Certain Video Analytics Software, Systems, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same; Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting Motion To Amend Complaint and Notice of Investigation, 808-809 [2012-16]
Download as PDF
808
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2012 / Notices
reason of infringement of certain claims
of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,849,881 (‘‘the ‘881
patent’’); 6,975,011; 7,106,090 (‘‘the ‘090
patent’’); 7,151,283; and 7,271,425. 76
FR 40746 (Jul. 11, 2011). The
respondents are LG Electronics, Inc. of
Seoul, South Korea; LG Innotek Co., Ltd.
of Seoul, South Korea; LG Electronics
U.S.A., Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey; and LG Innotek U.S.A., Inc. of
San Diego, California (collectively,
‘‘LG’’). Id.
Complainant OSRAM moved to
amend the complaint and notice of
investigation to withdraw all allegations
with respect to the ‘881 and ‘090
patents, and to add allegations of a
violation of Section 337 by all
respondents as to claims 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9–
12, 15–17, 20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30, and
33–35 of U.S. Patent No. 7,341,925 (‘‘the
‘925 patent’’). Respondent LG filed a
response supporting the withdrawal of
allegations with respect to the ‘881 and
‘090 patents, and opposing OSRAM’s
request to add allegations with respect
to the ‘925 patent.
On December 8, 2011, the presiding
ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 9). The ALJ
granted OSRAM’s motion in part to the
extent that it sought termination of the
‘881 patent and the ‘090 patent from the
investigation, and denied the portion of
OSRAM’s motion that sought to add the
‘925 patent to this investigation. No
party petitioned for review. The
Commission has determined not to
review the ID.
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(h) of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR
210.42(h).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: December 30, 2011.
James R. Holbein,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012–13 Filed 1–5–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
[Investigation No. 337–TA–738]
Certain Components for Installation of
Marine Autopilots With GPS or IMU;
Termination of Investigation on the
Basis of Settlement
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:40 Jan 05, 2012
Jkt 226001
Commission has determined not to
review the presiding administrative law
judge’s initial determination (‘‘ID’’)
(Order No. 26) granting a joint motion
to terminate the investigation as to the
last remaining respondents on the basis
of a settlement agreement, and
terminating the investigation in its
entirety.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sidney A. Rosenzweig, Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
708–2532. 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.
The
Commission instituted this investigation
on September 28, 2010, based on a
complaint filed by American GNC of
Simi Valley, California (‘‘AGNC’’),
alleging a violation of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19
U.S.C. 1337, in the importation, sale for
importation, and sale within the United
States after importation of certain
components for installation of marine
autopilots with GPS or IMU (i.e.,
devices for pointing and stabilizing
marine navigation equipment) by reason
of infringement of certain claims of U.S.
Patent No. 6,596,976. The complaint
named eight respondents: Furuno
Electronics Co. of Nishinomiya City,
Japan and Furuno U.S.A. Inc. of Camas,
Washington (collectively ‘‘Furuno’’);
Navico Holdings AS of Lysaker,
Norway, Navico UK, Ltd. of Romsey
Hampshire, United Kingdom, and
Navico, Inc. of Nashua, New Hampshire
(collectively ‘‘Navico’’); and Raymarine
UK Ltd. of Portsmouth, Hampshire,
United Kingdom; Raymarine Inc. of
Merrimack, New Hampshire; and FLIR
Systems, Inc. of Wilsonville, Oregon
(collectively ‘‘Raymarine’’).
On June 8, 2011, the Commission
determined not to review the ALJ’s IDs
terminating the investigation as to
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Furuno and Raymarine on the basis of
settlement agreements.
On November 28, 2011, AGNC and
Navico jointly moved to terminate the
investigation as to the Navico
respondents on the basis of a settlement
agreement. The Commission
investigative attorney supported the
motion. On December 6, 2011, the ALJ
granted the motion. Order No. 26.
Because the Navico parties are the last
remaining respondents, termination
against Navico results in termination of
the investigation.
No petitions for review of the ID were
filed. The Commission has determined
not to review the ID.
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 210.21 and 210.42 of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure (19 CFR 210.21, 210.42).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: December 30, 2011.
James R. Holbein,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012–14 Filed 1–5–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–795]
Certain Video Analytics Software,
Systems, Components Thereof, and
Products Containing Same;
Determination Not To Review an Initial
Determination Granting Motion To
Amend Complaint and Notice of
Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined not to
review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’)
(Order No. 16) of the presiding
administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’)
granting complainant’s motion to amend
complaint and notice of investigation.
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)
205–3106. 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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\06JAN1.SGM
06JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 4 / Friday, January 6, 2012 / Notices
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.
The
Commission instituted this investigation
on August 1, 2011, based on a complaint
filed by ObjectVideo, Inc. of Reston,
Virginia. 76 FR 45859 (Aug. 1, 2011).
The complaint, as amended, alleges
violations of section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930 (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 video analytics software,
systems, components thereof, and
products containing same by reason of
infringement of certain claims of U.S.
Patent Nos. 6,696,945; 6,970,083;
7,613,324; 7,424,175; 7,868,912; and
7,932,923. The complaint names Robert
Bosch GmbH of Stuttgart, Germany;
Bosch Security Systems, Inc. of
Fairpoint, New York; Samsung Techwin
Co., Ltd. of Seoul, Korea; Samsung
Opto-Electronics America, Inc. (d/b/a
Samsung Techwin America, Inc.) of
Ridgefield Park, New Jersey; Sony
Corporation of Tokyo, Japan; and Sony
Electronics, Inc., of San Diego,
California as respondents.
On December 6, 2011, the ALJ issued
an ID (Order No. 16) granting
complainant’s motion to amend
complaint and notice of investigation to
add Bosch Sicherheitssysteme GmbH of
Grasbrunn, Germany; Bosch Security
Systems B.V. of Eindhoven, The
Netherlands; Bosch Sicherheitssysteme
Engineering GmbH of Nurnberg,
Germany; Bosch Security Systems—
Sistemas de Seguranca, S.A. of Ovar,
Portugal; Bosch (Zhuhai) Security
Systems, Co., Ltd. of Zhuhai, China; and
Extreme CCTV, Inc. of Burnaby, Canada
as respondents. No party petitioned for
review of the ID, and the Commission
has determined not to review it.
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(h) of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR
210.42(h).
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
By order of the Commission.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:40 Jan 05, 2012
Jkt 226001
Issued: December 30, 2011.
James R. Holbein,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012–16 Filed 1–5–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of a Consent Decree
Under the Clean Water Act
Notice is hereby given that on
December 29, 2011, a proposed Consent
Decree in United States and State of
Indiana v. City of South Bend, Indiana,
Civil Action No. 3:11CV505 was lodged
with the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Indiana.
In this case, the United States and the
State of Indiana (Indiana) seek civil
penalties and injunctive relief for
violations of the Clean Water Act, 33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq., Title 13 of the
Indiana Code, Title 327 of the Indiana
Administrative Code, and certain terms
and conditions of National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System permits
that Indiana issued to the City of South
Bend (South Bend) for the relevant time
periods, related to alleged discharges of
untreated sewage from South Bend’s
combined sewer collection system, i.e.
‘‘combined sewer overflows,’’ during
wet weather events, and some dry
weather time periods, into ‘‘waters of
the United States’’ and ‘‘waters of the
state.’’
The proposed Consent Decree would
require South Bend to reduce its
combined sewer overflows by
comprehensively upgrading and
expanding its sewage collection, storage,
conveyance, and treatment system, at a
cost of approximately $509.5 million in
2007 dollars. South Bend must complete
these improvements by December 31,
2031 or, if South Bend demonstrates
financial hardship, by December 31,
2036. Additionally, the proposed Decree
requires South Bend to pay a total civil
penalty of $88,200 split equally between
the United States and the State of
Indiana.
The Department of Justice will receive
for a period of thirty (30) days from the
date of this publication comments
relating to the proposed Consent Decree.
Comments should be addressed to the
Assistant Attorney General,
Environment and Natural Resources
Division, and either emailed 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 United
States and State of Indiana v. City of
South Bend, Indiana, No. 3:11–CV–505
(N.D. Ind.), D.J. Ref. 90–5–1–1–08182.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
809
The proposed Consent Decree may be
examined at the Office of the United
States Attorney, Northern District of
Indiana, 5400 Federal Plaza, Suite 1500,
Hammond, IN 46320 (contact Assistant
United States Attorney Wayne Ault
(219) 937–5650)), and at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, IL 60604–3590 (contact
Associate Regional Counsel Gary
Prichard (312) 886–0570)).
During the public comment period,
the proposed Consent Decree also may
be examined on the following
Department of Justice Web site: https://
www.usdoj.gov/enrd/
Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the
proposed consent decree also may 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 ‘‘Consent Decree Copy’’
(EESCDCopy.ENRD@usdoj.gov), fax no.
(202) 514–0097, phone confirmation
number (202) 514–5271. In requesting a
copy from the Consent Decree Library,
please enclose a check in the amount of
$21.00 (25 cents per page reproduction
cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if
by email or fax, forward a check in that
amount to the Consent Decree Library at
the address given above.
Maureen Katz,
Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement
Section, Environment and Natural Resources
Division.
[FR Doc. 2012–41 Filed 1–5–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Office of Justice Programs
[OJP (NIJ) Docket No. 1578]
Request for Proposals for Certification
and Testing Expertise for the Ballistic
Resistance of Personal Body Armor
(2008) Standard
National Institute of Justice,
Department of Justice.
ACTION: Request for Proposals for
Certification and Testing Expertise.
AGENCY:
The National Institute of
Justice (NIJ) is in the process of revising
its Ballistic Resistance of Personal Body
Armor (2008) Standard and
corresponding certification program
requirements. This work will be
performed by a Special Technical
Committee (STC), comprised of
practitioners from the field, researchers,
testing experts, certification experts, and
representatives from stakeholder
organizations. It is anticipated that the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\06JAN1.SGM
06JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 4 (Friday, January 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 808-809]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-795]
Certain Video Analytics Software, Systems, Components Thereof,
and Products Containing Same; Determination Not To Review an Initial
Determination Granting Motion To Amend Complaint and Notice of
Investigation
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 initial determination
(``ID'') (Order No. 16) of the presiding administrative law judge
(``ALJ'') granting complainant's motion to amend complaint and notice
of investigation.
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) 205-3106. 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
[[Page 809]]
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 August 1, 2011, based on a complaint filed by ObjectVideo, Inc. of
Reston, Virginia. 76 FR 45859 (Aug. 1, 2011). The complaint, as
amended, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930
(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 video analytics software, systems, components
thereof, and products containing same by reason of infringement of
certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,696,945; 6,970,083; 7,613,324;
7,424,175; 7,868,912; and 7,932,923. The complaint names Robert Bosch
GmbH of Stuttgart, Germany; Bosch Security Systems, Inc. of Fairpoint,
New York; Samsung Techwin Co., Ltd. of Seoul, Korea; Samsung Opto-
Electronics America, Inc. (d/b/a Samsung Techwin America, Inc.) of
Ridgefield Park, New Jersey; Sony Corporation of Tokyo, Japan; and Sony
Electronics, Inc., of San Diego, California as respondents.
On December 6, 2011, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 16) granting
complainant's motion to amend complaint and notice of investigation to
add Bosch Sicherheitssysteme GmbH of Grasbrunn, Germany; Bosch Security
Systems B.V. of Eindhoven, The Netherlands; Bosch Sicherheitssysteme
Engineering GmbH of Nurnberg, Germany; Bosch Security Systems--Sistemas
de Seguranca, S.A. of Ovar, Portugal; Bosch (Zhuhai) Security Systems,
Co., Ltd. of Zhuhai, China; and Extreme CCTV, Inc. of Burnaby, Canada
as respondents. No party petitioned for review of the ID, and the
Commission has determined not to review it.
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(h) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.42(h).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: December 30, 2011.
James R. Holbein,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012-16 Filed 1-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P