 of the ‘178 patent. On December 2, 2005, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 4) granting the motion to amend the complaint. The Commission determined not to review this ID. An evidentiary hearing was held from July 5, 2006, through July 13, 2006. On November 65, 2006, the ALJ issued his final ID and recommended determination on remedy and bonding. The ALJL concluded that there was no violation of section 337. Specifically, he found that the asserted claims of the ‘178, ‘969, and ‘449 patents are not infringed and are not valid, and that there is no domestic industry involving the three patents. On November 17, 2006, complainant Toshiba, the Commission investigative attorney, and respondent Hynix petitioned for review of various portions of the final ID. On November 28, 2006, all parties filed responses to the petitions for review. Having examined the record of this investigation, including the ALJ’s final ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto, the Commission has determined not to review the ALJ’s ID, and has terminated the investigation. The authority for the Commission’s determination is contained in section PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 78465 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in section 210.42–45 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42–45). Issued: December 22, 2006. By order of the Commission. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 06–9916 Filed 12–28–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–M DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Partial Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (‘‘CERCLA’’) Consistent with Section 122(d) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9622(d), and 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby given that on December 14, 2006, a proposed Partial Consent Decree with Colgate-Palmolive Company in United States v. American Cyanamid, et al., Nos. 1:02–CV–109–1 and 1:03–CV–122–3 (M.D. Ga.), was lodged with the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. In this action, the United States seeks to recover from various defendants, pursuant to Sections 107 and 113(g)(2) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9607 and 9613(g)(2), the costs incurred and to be incurred by the United States in responding to the release and/or threatened release of hazardous substances at and from the Stoller Chemical Company/Pelham Phosphate Company Site (‘‘Site’’) in Pelham, Mitchell County, Georgia. Under the proposed Partial Consent Decree, Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company will pay $2,850,000 to the Hazardous Substances Superfund in reimbursement of the costs incurred by the United States at the Site. The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of this publication comments relating to the Partial Consent Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611, and should refer to United States v. American Cyanamid, et al., (M.D. Ga) (Partial Consent Decree with Colgate-Palmolive Company, DOJ Ref. No. 9011–3–07602). The Partial Consent Decree may be examined at the Office of the United E:\FR\FM\29DEN1.SGM 29DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 250 (Friday, December 29, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Page 78465]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-9916]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-552]


In the Matter of Certain Flash Memory Devices, and Components 
Thereof, and Products Containing Such Devices and Components; Notice of 
Commission Decision Not to Review the Administrative Law Judge's Final 
Initial Determination That There is No Violation of Section 337; 
Termination of Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION:  Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the United States International 
Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination 
(``ID'') issued by the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') 
finding no violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended, and to terminate the investigation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean 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 non-
confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are 
or will be available le 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 
http://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be 
viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at http://
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 4, 2005, based on a complaint filed by Toshiba Corporation 
of Tokyo, Japan (``Toshiba'') under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337. 70 FR 67192-193 (November 4, 2005). 
The complainant alleged violations of section 337 in the importation 
and sale of certain flash memory devices and components thereof, and 
products containing such devices and components, by reason of 
infringement of claims 1-4 of U.S. Patent No. 5,150,178 (``the `178 
patent''); claims 1, 6 and 7 of U.S. Patent No. 5,270,969 (``the `969 
patent''); and claims 1 and 4 of U.S. Patent No. 5,517,449 (``the `449 
patent''). The complainant named Hynix Semiconductor of Ischon-si, 
Republic of Korea, and Hynix Semiconductor America, Inc. of San Jose, 
California (collectively ``Hynix'') as respondents.
    On November 21, 2005, Toshiba moved for leave to amend the 
complaint to add claim 5 of the `178 patent. On December 2, 2005, the 
ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 4) granting the motion to amend the 
complaint. The Commission determined not to review this ID.
    An evidentiary hearing was held from July 5, 2006, through July 13, 
2006. On November 65, 2006, the ALJ issued his final ID and recommended 
determination on remedy and bonding. The ALJL concluded that there was 
no violation of section 337. Specifically, he found that the asserted 
claims of the `178, `969, and `449 patents are not infringed and are 
not valid, and that there is no domestic industry involving the three 
patents.
    On November 17, 2006, complainant Toshiba, the Commission 
investigative attorney, and respondent Hynix petitioned for review of 
various portions of the final ID. On November 28, 2006, all parties 
filed responses to the petitions for review.
    Having examined the record of this investigation, including the 
ALJ's final ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto, 
the Commission has determined not to review the ALJ's ID, and has 
terminated the 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 section 210.42-45 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure (19 CFR 210.42-45).

    Issued: December 22, 2006.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 06-9916 Filed 12-28-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-M