In the Matter of: Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof; Enforcement Proceeding II; Institution of Formal Enforcement Proceeding, 36557 [E8-14632]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 125 / Friday, June 27, 2008 / Notices Inexeco Oil Company Group VII. Eni Petroleum Co., Inc. Eni Petroleum US, LLC Eni Oil US, LLC Eni Marketing, Inc. Eni BB Petroleum, Inc. Eni U.S. Operating Co., Inc. Eni BB Pipeline, LLC Group VIII. Petrobras America, Inc. Group IX. StatoilHydro ASA Statoil Gulf of Mexico, LLC StatoilHydro USA E&P, Inc. StatoilHydro Gulf Properties, Inc. Dated: June 9, 2008. Randall B. Luthi, Director, Minerals Management Service. [FR Doc. E8–14654 Filed 6–26–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Inv. No. 337–TA–565] In the Matter of: Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof; Enforcement Proceeding II; Institution of Formal Enforcement Proceeding U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has instituted a formal enforcement proceeding in the abovecaptioned investigation and named two enforcement respondents in the proceeding. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Haldenstein, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–3041. Copies of 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. 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 the matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:47 Jun 26, 2008 Jkt 214001 The Commission instituted the underlying investigation in this matter on March 23, 2006, based on a complaint filed by Epson Portland, Inc. of Oregon; Epson America, Inc. of California; and Seiko Epson Corporation of Japan (collectively ‘‘Epson’’). 71 FR. 14720 (March 23, 2006). The complaint, as amended, alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘section 337’’) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain ink cartridges and components thereof by reason of infringement of claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 5,615,957; claims 18, 81, 93, 149, 164 and 165 of U.S. Patent No. 5,622,439; claims 83 and 84 of U.S. Patent No. 5,158,377; claims 19 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 5,221,148; claims 29, 31, 34 and 38 of U.S. Patent No. 5,156,472; claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 5,488,401; claims 1–3 and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 6,502,917; claims 1, 31 and 34 of U.S. Patent No. 6,550,902; claims 1, 10 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 6,955,422; claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 7,008,053; and claims 21, 45, 53 and 54 of U.S. Patent No. 7,011,397. The complaint further alleged that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The complainants requested that the Commission issue a general exclusion order and cease and desist orders. The Commission named as respondents 24 companies located in China, Germany, Hong Kong, Korea, and the United States. Several respondents were terminated from the investigation on the basis of settlement agreements or consent orders or were found in default. On March 30, 2007, the presiding administrative law judge (ALJ) issued a final ID in the investigation finding a violation of section 337 with respect to certain respondents. He found the asserted claims valid and infringed by certain respondents’ products. He recommended issuance of a general exclusion order and cease and desist orders directed to certain respondents and bond in the amount of $13.60 per cartridge during the Presidential review period. On October, 19, 2007, after review, the Commission made its final determination in the investigation, finding a violation of section 337. The Commission issued a general exclusion order, limited exclusion order, and cease and desist orders directed to several domestic respondents. The Commission also determined that the public interest factors enumerated in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d), (f), and (g) did not preclude issuance of the aforementioned remedial orders, and that the bond SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 36557 during the Presidential review period would be $13.60 per cartridge for covered ink cartridges. On May 1, 2008, the Commission, based on two complaints filed by Epson on February 8, 2008, determined to institute a consolidated formal enforcement proceeding to determine whether certain respondents are in violation of the Commission’s exclusion orders and cease and desist orders issued in the investigation, and what, if any, enforcement measures are appropriate. The following companies were named as respondents: Ninestar Technology Co., Ltd.; Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd.; Town Sky Inc.; Mipo America Ltd.; and Mipo International, Ltd. Based upon a third complaint filed by Epson on March 18, 2008, alleging violations of the general exclusion order and a consent order, the Commission has now determined to institute another formal enforcement proceeding to determine whether two respondents are in violation of the Commission’s general exclusion order and a consent order issued in the investigation, and what, if any, enforcement measures are appropriate. The following entities are named as parties to the formal enforcement proceeding: (1) Complainant Epson; (2) respondents Ribbon Tree USA, Inc. (dba Cana-Pacific Ribbons) and Apex Distributing Inc; and (3) a Commission investigative attorney to be designated by the Director, Office of Unfair Import Investigations. 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 210.75 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.75). Issued: June 23, 2008. By order of the Commission. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E8–14632 Filed 6–26–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Antitrust Division United States v. Verizon Communications Inc. and Rural Cellular Corporation; Proposed Final Judgment and Competitive Impact Statement Notice is hereby given pursuant to the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act, 15 U.S.C. 16(b)-(h), that a proposed Final Judgment, Stipulation, and E:\FR\FM\27JNN1.SGM 27JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 125 (Friday, June 27, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 36557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-14632]


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

 INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337-TA-565]


In the Matter of: Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof; 
Enforcement Proceeding II; Institution of Formal Enforcement Proceeding

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has instituted a formal enforcement proceeding in the above-
captioned investigation and named two enforcement respondents in the 
proceeding.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Haldenstein, Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3041. Copies of 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. 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 the matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD 
terminal on 202-205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted the underlying 
investigation in this matter on March 23, 2006, based on a complaint 
filed by Epson Portland, Inc. of Oregon; Epson America, Inc. of 
California; and Seiko Epson Corporation of Japan (collectively 
``Epson''). 71 FR. 14720 (March 23, 2006). The complaint, as amended, 
alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (``section 
337'') in the importation into the United States, the sale for 
importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of 
certain ink cartridges and components thereof by reason of infringement 
of claim 7 of U.S. Patent No. 5,615,957; claims 18, 81, 93, 149, 164 
and 165 of U.S. Patent No. 5,622,439; claims 83 and 84 of U.S. Patent 
No. 5,158,377; claims 19 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 5,221,148; claims 
29, 31, 34 and 38 of U.S. Patent No. 5,156,472; claim 1 of U.S. Patent 
No. 5,488,401; claims 1-3 and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 6,502,917; claims 1, 
31 and 34 of U.S. Patent No. 6,550,902; claims 1, 10 and 14 of U.S. 
Patent No. 6,955,422; claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 7,008,053; and claims 
21, 45, 53 and 54 of U.S. Patent No. 7,011,397. The complaint further 
alleged that an industry in the United States exists as required by 
subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The complainants requested that the 
Commission issue a general exclusion order and cease and desist orders. 
The Commission named as respondents 24 companies located in China, 
Germany, Hong Kong, Korea, and the United States. Several respondents 
were terminated from the investigation on the basis of settlement 
agreements or consent orders or were found in default.
    On March 30, 2007, the presiding administrative law judge (ALJ) 
issued a final ID in the investigation finding a violation of section 
337 with respect to certain respondents. He found the asserted claims 
valid and infringed by certain respondents' products. He recommended 
issuance of a general exclusion order and cease and desist orders 
directed to certain respondents and bond in the amount of $13.60 per 
cartridge during the Presidential review period.
    On October, 19, 2007, after review, the Commission made its final 
determination in the investigation, finding a violation of section 337. 
The Commission issued a general exclusion order, limited exclusion 
order, and cease and desist orders directed to several domestic 
respondents. The Commission also determined that the public interest 
factors enumerated in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d), (f), and (g) did not preclude 
issuance of the aforementioned remedial orders, and that the bond 
during the Presidential review period would be $13.60 per cartridge for 
covered ink cartridges.
    On May 1, 2008, the Commission, based on two complaints filed by 
Epson on February 8, 2008, determined to institute a consolidated 
formal enforcement proceeding to determine whether certain respondents 
are in violation of the Commission's exclusion orders and cease and 
desist orders issued in the investigation, and what, if any, 
enforcement measures are appropriate. The following companies were 
named as respondents: Ninestar Technology Co., Ltd.; Ninestar 
Technology Company, Ltd.; Town Sky Inc.; Mipo America Ltd.; and Mipo 
International, Ltd.
    Based upon a third complaint filed by Epson on March 18, 2008, 
alleging violations of the general exclusion order and a consent order, 
the Commission has now determined to institute another formal 
enforcement proceeding to determine whether two respondents are in 
violation of the Commission's general exclusion order and a consent 
order issued in the investigation, and what, if any, enforcement 
measures are appropriate. The following entities are named as parties 
to the formal enforcement proceeding: (1) Complainant Epson; (2) 
respondents Ribbon Tree USA, Inc. (dba Cana-Pacific Ribbons) and Apex 
Distributing Inc; and (3) a Commission investigative attorney to be 
designated by the Director, Office of Unfair Import Investigations.
    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 210.75 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure 
(19 CFR 210.75).

    Issued: June 23, 2008.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
 [FR Doc. E8-14632 Filed 6-26-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.