In the Matter of Certain Liquid Crystal Display Devices and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Decision To Review-in-Part a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Request for Written Submissions Regarding Remedy, Bonding, and the Public Interest; and Extension of Target Date, 15301-15302 [E9-7478]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 63 / Friday, April 3, 2009 / Notices SOUTH DAKOTA Custer County Hermosa Masonic Lodge, W. side of 2nd St., between Folsom St. and Hwy 40, Hermosa, 09000043, LISTED, 2/17/09 Hutchinson County Tucek-Sykora Farmstead, 28883 412th Ave., Tripp vicinity, 09000044, LISTED, 2/17/09 (Czech Folk Architecture in Southeastern South Dakota MRA) VIRGINIA Louisa County Baker-Strickler House, 10074 W. Gordon Rd., Gordonsville, 09000046, LISTED, 2/18/09 WISCONSIN Columbia County Mills, Richard W. and Margaret, House, 104 Grand Ave., Lodi, 09000048, LISTED, 2/18/09 * Denotes: Federal determination of eligibility. [FR Doc. E9–7526 Filed 4–2–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–51–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–631] In the Matter of Certain Liquid Crystal Display Devices and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Decision To Review-inPart a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Request for Written Submissions Regarding Remedy, Bonding, and the Public Interest; and Extension of Target Date sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to reviewin-part a final initial determination (‘‘ID’’) of the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) finding a violation of section 337 in the above-captioned investigation, and to request written submissions regarding remedy, bonding, and the public interest. The Commission has also extended the target date for completion of the investigation by 30 days until May 27, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clint Gerdine, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708–2310. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:07 Apr 02, 2009 Jkt 217001 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 at 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 investigation on January 25, 2008, based on a complaint filed by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (‘‘Samsung’’) of Korea. 73 FR 4626–27. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 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 liquid crystal display (‘‘LCD’’) devices and products containing the same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,193,666 (‘‘the ’666 patent’’); 6,771,344 (‘‘the ’344 patent’’); 7,295,196; and 6,937,311 (‘‘the ’311 patent’’). The complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The Commission’s notice of investigation named the following respondents: Sharp Corporation of Japan; Sharp Electronics Corporation of Mahwah, New Jersey; and Sharp Electronics Manufacturing Company of America, Inc. of San Diego, California (collectively ‘‘Sharp’’). On January 26, 2009, the ALJ issued his final ID finding a violation of section 337 by respondents. On February 9, 2009, Sharp and the Commission investigative attorney (‘‘IA’’) filed petitions for review of the final ID. The IA and Samsung filed responses to the petitions on February 17, 2009. Also, on March 12, 2009, Sharp filed a motion to extend the target date for completion of the investigation to allow consideration of the final ID scheduled to issue in Certain Liquid Crystal Display Modules, Products Containing Same, and Methods for Using the Same, Inv. No. 337–TA–634, on June 12, 2009. On March 23, 2009, Samsung and the IA filed responses in opposition to Sharp’s motion. On March 26, Sharp filed a motion for leave to file a reply to Samsung’s and the IA’s responses in opposition. PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 15301 Upon considering the parties’ filings, the Commission has determined to review-in-part the ID. Specifically, the Commission has determined to review: (1) The ALJ’s construction of the claim term ‘‘domain dividers’’ relating to the ’311 patent; (2) the ALJ’s determination that Sharp’s LCD devices infringe the ’311 patent; (3) the ALJ’s determination that the ’311 patent is not unenforceable; and (4) the ALJ’s determination that the asserted claims of the ’344 patent are not invalid as anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,309,264 (‘‘the ’264 patent’’). The Commission has determined not to review the remainder of the ID. Also, the Commission has extended the target date for completion of the investigation by 30 days until May 27, 2009, for procedural reasons. It has denied Sharp’s motion to extend the target date to the extent necessary to allow consideration of the final ID to issue in Inv. No. 337–TA–634. Also, the Commission has denied Sharp’s motion for leave to file a reply to Samsung’s and the IA’s responses in opposition to Sharp’s motion to extend the target date. On review, with respect to violation, the parties are requested to submit briefing limited to the following issues: (1) Whether one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the claim term ‘‘domain dividers’’ in claims 6 and 8 of the ’311 patent includes protrusions, in light of the intrinsic evidence and the context of the claimed invention. Please discuss Wang Labs, Inc. v. Am. Online, 197 F.3d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 1999) in your response. (2) Under the ID’s construction for the claim term ‘‘domain dividers’’ which includes protrusions, whether claims 6 and 8 of the ’311 patent are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 112, ¶ 1. Please discuss ICU Med., Inc. v. Alaris Med. Sys., No. 2008–1077, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 5271 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 13, 2009) and LizardTech, Inc. v. Earth Res. Mapping, Inc., 424 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2005) in your response. (3) Under the ID’s construction of ‘‘aperture’’in claims 7 and 8 of the ‘344 patent, (a) whether U.S. Patent No. 5,309,264 anticipates those claims; and (b) how the ‘‘orientation’’ of a multipronged aperture is determined. Assume the Commission finds that all other claim terms are met. In addressing these issues, the parties are requested to make specific reference to the evidentiary record and to cite relevant authority. In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the Commission may issue an order that results in the exclusion of the subject articles from entry into the United E:\FR\FM\03APN1.SGM 03APN1 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES 15302 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 63 / Friday, April 3, 2009 / Notices States. Accordingly, the Commission is interested in receiving written submissions that address the form of remedy, if any, that should be ordered. If a party seeks exclusion of an article from entry into the United States for purposes other than entry for consumption, the party should so indicate and provide information establishing that activities involving other types of entry either are adversely affecting it or likely to do so. For background, see In the Matter of Certain Devices for Connecting Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994) (Commission Opinion). When the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders would have on (1) the public health and welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S. production of articles that are like or directly competitive with those that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. consumers. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving written submissions that address the aforementioned public interest factors in the context of this investigation. When the Commission orders some form of remedy, the U.S. Trade Representative, as delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve or disapprove the Commission’s action. See Presidential Memorandum of July 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period, the subject articles would be entitled to enter the United States under bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of the bond that should be imposed if a remedy is ordered. Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation are requested to file written submissions on the issues under review. The submissions should be concise and thoroughly referenced to the record in this investigation. Parties to the investigation, interested government agencies, and any other interested parties are encouraged to file written submissions on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding, and such submissions should address the recommended determination by the ALJ on remedy and bonding. The complainant and the Commission investigative attorney are also requested to submit proposed VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:07 Apr 02, 2009 Jkt 217001 remedial orders for the Commission’s consideration. Complainants are also requested to state the dates that the patents at issue expire and the HTSUS numbers under which the accused products are imported. The written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later than close of business on April 10, 2009. Reply submissions must be filed no later than the close of business on April 17. No further submissions on these issues will be permitted unless otherwise ordered by the Commission. Persons filing written submissions must file the original document and 12 true copies thereof on or before the deadlines stated above with the Office of the Secretary. Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment unless the information has already been granted such treatment during the proceedings. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary of the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 210.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is sought will be treated accordingly. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary. 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 sections 210.42–46 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.42–46. Issued: March 30, 2009. By order of the Commission. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. William R. Bishop, Acting Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E9–7478 Filed 4–2–09; 8:45 am] sought natural resource damages for releases of hazardous substances into Commencement Bay, Washington. Under the consent decree, defendant will pay $638,391.06 in natural resource damages and reimburse $111,608.94 in damage assessment costs. For thirty (30) days after the date of this publication, the Department of Justice will receive comments relating to the Consent Decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and either e-mailed to pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov or mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611. In either case, the comments should refer to United States v. Petroleum Reclaiming Service, Inc., No. 09-cv-05157, D.J. Ref. No. 90–11–2– 1049/14. During the comment period, the Consent Decree may be examined on the following Department of Justice Web site: https://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the Consent Decree may also be obtained by mail from the Consent Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611, or by faxing or e-mailing a request to Tonia Fleetwood (tonia.fleetwood@usdoj.gov), fax no. (202) 514–0097, phone confirmation number (202) 514–1547. In requesting a copy from the Consent Decree Library, please enclose a check in the amount of $6.25 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the United States Treasury or, if by e-mail or fax, forward a check in that amount to the Consent Decree Library at the stated address. Maureen Katz, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division. [FR Doc. E9–7474 Filed 4–2–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–15–P BILLING CODE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Notice is hereby given that on March 23, 2009, a proposed consent decree in United States, et al., v. Petroleum Reclaiming Service, Inc., No. 09-cv05157, was lodged with the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. In this action, the United States, State of Washington, Puyallup Tribe of Indians and Muckleshoot Indian Tribe PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives [OMB Number 1140–NEW] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comments Requested ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Student and Supervisor Training Validation Surveys. The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) will be submitting the following information collection E:\FR\FM\03APN1.SGM 03APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 63 (Friday, April 3, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15301-15302]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-7478]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-631]


In the Matter of Certain Liquid Crystal Display Devices and 
Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Decision To Review-
in-Part a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 
337; Request for Written Submissions Regarding Remedy, Bonding, and the 
Public Interest; and Extension of Target Date

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 a final initial 
determination (``ID'') of the presiding administrative law judge 
(``ALJ'') finding a violation of section 337 in the above-captioned 
investigation, and to request written submissions regarding remedy, 
bonding, and the public interest. The Commission has also extended the 
target date for completion of the investigation by 30 days until May 
27, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clint Gerdine, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-2310. 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 at 
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 investigation 
on January 25, 2008, based on a complaint filed by Samsung Electronics 
Co., Ltd. (``Samsung'') of Korea. 73 FR 4626-27. The complaint, as 
supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended, 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 liquid crystal display (``LCD'') devices 
and products containing the same by reason of infringement of certain 
claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,193,666 (``the '666 patent''); 6,771,344 
(``the '344 patent''); 7,295,196; and 6,937,311 (``the '311 patent''). 
The complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The 
Commission's notice of investigation named the following respondents: 
Sharp Corporation of Japan; Sharp Electronics Corporation of Mahwah, 
New Jersey; and Sharp Electronics Manufacturing Company of America, 
Inc. of San Diego, California (collectively ``Sharp'').
    On January 26, 2009, the ALJ issued his final ID finding a 
violation of section 337 by respondents. On February 9, 2009, Sharp and 
the Commission investigative attorney (``IA'') filed petitions for 
review of the final ID. The IA and Samsung filed responses to the 
petitions on February 17, 2009. Also, on March 12, 2009, Sharp filed a 
motion to extend the target date for completion of the investigation to 
allow consideration of the final ID scheduled to issue in Certain 
Liquid Crystal Display Modules, Products Containing Same, and Methods 
for Using the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-634, on June 12, 2009. On March 23, 
2009, Samsung and the IA filed responses in opposition to Sharp's 
motion. On March 26, Sharp filed a motion for leave to file a reply to 
Samsung's and the IA's responses in opposition.
    Upon considering the parties' filings, the Commission has 
determined to review-in-part the ID. Specifically, the Commission has 
determined to review: (1) The ALJ's construction of the claim term 
``domain dividers'' relating to the '311 patent; (2) the ALJ's 
determination that Sharp's LCD devices infringe the '311 patent; (3) 
the ALJ's determination that the '311 patent is not unenforceable; and 
(4) the ALJ's determination that the asserted claims of the '344 patent 
are not invalid as anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,309,264 (``the '264 
patent''). The Commission has determined not to review the remainder of 
the ID. Also, the Commission has extended the target date for 
completion of the investigation by 30 days until May 27, 2009, for 
procedural reasons. It has denied Sharp's motion to extend the target 
date to the extent necessary to allow consideration of the final ID to 
issue in Inv. No. 337-TA-634. Also, the Commission has denied Sharp's 
motion for leave to file a reply to Samsung's and the IA's responses in 
opposition to Sharp's motion to extend the target date.
    On review, with respect to violation, the parties are requested to 
submit briefing limited to the following issues:
    (1) Whether one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that 
the claim term ``domain dividers'' in claims 6 and 8 of the '311 patent 
includes protrusions, in light of the intrinsic evidence and the 
context of the claimed invention. Please discuss Wang Labs, Inc. v. Am. 
Online, 197 F.3d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 1999) in your response.
    (2) Under the ID's construction for the claim term ``domain 
dividers'' which includes protrusions, whether claims 6 and 8 of the 
'311 patent are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 112, ] 1. Please discuss ICU 
Med., Inc. v. Alaris Med. Sys., No. 2008-1077, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 
5271 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 13, 2009) and LizardTech, Inc. v. Earth Res. 
Mapping, Inc., 424 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2005) in your response.
    (3) Under the ID's construction of ``aperture''in claims 7 and 8 of 
the `344 patent, (a) whether U.S. Patent No. 5,309,264 anticipates 
those claims; and (b) how the ``orientation'' of a multi-pronged 
aperture is determined. Assume the Commission finds that all other 
claim terms are met.
    In addressing these issues, the parties are requested to make 
specific reference to the evidentiary record and to cite relevant 
authority.
    In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the 
Commission may issue an order that results in the exclusion of the 
subject articles from entry into the United

[[Page 15302]]

States. Accordingly, the Commission is interested in receiving written 
submissions that address the form of remedy, if any, that should be 
ordered. If a party seeks exclusion of an article from entry into the 
United States for purposes other than entry for consumption, the party 
should so indicate and provide information establishing that activities 
involving other types of entry either are adversely affecting it or 
likely to do so. For background, see In the Matter of Certain Devices 
for Connecting Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337-TA-360, 
USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994) (Commission Opinion).
    When the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must 
consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The 
factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an 
exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders would have on (1) the 
public health and welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S. 
economy, (3) U.S. production of articles that are like or directly 
competitive with those that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. 
consumers. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving written 
submissions that address the aforementioned public interest factors in 
the context of this investigation.
    When the Commission orders some form of remedy, the U.S. Trade 
Representative, as delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve 
or disapprove the Commission's action. See Presidential Memorandum of 
July 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period, the 
subject articles would be entitled to enter the United States under 
bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and prescribed by the 
Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is therefore interested in 
receiving submissions concerning the amount of the bond that should be 
imposed if a remedy is ordered.
    Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation are requested 
to file written submissions on the issues under review. The submissions 
should be concise and thoroughly referenced to the record in this 
investigation. Parties to the investigation, interested government 
agencies, and any other interested parties are encouraged to file 
written submissions on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and 
bonding, and such submissions should address the recommended 
determination by the ALJ on remedy and bonding. The complainant and the 
Commission investigative attorney are also requested to submit proposed 
remedial orders for the Commission's consideration. Complainants are 
also requested to state the dates that the patents at issue expire and 
the HTSUS numbers under which the accused products are imported. The 
written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later 
than close of business on April 10, 2009. Reply submissions must be 
filed no later than the close of business on April 17. No further 
submissions on these issues will be permitted unless otherwise ordered 
by the Commission.
    Persons filing written submissions must file the original document 
and 12 true copies thereof on or before the deadlines stated above with 
the Office of the Secretary. Any person desiring to submit a document 
to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment 
unless the information has already been granted such treatment during 
the proceedings. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary 
of the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why 
the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 210.6. Documents 
for which confidential treatment by the Commission is sought will be 
treated accordingly. All nonconfidential written submissions will be 
available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary.
    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 sections 210.42-46 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.42-46.

    Issued: March 30, 2009.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
William R. Bishop,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-7478 Filed 4-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE