Certain Digital Set-Top Boxes and Components Thereof; Notice of Commission Determination Not To Review a Final Initial Determination; Affirming-in-Part ALJ Order No. 33 Granting Summary Determination That Complainant Satisfied the Economic Prong of the Domestic Industry Requirement Under 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3); Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding, 45616-45617 [2011-19183]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
45616
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2011 / Notices
Commission should grant such
treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents
for which confidential treatment by the
Commission is properly sought will be
treated accordingly. All nonconfidential
written submissions will be available for
public inspection at the Office of the
Secretary.
This action is taken under the
authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337),
and of sections 201.10 and 210.50(a)(4)
of the Commission’s Rules of Practice
and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10,
210.50(a)(4)).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: July 26, 2011.
James R. Holbein,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011–19225 Filed 7–28–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–712]
Certain Digital Set-Top Boxes and
Components Thereof; Notice of
Commission Determination Not To
Review a Final Initial Determination;
Affirming-in-Part ALJ Order No. 33
Granting Summary Determination That
Complainant Satisfied the Economic
Prong of the Domestic Industry
Requirement Under 19 U.S.C.
1337(a)(3); Schedule for Filing Written
Submissions on Remedy, the Public
Interest, and Bonding
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission (‘‘the Commission’’) has
determined not to review the final
initial determination (‘‘ID’’) issued by
the presiding administrative law judge
(‘‘ALJ’’) on May 20, 2011, in the abovecaptioned investigation; the
Commission has also determined to
affirm-in-part ALJ Order No. 33 granting
summary determination that
complainant satisfies the economic
prong of the domestic industry
requirement.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–3116. 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
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jul 28, 2011
Jkt 223001
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: This
investigation was instituted on April 21,
2010, based on a complaint filed by
Verizon Communications Inc. and
Verizon Services Corp. (collectively,
‘‘Verizon’’), alleging a violation of
section 337 in the importation, sale for
importation, and sale within the United
States after importation of certain digital
set-top boxes and components thereof,
that infringe one or more of claim 14 of
U.S. Patent No. 5,635,979; claim 38 of
U.S. Patent No. 5,666,293; claim 13 of
U.S. Patent No. 6,381,748 (‘‘the ’748
patent’’); claim 14 of U.S. Patent No.
6,367,078; and claim 5 of U.S. Patent
No. 7,561,214. 75 FR 20861 (2010).
Complainant named Cablevision
Systems Corp. of Bethpage, New York
(‘‘Cablevision’’) as the only respondent.
Id.
On September 7, 2010, Verizon
moved for summary determination that
its activities in the United States
concerning its FiOS TV services satisfy
the economic prong of the domestic
industry requirement under 19 U.S.C.
1337(a)(3). On September 24, 2010,
Cablevision filed an opposition to
Verizon’s motion. Also on September
24, 2010, the Commission investigative
attorney (‘‘the IA’’) filed a response in
support of Verizon’s motion. On January
11, 2010, the ALJ issued an ID (Order
No. 33) granting Verizon’s motion. On
January 20, 2011, respondent
Cablevision filed a petition for review of
the Summary ID. On January 27, 2011,
Verizon and the IA each filed a response
to the petition for review. On February
11, 2011, the Commission determined to
review the Summary ID and requested
written submissions from the parties on
the issues under review. All of the
parties timely submitted their respective
initial and reply submissions.
The evidentiary hearing on violation
of Section 337 was held from January
24, 2011 through February 1, 2011. On
May 20, 2011, the ALJ issued his final
ID finding a violation of section 337 as
to the ’748 patent only. The ID included
the ALJ’s recommended determination
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
on remedy and bonding. All the parties
to the investigation filed timely
petitions for review of various portions
of the final ID, as well as timely
responses to the petitions. On July 1,
2011, Cablevision filed an unopposed
motion for leave to file a supplemental
submission regarding a district court
proceeding. ActiveVideo Networks, Inc.
v. Verizon Commc’ns, Inc., Civil Action
No. 2:10cv248. The motion is hereby
granted.
Having examined the record in this
investigation, including the ALJ’s final
ID, the petitions for review, and the
responses thereto, the Commission has
determined not to review the final ID.
The Commission has also determined to
affirm-in-part the ALJ’s Order No. 33,
granting Verizon’s motion for summary
determination that it has satisfied the
economic prong of the domestic
industry requirement under 19 U.S.C.
1337(a)(3)(C). In particular, the
Commission affirms that Verizon has
satisfied the economic prong of the
domestic industry requirement based on
its investment in the software
development and testing, installation,
and support associated with the set-top
boxes that were alleged to practice the
asserted claims of the patents-in-suit
because Verizon’s investments in those
activities are ‘‘substantial’’ within the
meaning of Section 337(a)(3)(C). The
Commission takes no position on the
remainder of the summary
determination ID. Specifically, the
Commission takes no position on
whether Verizon’s investments in the
FiOS network satisfy the economic
prong.
In connection with the final
disposition of this investigation, the
Commission may (1) issue an order that
could result in the exclusion of the
subject articles from entry into the
United States, and/or (2) issue one or
more cease and desist orders that could
result in the respondent being required
to cease and desist from engaging in
unfair acts in the importation and sale
of such articles. 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 are 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 (Dec. 1994)
(Commission Opinion).
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 146 / Friday, July 29, 2011 / Notices
If 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.
If 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. The
Commission is therefore interested in
receiving submissions concerning the
amount of the bond that should be
imposed.
Written Submissions: 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. Such
submissions should address the
recommended determination by the ALJ
on remedy and bonding. Complainant
and the Commission investigative
attorney are also requested to submit
proposed remedial orders for the
Commission’s consideration.
Complainant is further requested to
provide the expiration date of the ’748
patent and state the HTSUS numbers
under which the accused articles are
imported. The written submissions and
proposed remedial orders must be filed
no later than the close of business on
August 4, 2011. Reply submissions must
be filed no later than the close of
business on August 12, 2011. 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:17 Jul 28, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 this action is
contained in section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C.
1337), and in sections 210.42–.46 and
.50 of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42–
.46,.50).
Issued: July 21, 2011.
By order of the Commission.
James R. Holbein,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011–19183 Filed 7–28–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of the Consent
Decree Under the Clean Water Act
Notice is hereby given that on July 19,
2011, a proposed Consent Decree in
United States v. Jersey City Municipal
Utilities Authority (‘‘JCMUA’’), Civil
Action No. 2:11–04120 (SDW–MCA),
was lodged with the United States Court
for the District of New Jersey.
The proposed Consent Decree
resolves JCMUA’s Clean Water Act
(CWA) violations stemming from its
failure to properly operate and maintain
its Combined Sewer Collection System,
which resulted in dry weather overflows
and numerous basement backups in the
homes of residents of Jersey City. Under
the terms of the Consent Decree, JCMUA
will pay a $375,000 penalty, undertake
a Supplemental Environment Project
valued at $550,000, and implement
injunctive relief valued at
approximately $52 million. As part of
the injunctive relief, JCMUA will
undertake a Capacity and Condition
Assessment Study, a telemetry
monitoring program, implement a
residential complaint tracking system,
implement approved operation and
maintenance schedules of its sewers,
conduct a pump station evaluation, as
well as implement numerous
construction projects aimed at repairing
or replacing deteriorating sewers within
its Combined Sewer System.
The Department of Justice will receive
for a period of thirty (30) days from the
date of this publication comments
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
45617
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, and should refer to the
matter as United States v. JCMUA, D.J.
Ref. 90–5–1–1–09499.
The Consent Decree may be examined
at the Office of the United States
Attorney, 970 Broad Street, Suite 700,
Newark, New Jersey, and at U.S. EPA
Region II, 290 Broadway, New York,
New York. During the public comment
period, the Consent Decree may also 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 emailing a request to Tonia
Fleetwood (tonia.fleetwood@usdoj.gov),
fax no. (202) 514–0097, phone
confirmation number (202) 514–1547. In
requesting from the Consent Decree
Library a copy of the consent decree for
United States v. JCMUA, Civil Action
No. 2:11–04120, please enclose a check
in the amount of $15.75 (25 cents per
page reproduction cost) payable to the
U.S. Treasury.
Ronald G. Gluck,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental
Enforcement Section, Environment and
Natural Resource Division.
[FR Doc. 2011–19178 Filed 7–28–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of the Consent
Decree Under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act
Notice is hereby given that on July 25,
2011, a proposed Consent Decree in
United States v. Chevron Puerto Rico,
LLC, f/k/a Texaco Puerto Rico, Inc.
(‘‘CHEVRON’’), Civil Action No. 3:11–
CV–1716, was lodged with the United
States Court for the District of Puerto
Rico.
The proposed Consent Decree
resolves CHEVRON’s Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
and the Puerto Rico Underground
Storage Tank Regulations (PRUSTR)
violations stemming from its failure to
provide overfill protection equipment at
two underground storage tank (UST)
facilities; failure to perform annual tests
of automatic line leak detectors (ALLDs)
E:\FR\FM\29JYN1.SGM
29JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 146 (Friday, July 29, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45616-45617]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19183]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-712]
Certain Digital Set-Top Boxes and Components Thereof; Notice of
Commission Determination Not To Review a Final Initial Determination;
Affirming-in-Part ALJ Order No. 33 Granting Summary Determination That
Complainant Satisfied the Economic Prong of the Domestic Industry
Requirement Under 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3); Schedule for Filing Written
Submissions on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission (``the Commission'') has determined not to review the final
initial determination (``ID'') issued by the presiding administrative
law judge (``ALJ'') on May 20, 2011, in the above-captioned
investigation; the Commission has also determined to affirm-in-part ALJ
Order No. 33 granting summary determination that complainant satisfies
the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3116. 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: This investigation was instituted on April
21, 2010, based on a complaint filed by Verizon Communications Inc. and
Verizon Services Corp. (collectively, ``Verizon''), alleging a
violation of section 337 in the importation, sale for importation, and
sale within the United States after importation of certain digital set-
top boxes and components thereof, that infringe one or more of claim 14
of U.S. Patent No. 5,635,979; claim 38 of U.S. Patent No. 5,666,293;
claim 13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,381,748 (``the '748 patent''); claim 14
of U.S. Patent No. 6,367,078; and claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 7,561,214.
75 FR 20861 (2010). Complainant named Cablevision Systems Corp. of
Bethpage, New York (``Cablevision'') as the only respondent. Id.
On September 7, 2010, Verizon moved for summary determination that
its activities in the United States concerning its FiOS TV services
satisfy the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement under
19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3). On September 24, 2010, Cablevision filed an
opposition to Verizon's motion. Also on September 24, 2010, the
Commission investigative attorney (``the IA'') filed a response in
support of Verizon's motion. On January 11, 2010, the ALJ issued an ID
(Order No. 33) granting Verizon's motion. On January 20, 2011,
respondent Cablevision filed a petition for review of the Summary ID.
On January 27, 2011, Verizon and the IA each filed a response to the
petition for review. On February 11, 2011, the Commission determined to
review the Summary ID and requested written submissions from the
parties on the issues under review. All of the parties timely submitted
their respective initial and reply submissions.
The evidentiary hearing on violation of Section 337 was held from
January 24, 2011 through February 1, 2011. On May 20, 2011, the ALJ
issued his final ID finding a violation of section 337 as to the '748
patent only. The ID included the ALJ's recommended determination on
remedy and bonding. All the parties to the investigation filed timely
petitions for review of various portions of the final ID, as well as
timely responses to the petitions. On July 1, 2011, Cablevision filed
an unopposed motion for leave to file a supplemental submission
regarding a district court proceeding. ActiveVideo Networks, Inc. v.
Verizon Commc'ns, Inc., Civil Action No. 2:10cv248. The motion is
hereby granted.
Having examined the record in this investigation, including the
ALJ's final ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto,
the Commission has determined not to review the final ID. The
Commission has also determined to affirm-in-part the ALJ's Order No.
33, granting Verizon's motion for summary determination that it has
satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement under
19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)(C). In particular, the Commission affirms that
Verizon has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry
requirement based on its investment in the software development and
testing, installation, and support associated with the set-top boxes
that were alleged to practice the asserted claims of the patents-in-
suit because Verizon's investments in those activities are
``substantial'' within the meaning of Section 337(a)(3)(C). The
Commission takes no position on the remainder of the summary
determination ID. Specifically, the Commission takes no position on
whether Verizon's investments in the FiOS network satisfy the economic
prong.
In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the
Commission may (1) issue an order that could result in the exclusion of
the subject articles from entry into the United States, and/or (2)
issue one or more cease and desist orders that could result in the
respondent being required to cease and desist from engaging in unfair
acts in the importation and sale of such articles. 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 are 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
(Dec. 1994) (Commission Opinion).
[[Page 45617]]
If 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.
If 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. The Commission is
therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of
the bond that should be imposed.
Written Submissions: 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. Such submissions should address the recommended
determination by the ALJ on remedy and bonding. Complainant and the
Commission investigative attorney are also requested to submit proposed
remedial orders for the Commission's consideration. Complainant is
further requested to provide the expiration date of the '748 patent and
state the HTSUS numbers under which the accused articles are imported.
The written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no
later than the close of business on August 4, 2011. Reply submissions
must be filed no later than the close of business on August 12, 2011.
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 this action is contained in section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in sections
210.42-.46 and .50 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure
(19 CFR 210.42-.46,.50).
Issued: July 21, 2011.
By order of the Commission.
James R. Holbein,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011-19183 Filed 7-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
