Certain Integrated Circuits, Chipsets, and Products Containing Same Including Televisions; Commission Decision To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337; Termination of Investigation, 57589-57590 [2012-22943]

Download as PDF 57589 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 181 / Tuesday, September 18, 2012 / Notices landholdings total 40 acres or less are exempt from the requirement to submit RRA forms. Landholders who are ‘‘qualified recipients’’ have RRA forms submittal thresholds of 80 acres or 240 acres depending on the district’s RRA forms submittal threshold category where the land is held. Only farm operators who provide multiple services to more than 960 acres held in trusts or by legal entities are required to submit forms. II. Changes to the RRA Forms and Their Instructions The changes made to the currently approved RRA forms and the corresponding instructions are of a formatting or editorial nature, and are designed to assist the respondents by increasing their understanding of the forms, clarifying the instructions for completing the forms, and clarifying the information that is required to be on the forms. The proposed revisions to the RRA forms will be effective in the 2014 water year. III. Data OMB Control Number: 1006–0005. Title: Individual Landholder’s and Farm Operator’s Certification and Reporting Forms for Acreage Limitation, 43 CFR part 426 and 43 CFR part 428. Form Number: Form 7–2180, Form 7– 2180EZ, Form 7–2181, Form 7–2184, Form 7–2190, Form 7–2190EZ, Form 7– 2191, Form 7–2194, Form 7–21TRUST, Form 7–21PE, Form 7–21PE–IND, Form 7–21FARMOP, Form 7–21VERIFY, Burden estimate per form (in minutes) Form No. Form Form Form Form Form Form Form Form Form Form Form Form Form Form Form Form 7–21FC, Form 7–21XS, Form 7– 21XSINAQ, Form 7–21CONT–I, Form 7–21CONT–L, Form 7–21CONT–O, and Form 7–21INFO. Frequency: Annually. Respondents: Landholders and farm operators of certain lands in our projects, whose landholdings exceed specified RRA forms submittal thresholds. Estimated Annual Total Number of Respondents: 14,002. Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 1.02. Estimated Total Number of Annual Responses: 14,282. Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 10,467 hours. Estimated Completion Time per Respondent: See table below. Number of respondents Annual number of responses Annual burden on respondents (in hours) 7–2180 ................................................................................................... 7–2180EZ ............................................................................................... 7–2181 ................................................................................................... 7–2184 ................................................................................................... 7–2190 ................................................................................................... 7–2190EZ ............................................................................................... 7–2191 ................................................................................................... 7–2194 ................................................................................................... 7–21PE ................................................................................................... 7–21PE–IND .......................................................................................... 7–21TRUST ........................................................................................... 7–21VERIFY .......................................................................................... 7–21FC ................................................................................................... 7–21XS ................................................................................................... 7–21FARMOP ........................................................................................ 60 45 78 45 60 45 78 45 75 12 60 12 30 30 78 3,596 374 1,051 32 1,618 96 777 4 139 4 700 5,081 214 144 172 3,668 381 1,072 33 1,650 98 793 4 142 4 714 5,183 218 147 175 3,668 286 1,394 24 1,650 73 1,030 3 177 1 714 1,037 109 73 228 Totals ........................................................................................................ ........................ 14,002 14,282 10,467 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES IV. Request for Comments V. Public Disclosure We invite your comments on: (a) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of our functions, including whether the information will have practical use; (b) The accuracy of our burden estimate for the proposed collection of information; (c) Ways to enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) Ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. We will summarize all comments received regarding this notice. We will publish that summary in the Federal Register when the information collection request is submitted to OMB for review and approval. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:39 Sep 17, 2012 Jkt 226001 Dated: September 7, 2012. Roseann Gonzales, Director, Policy and Administration, Denver Office. [FR Doc. 2012–22936 Filed 9–17–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–MN–P PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–786] Certain Integrated Circuits, Chipsets, and Products Containing Same Including Televisions; Commission Decision To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337; Termination of Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to review in part the presiding administrative law judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) final initial determination (‘‘ID’’) issued on July 12, 2012, finding no violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337 in the above-captioned investigation. On review, the Commission affirms the ID’s SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\18SEN1.SGM 18SEN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 57590 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 181 / Tuesday, September 18, 2012 / Notices finding of no violation, and terminates the 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 this investigation on July 14, 2011, based on a complaint filed by Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. of Austin, Texas (‘‘Freescale’’). 76 FR 41521–2 (July 14, 2011). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,467,455 (‘‘the ’455 patent’’). The complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The Commission’s notice of investigation named Funai Electric Co., Ltd. of Osaka, Japan and Funai Corporation, Inc. of Rutherford, New Jersey (collectively ‘‘Funai’’); MediaTek Inc. of Hsinchu City, Taiwan (‘‘MediaTek’’); and Zoran Corporation of Sunnyvale, California (‘‘Zoran’’) as respondents. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was named as a party. On May 25, 2012, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 27) terminating the investigation as to Funai on the basis of a consent order. Notice (May 25, 2012). On May 29, 2012, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 31) terminating the investigation as to certain Zoran products and certain MediaTek products. Notice (May 29, 2012). On July 12, 2012, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding no violation of section 337 as to the ’455 patent. The ID included the ALJ’s recommended determination (‘‘RD’’) on remedy and bonding. In particular, the ALJ found that claims 9 and 10 of the ’455 patent are not invalid pursuant to 35 U.S.C. VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:23 Sep 17, 2012 Jkt 226001 102, but that they are invalid pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 103. The ALJ further found that those Zoran products that were adjudicated in Integrated Circuits I are precluded under the doctrine of issue preclusion. The ALJ also found that certain of the accused Zoran products remaining in the investigation infringe claims 9 and 10 of the ’455 patent, but that the accused MediaTek products do not infringe claims 9 and 10 of the ’455 patent. The ALJ further found that Freescale has failed to satisfy the domestic industry requirement with respect to the ’455 patent. The ALJ’s RD recommended a limited exclusion order barring entry of Zoran’s and MediaTek’s infringing integrated circuits, chipsets, and products containing same including televisions. Freescale did not request, and the ALJ did not recommend, issuance of a cease and desist order against Zoran. The ALJ also recommended that respondents be required to post no bond for the importation of products found to infringe during the period of Presidential review. On July 24, 2012, Freescale filed a petition for review of certain aspects of the final ID’s findings concerning infringement, validity, and domestic industry, and preclusion. Also on July 25, 2012, the IA timely filed a petition for review of certain aspect of the final ID’s findings concerning claim construction. Further on July 24, 2012, Zoran and MediaTek contingently petitioned for review of certain aspects of the final ID’s findings concerning claim construction, infringement, domestic industry, and preclusion. No post-RD statements on the public interest pursuant to Commission Rule 201.50(a)(4) or in response to the postRD Commission Notice issued on July 16, 2012, were filed. See 77 FR 42764 (July 20, 2012). Having examined the record of this investigation, including the ALJ’s final ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto, the Commission has determined to review the final ID in part. Specifically, the Commission has determined to review, and on review, reverses the ALJ’s finding that Japanese Patent Application JP H05–83113–A to Kuboki (‘‘Kuboki’’) discloses the limitation ‘‘[a] data processor within an integrated circuit package comprising: * * * a plurality of bus termination circuits’’ of claim 9 of the ’455 patent. The Commission has also determined to review, and on review, affirms with modification the ID’s finding that Kuboki in combination with the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art renders obvious claims 9 and 10 of the ’455 patent. The Commission has PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 further determined to review the ID’s finding that the Kuboki reference in combination with U.S. Patent No. 5,479,123 to Gist (‘‘Gist’’) renders obvious claims 9 and 10, and on review, finds that the Kuboki reference in combination with Gist and the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art renders obvious claims 9 and 10 of the ’455 patent. The Commission has also determined to review the ID’s finding that Freescale failed to establish the existence of a domestic industry based on its licensing activities, and on review, affirms the ID’s finding with modification. The Commission has further determined to review the ID’s finding that Freescale has failed to show that the Accused Zoran Hybrid Termination Circuits infringe claims 9 and 10 of the ’455 patent and on review, affirms the ID’s finding with modification. The Commission has determined not to review the remaining issues decided in the ID. A Commission opinion will issue shortly. 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 and 210.50 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42–46 and 210.50). By order of the Commission. Issued: September 12, 2012. Lisa R. Barton, Acting Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2012–22943 Filed 9–17–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives [OMB Number 1140–0001] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comments Requested: ATF Distribution Center Survey 60-Day notice of information collection under review. ACTION: The Department of Justice (DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. Comments E:\FR\FM\18SEN1.SGM 18SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57589-57590]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-22943]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-786]


Certain Integrated Circuits, Chipsets, and Products Containing 
Same Including Televisions; Commission Decision To Review in Part a 
Final Initial Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337; 
Termination of Investigation

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 the presiding 
administrative law judge's (``ALJ'') final initial determination 
(``ID'') issued on July 12, 2012, finding no violation of section 337 
of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337 in the above-captioned 
investigation. On review, the Commission affirms the ID's

[[Page 57590]]

finding of no violation, and terminates the 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 this investigation 
on July 14, 2011, based on a complaint filed by Freescale 
Semiconductor, Inc. of Austin, Texas (``Freescale''). 76 FR 41521-2 
(July 14, 2011). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, by reason of 
infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,467,455 (``the '455 
patent''). The complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic 
industry. The Commission's notice of investigation named Funai Electric 
Co., Ltd. of Osaka, Japan and Funai Corporation, Inc. of Rutherford, 
New Jersey (collectively ``Funai''); MediaTek Inc. of Hsinchu City, 
Taiwan (``MediaTek''); and Zoran Corporation of Sunnyvale, California 
(``Zoran'') as respondents. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations 
was named as a party. On May 25, 2012, the Commission determined not to 
review an ID (Order No. 27) terminating the investigation as to Funai 
on the basis of a consent order. Notice (May 25, 2012). On May 29, 
2012, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 31) 
terminating the investigation as to certain Zoran products and certain 
MediaTek products. Notice (May 29, 2012).
    On July 12, 2012, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding no violation 
of section 337 as to the '455 patent. The ID included the ALJ's 
recommended determination (``RD'') on remedy and bonding. In 
particular, the ALJ found that claims 9 and 10 of the '455 patent are 
not invalid pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102, but that they are invalid 
pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 103. The ALJ further found that those Zoran 
products that were adjudicated in Integrated Circuits I are precluded 
under the doctrine of issue preclusion. The ALJ also found that certain 
of the accused Zoran products remaining in the investigation infringe 
claims 9 and 10 of the '455 patent, but that the accused MediaTek 
products do not infringe claims 9 and 10 of the '455 patent. The ALJ 
further found that Freescale has failed to satisfy the domestic 
industry requirement with respect to the '455 patent. The ALJ's RD 
recommended a limited exclusion order barring entry of Zoran's and 
MediaTek's infringing integrated circuits, chipsets, and products 
containing same including televisions. Freescale did not request, and 
the ALJ did not recommend, issuance of a cease and desist order against 
Zoran. The ALJ also recommended that respondents be required to post no 
bond for the importation of products found to infringe during the 
period of Presidential review.
    On July 24, 2012, Freescale filed a petition for review of certain 
aspects of the final ID's findings concerning infringement, validity, 
and domestic industry, and preclusion. Also on July 25, 2012, the IA 
timely filed a petition for review of certain aspect of the final ID's 
findings concerning claim construction. Further on July 24, 2012, Zoran 
and MediaTek contingently petitioned for review of certain aspects of 
the final ID's findings concerning claim construction, infringement, 
domestic industry, and preclusion. No post-RD statements on the public 
interest pursuant to Commission Rule 201.50(a)(4) or in response to the 
post-RD Commission Notice issued on July 16, 2012, were filed. See 77 
FR 42764 (July 20, 2012).
    Having examined the record of this investigation, including the 
ALJ's final ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto, 
the Commission has determined to review the final ID in part. 
Specifically, the Commission has determined to review, and on review, 
reverses the ALJ's finding that Japanese Patent Application JP H05-
83113-A to Kuboki (``Kuboki'') discloses the limitation ``[a] data 
processor within an integrated circuit package comprising: * * * a 
plurality of bus termination circuits'' of claim 9 of the '455 patent. 
The Commission has also determined to review, and on review, affirms 
with modification the ID's finding that Kuboki in combination with the 
knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art renders obvious claims 9 
and 10 of the '455 patent. The Commission has further determined to 
review the ID's finding that the Kuboki reference in combination with 
U.S. Patent No. 5,479,123 to Gist (``Gist'') renders obvious claims 9 
and 10, and on review, finds that the Kuboki reference in combination 
with Gist and the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the art renders 
obvious claims 9 and 10 of the '455 patent. The Commission has also 
determined to review the ID's finding that Freescale failed to 
establish the existence of a domestic industry based on its licensing 
activities, and on review, affirms the ID's finding with modification. 
The Commission has further determined to review the ID's finding that 
Freescale has failed to show that the Accused Zoran Hybrid Termination 
Circuits infringe claims 9 and 10 of the '455 patent and on review, 
affirms the ID's finding with modification.
    The Commission has determined not to review the remaining issues 
decided in the ID. A Commission opinion will issue shortly.
    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 and 210.50 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42-46 and 210.50).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: September 12, 2012.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012-22943 Filed 9-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P