In the Matter of Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof Consolidated Enforcement Proceeding and Enforcement Proceeding II; Notice of a Commission Determination Not To Review an Enforcement Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Cease and Desist Orders and a Consent Order; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on Civil Penalties, 30320-30321 [E9-14941]

Download as PDF 30320 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Notices Water Gap, National Recreation Area, River Road, Bushkill, PA 18324. Dated: May 5, 2009. John J. Donahue, Superintendent, Delaware Water Gap, National Recreation Area. [FR Doc. E9–15021 Filed 6–24–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–J6–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Inv. No. 337–TA–565] In the Matter of Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof Consolidated Enforcement Proceeding and Enforcement Proceeding II; Notice of a Commission Determination Not To Review an Enforcement Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Cease and Desist Orders and a Consent Order; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on Civil Penalties 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 not to review an enforcement initial determination (‘‘EID’’) of the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) in the above-captioned proceeding finding a violation of cease and desist orders and a consent order. The Commission is requesting briefing on the amount of civil penalties for violation of the orders. 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 (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 the matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted the underlying VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 24, 2009 Jkt 217001 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 October 19, 2007, after review of the ALJ’s final ID, the Commission made its final determination in the investigation, finding a violation of section 337. The Commission issued a general exclusion order, a 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 period of review would be $13.60 per cartridge for covered ink cartridges. Certain respondents appealed the Commission’s final determination to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (‘‘Federal Circuit’’). On January 13, 2009, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Commission’s final determination without opinion pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 36. Ninestar Technology Co. et al. v. PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 International Trade Commission, Appeal No. 2008–1201. On February 8, 2008, Epson filed two complaints for enforcement of the Commission’s orders pursuant to Commission rule 210.75. Epson proposed that the Commission name five respondents as enforcement respondents. On May 1, 2008, the Commission determined that the criteria for institution of enforcement proceedings were satisfied and instituted consolidated enforcement proceedings, naming the five following proposed respondents as enforcement respondents: Ninestar Technology Co., Ltd.; Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd.; Town Sky Inc. (collectively, the ‘‘Ninestar Respondents’’), as well as Mipo America Ltd. (‘‘Mipo America’’) and Mipo International, Ltd (collectively, the ‘‘Mipo Respondents’’). On March 18, 2008, Epson filed a third enforcement complaint against two proposed respondents: Ribbon Tree USA, Inc. (dba Cana-Pacific Ribbons) and Apex Distributing Inc. (collectively, the ‘‘Apex Respondents’’). On June 23, 2008, the Commission determined that the criteria for institution of enforcement proceedings were satisfied and instituted another formal enforcement proceeding and named the two proposed respondents as the enforcement respondents. On September 18, 2008, the ALJ issued Order No. 37, consolidating the two proceedings. On April 17, 2009, the ALJ issued his Enforcement Initial Determination (EID) in which he determined that there have been violations of the Commission’s cease and desist orders and a consent order and recommended that the Commission impose civil penalties for such violations. On April 29, 2009, the Ninestar Respondents filed a petition for review of the EID. On May 7, 2009, Epson and the Commission investigative attorney filed responses to the petition for review. Having considered the EID, the petition for review, the responses thereto, and other relevant portions of the record, the Commission has determined not to review the EID. The Commission may levy civil penalties for violation of the cease and desist orders and consent order. Written Submissions: Parties to the investigation, interested government agencies, and any other interested parties are encouraged to file written submissions on the amount of civil penalties to be imposed. Such submissions should address the April 17, 2009, recommended determination by the ALJ on civil penalties. The E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 121 / Thursday, June 25, 2009 / Notices written submissions must be filed no later than close of business on July 3, 2009. Reply submissions must be filed no later than the close of business on July 13, 2009. 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 (or portion thereof) 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 section 201.6 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 201.6. 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 sections 210.16 and 210.75 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.16 and 210.75). By order of the Commission. Issued: June 19, 2009. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E9–14941 Filed 6–24–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. TA–421–7] On the basis of information developed in the subject investigation, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) determines, pursuant to section 421(b)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974,1 that certain passenger vehicle and light truck tires 2 from the People’s sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES U.S.C. 2451(b)(1). purposes of this investigation, certain passenger vehicle and light truck tires are defined as new pneumatic tires, of rubber, from China, of a kind used on motor cars (except racing cars) and on-the-highway light trucks, vans, and sport utility vehicles, provided for in subheadings 4011.10.10, 4011.10.50, 4011.20.10, and 4011.20.50 of the 2 For VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:25 Jun 24, 2009 Jkt 217001 Background The Commission instituted this investigation following receipt, on April 20, 2009, of a petition filed by the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union. Notice of the institution of the Commission’s investigation and of the scheduling of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting a copy of the notice on the Commission’s Web site (http://www.usitc.gov) and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of April 29, 2009 (74 FR 19593). The hearing was held on June 2, 2009 in Washington, DC; all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. By order of the Commission. Issued: June 19, 2009. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E9–14943 Filed 6–24–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–667 and Investigation No. 337–TA–673] In the Matter of Certain Electronic Devices, Including Handheld Wireless Communications Devices; Notice of Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Motion To Amend the Notice of Investigation AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. Certain Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires From the People’s Republic of China; Determination 1 19 Republic of China are being imported into the United States in such increased quantities or under such conditions as to cause or threaten to cause market disruption to the domestic producers of like or directly competitive products.3 SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review the presiding administrative law judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 14C) in consolidated Inv. Nos. 337–TA–667 and 337–TA– 673, Certain Electronic Devices Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (‘‘HTS’’). The HTS subheadings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; the written description of the product under investigation is dispositive. 3 Vice Chairman Daniel R. Pearson and Commissioner Deanna Tanner Okun made a negative determination. PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 30321 Including Handheld Wireless Communications Devices, granting a motion to amend the notice of investigation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan M. Valentine, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708–2301. 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 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 Inv. No. 337– TA–667 (‘‘the 667 Investigation’’) on January 23, 2009, based on a complaint filed by Saxon Innovation, LLC of Tyler, Texas (‘‘Saxon’’). 74 FR 4231. The complaint, as amended and 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 electronic devices, including handheld wireless communications devices, by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,235,635 (‘‘the ‘635 patent’’); 5,530,597 (‘‘the ‘597 patent’’); and 5,608,873 (‘‘the ‘873 patent’’). The complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry related to each patent. The Commission’s notice of investigation named various respondents, including High Tech Computer Corp. of Taoyuan, Taiwan and HTC America, Inc. of Bellevue, Washington (collectively ‘‘HTC’’). On April 28, 2009, the Commission determined not to review an ID granting under Commission Rule 210.21(b) a joint motion filed by Saxon and HTC to terminate the investigation as to respondent HTC. The Commission instituted Inv. No. 337–TA–673 (‘‘the 673 Investigation’’) on March 31, 2009, based on a complaint filed by Saxon. 74 FR 14578– 9. The complaint, as amended and supplemented, alleges violations of E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM 25JNN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 121 (Thursday, June 25, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30320-30321]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14941]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337-TA-565]


In the Matter of Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof 
Consolidated Enforcement Proceeding and Enforcement Proceeding II; 
Notice of a Commission Determination Not To Review an Enforcement 
Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Cease and Desist Orders 
and a Consent Order; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on Civil 
Penalties

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 an enforcement initial 
determination (``EID'') of the presiding administrative law judge 
(``ALJ'') in the above-captioned proceeding finding a violation of 
cease and desist orders and a consent order. The Commission is 
requesting briefing on the amount of civil penalties for violation of 
the orders.

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 
(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 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 October 19, 2007, after review of the ALJ's final ID, the 
Commission made its final determination in the investigation, finding a 
violation of section 337. The Commission issued a general exclusion 
order, a 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 period of review would be 
$13.60 per cartridge for covered ink cartridges. Certain respondents 
appealed the Commission's final determination to the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (``Federal Circuit''). On 
January 13, 2009, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Commission's final 
determination without opinion pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 36. Ninestar 
Technology Co. et al. v. International Trade Commission, Appeal No. 
2008-1201.
    On February 8, 2008, Epson filed two complaints for enforcement of 
the Commission's orders pursuant to Commission rule 210.75. Epson 
proposed that the Commission name five respondents as enforcement 
respondents. On May 1, 2008, the Commission determined that the 
criteria for institution of enforcement proceedings were satisfied and 
instituted consolidated enforcement proceedings, naming the five 
following proposed respondents as enforcement respondents: Ninestar 
Technology Co., Ltd.; Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd.; Town Sky Inc. 
(collectively, the ``Ninestar Respondents''), as well as Mipo America 
Ltd. (``Mipo America'') and Mipo International, Ltd (collectively, the 
``Mipo Respondents''). On March 18, 2008, Epson filed a third 
enforcement complaint against two proposed respondents: Ribbon Tree 
USA, Inc. (dba Cana-Pacific Ribbons) and Apex Distributing Inc. 
(collectively, the ``Apex Respondents''). On June 23, 2008, the 
Commission determined that the criteria for institution of enforcement 
proceedings were satisfied and instituted another formal enforcement 
proceeding and named the two proposed respondents as the enforcement 
respondents. On September 18, 2008, the ALJ issued Order No. 37, 
consolidating the two proceedings.
    On April 17, 2009, the ALJ issued his Enforcement Initial 
Determination (EID) in which he determined that there have been 
violations of the Commission's cease and desist orders and a consent 
order and recommended that the Commission impose civil penalties for 
such violations.
    On April 29, 2009, the Ninestar Respondents filed a petition for 
review of the EID. On May 7, 2009, Epson and the Commission 
investigative attorney filed responses to the petition for review.
    Having considered the EID, the petition for review, the responses 
thereto, and other relevant portions of the record, the Commission has 
determined not to review the EID. The Commission may levy civil 
penalties for violation of the cease and desist orders and consent 
order.
    Written Submissions: Parties to the investigation, interested 
government agencies, and any other interested parties are encouraged to 
file written submissions on the amount of civil penalties to be 
imposed. Such submissions should address the April 17, 2009, 
recommended determination by the ALJ on civil penalties. The

[[Page 30321]]

written submissions must be filed no later than close of business on 
July 3, 2009. Reply submissions must be filed no later than the close 
of business on July 13, 2009. 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 
(or portion thereof) 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 section 201.6 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure, 19 CFR 201.6. 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 
sections 210.16 and 210.75 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure (19 CFR 210.16 and 210.75).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: June 19, 2009.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-14941 Filed 6-24-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P