Certain Electronic Devices, Including Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, and Tablet Computers; Investigations: Terminations, Modifications and Rulings, 16865-16867 [2013-06252]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 19, 2013 / Notices
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 OMB in your
comment to withhold your personal
identifying information from public
review, we cannot guarantee that it will
be done.
Dated: March 7, 2013.
Leslie Holland-Bartels,
USGS Regional Executive, Alaska Area.
[FR Doc. 2013–06268 Filed 3–18–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4311–AM–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLAZ910000.L12100000.
XP0000LXSS150A00006100.241A]
State of Arizona Resource Advisory
Council Meetings
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Public Meetings.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976 and the Federal Advisory
Committee Act of 1972, the U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Land Management (BLM), Arizona
Resource Advisory Council (RAC) will
meet in Phoenix, Arizona, as indicated
below.
DATES: The RAC will meet on April 30
for the Recreation and Communities
Working Group meeting from 1 to 5:00
p.m. and May 1 for the Business
meeting from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at
the BLM National Training Center
located at 9828 North 31st Avenue,
Phoenix, Arizona 85051.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dorothea Boothe, Arizona RAC
Coordinator at the Bureau of Land
Management, Arizona State Office, One
North Central Avenue, Suite 800,
Phoenix, Arizona 85004–4427, 602–
417–9504. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339
to contact the above individual during
normal business hours. The FIRS is
available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week,
to leave a message or question with the
above individual. You will receive a
reply during normal business hours.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 15member Council advises the Secretary
of the Interior, through the BLM, on a
variety of planning and management
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 Mar 18, 2013
Jkt 229001
issues associated with public land
management in Arizona. Planned
agenda items include: A welcome and
introduction of Council members; BLM
State Director’s update on BLM
programs and issues; updates on the
Kaibab Vermilion Cliffs Heritage
Alliance Archeological Program;
Introduction to Partnership Initiative
and the Sonoran Landscape Pilot—
Recreational Target Shooting; report by
the Recreation and Communities
Working Group; Recreation RAC
recommendations to the U.S. Forest
Service Supervisor on the 9th Circuit
Court Mount Lemmon Settlement
Agreement; RAC questions on BLM
District Managers’ Reports; and other
items of interest to the RAC. Members
of the public are welcome to attend the
Working Group and Business meetings.
A public comment period is scheduled
on the day of the Business meeting from
11 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. and again from
1:30 p.m. to 2 p.m. during the
Recreation RAC Session for any
interested members of the public who
wish to address the Council on BLM or
Forest Service recreation fee programs
and business. Depending on the number
of persons wishing to speak and time
available, the time for individual
comments may be limited. Written
comments may also be submitted during
the meeting for the RAC’s or the
Recreation Resource Advisory Council’s
(RRAC) consideration. Final meeting
agendas will be available two weeks
prior to the meetings and posted on the
BLM Web site at: https://www.blm.gov/
az/st/en/res/rac.html. Individuals who
need special assistance, such as sign
language interpretation or other
reasonable accommodations, should
contact the RAC Coordinator listed
above no later than two weeks before
the start of the meeting. Under the
Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement
Act, the RAC has been designated as the
RRAC and has the authority to review
all BLM and Forest Service recreation
fee proposals in Arizona. The RRAC
will not review any recreation fee
proposals at this meeting.
Deborah K. Rawhouser,
Associate State Director.
[FR Doc. 2013–06197 Filed 3–18–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–32–P
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16865
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–794]
Certain Electronic Devices, Including
Wireless Communication Devices,
Portable Music and Data Processing
Devices, and Tablet Computers;
Investigations: Terminations,
Modifications and Rulings
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to extend
the target date for completion of the
investigation until May 31, 2013. The
Commission requests additional written
submissions from the parties and from
the public on the issues indicated in
this notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Clark S. Cheney, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202–
205–2661. 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 (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 Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of
Seoul, Republic of Korea, and Samsung
Telecommunications America, LLC of
Richardson, Texas (collectively,
‘‘Samsung’’). 76 FR 45860 (Aug. 1,
2011). The complaint 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
wireless communication devices,
portable music and data processing
devices, and tablet computers, by reason
of infringement of various patents,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
16866
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 19, 2013 / Notices
including U.S. Patent Nos. 7,706,348
(‘‘the ’348 patent’’), 7,486,644 (‘‘the ’644
patent’’), 7,450,114 (‘‘the ’114 patent’’),
and 6,771,980 (‘‘the ’980 patent’’). The
notice of investigation names Apple Inc.
of Cupertino, California (‘‘Apple’’), as
the only respondent.
On September 14, 2012, the presiding
administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) issued
his final initial determination (‘‘ID’’) in
this investigation finding no violation of
section 337. The ALJ determined that
the ’348, ’644, and ’980 patents are valid
but not infringed and that the ’114
patent is both invalid and not infringed.
The ALJ further determined that the
economic prong of the domestic
industry requirement is satisfied for all
four patents at issue, but that the
technical prong is not satisfied for any
of the asserted patents.
On November 19, 2012, the
Commission determined to review the
ID in its entirety and issued a notice
requesting written submissions from the
parties and from the public on certain
patent issues, on the assertion of
FRAND-encumbered patents at the
Commission, and on the issues of
remedy, the public interest, and
bonding. 77 FR 70464. The Commission
received written submissions from the
parties and from the public in response
to the notice.
The Commission has determined to
seek additional information on the
potential effect on the public interest, as
identified in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1) and
(f)(1), if the Commission were to order
remedies against articles alleged by
Samsung to infringe claims 75, 76, and
82–84 of the ’348 patent. (A dissenting
memorandum from Commissioner
Aranoff can be found on EDIS under
Inv. No. 337–TA–794.) Parties to the
investigation, interested government
agencies, the Office of Unfair Import
Investigations, and any other interested
persons are encouraged to file written
submissions on the following issues,
with reference to the applicable law, the
existing evidentiary record, and if
necessary, additional sworn testimony
or expert declarations:
1. How would remedial orders barring
the entry and further distribution of the
Apple articles alleged to infringe the
asserted claims of the ’348 patent affect
the public interest, as identified in 19
U.S.C. 1337(d)(1) and (f)(1)? The
Commission is particularly interested in
the effect on the public interest with
respect to (a) the percentage of the total
number of imported mobile telephone
handsets that would be affected by such
orders, (b) the percentage of the total
number of imported cellular-networkenabled tablets that would be affected
by such orders, and (c) the qualitative
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 Mar 18, 2013
Jkt 229001
impact of exclusion of such handsets
and tablets. The Commission is also
interested in any other relevant market
information bearing on the four
statutory public interest factors. In
addressing these issues, the Commission
requests that submitters avoid
discussing issues related to standardssetting organizations, as the record
concerning those issues has been well
developed.
2. What third, fourth, and later
generation products (if any) are
currently available in the U.S. market
that are authorized by Samsung to
utilize the technology covered by the
asserted claims of the ’348 patent? Are
these products acceptable substitutes for
the accused iPhones and iPads and are
they widely viewed to be acceptable
substitutes for the accused iPhones and
iPads?
3. In what ways, if any, should a
remedy with respect to infringement of
the ’348 patent be specifically tailored
to avoid harm to the public interest, as
identified in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1) and
(f)(1)? In addressing this issue, the
Commission requests that submitters
avoid discussing issues related to
standards-setting organizations, as the
record concerning those issues has been
well developed.
In addition to the foregoing, the
parties to the investigation are requested
to brief their positions on the following
issues, with reference to the applicable
law, the existing evidentiary record, and
if necessary, additional sworn testimony
or expert declarations:
4. With respect to the ’348 patent,
Samsung’s infringement case before the
Commission relied upon accused third
and fourth generation Apple products
that operate on the AT&T wireless
network. If the Commission were to
issue remedial orders covering articles
covered by the asserted claims of the
’348 patent, would such an order cover
(a) Apple products that operate on other
wireless networks in the United States,
and (b) later generation Apple products
(e.g., iPhone 5, later iPad versions)?
5. Please summarize the history to
date of negotiations between Samsung
and Apple concerning any potential
license to the ’348 patent, either alone
or in conjunction with other patents.
Please provide copies of all written
offers and counteroffers concerning a
license that would cover the ’348 patent,
whether made by Samsung or Apple.
6. Please summarize all licenses to the
’348 patent granted by Samsung to any
entity. Please provide copies of, or cite
to their location in the record of this
investigation, all agreements wherein
Samsung grants any entity a license to
the ’348 patent.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7. Samsung and Apple are each
requested to submit specific licensing
terms for the ’348 patent that each
believes are fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory. Would Samsung’s terms
change if the Commission were to enter
remedial orders against Apple’s
products accused in this investigation?
If so, please explain whether such an
offer would be fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory.
8. Which factors in Georgia-Pacific
Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.,
318 F. Supp. 1116 (S.D.N.Y. 1970) are
most relevant to determining whether
Samsung has offered to license the ’348
patent to Apple on fair, reasonable, and
non-discriminatory terms? Please apply
any relevant Georgia-Pacific factors to
Samsung’s offer(s) to license the ’348
patent to Apple. This analysis should
include a comparison of Samsung’s
licensing offers to a hypothetical
negotiation between the parties prior to
adoption of the ’348 patent into the
standard at issue here. What other
factors, if any, are relevant in
determining whether Samsung has
made a fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory offer?
The Commission has invited briefing
on only the discrete issues enumerated
above. Other issues on review are
adequately presented in existing filings.
Written Submissions: Written
submissions in response to this notice
must be filed no later than close of
business on April 3, 2013. Initial
submissions, not including any
attachments, expert declarations, or
exhibits, are limited to 50 pages for
parties and 25 pages for non-parties.
Reply submissions must be filed no later
than the close of business on April 10,
2013. Reply submissions, not including
any attachments, expert declarations, or
exhibits, are limited to 35 pages for
parties and 20 pages for non-parties. No
further submissions on these issues will
be permitted unless otherwise ordered
by the Commission.
Persons filing written submissions
must file the original document
electronically on or before the deadlines
stated above and submit 8 true paper
copies to the Office of the Secretary by
noon the next day pursuant to section
210.4(f) of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure (19 CFR
210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to
the investigation number (‘‘Inv. No.
337–TA–794’’) in a prominent place on
the cover page and/or the first page. (See
Handbook for Electronic Filing
Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/
secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/
handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf).
Persons with questions regarding filing
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 53 / Tuesday, March 19, 2013 / Notices
should contact the Secretary (202–205–
2000).
Any person desiring to submit a
document to the Commission in
confidence must request confidential
treatment. All such requests should be
directed to the Secretary to the
Commission and must include a full
statement of the reasons why the
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. A redacted nonconfidential version of the document
must also be filed simultaneously with
the any confidential filing. All nonconfidential written submissions will be
available for public inspection at the
Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.
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 Part
210 of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part
210).
Issued: March 13, 2013.
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013–06252 Filed 3–18–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
[OMB Number 1121–0270]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Extension of a Currently
Approved Collection; Comments
Requested: Bureau of Justice
Assistance Application Form:
Southwest Border Prosecution
Initiative
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ACTION:
30-Day notice.
The Department of Justice (DOJ),
Office of Justice Programs (OJP) 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 collection information is
published to obtain comments from the
public and affected agencies. This
proposed information collection was
previously published in the Federal
Register, Volume 78, Number 9, page
2692, on January 14, 2013, allowing for
a 60-day comment period.
The purpose of this notice is to allow
for an additional 30 days for public
comment untilApril 18, 2013.
This process is conducted in
accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:00 Mar 18, 2013
Jkt 229001
Written comments and/or suggestions
regarding the item(s) contained in this
notice, especially regarding the
estimated public burden and associated
response time, should be directed to the
Office of Management and Budget,
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Attention: Department of Justice
Desk Officer, Washington, DC 20530.
Additionally, comments may be
submitted to OMB via facsimile to (202)
395–7285. Comments may also be
submitted to M. Berry, Bureau of Justice
Assistance, Office of Justice Programs,
U.S. Department of Justice, 810 7th
Street NW., Washington, DC, 20531 via
email at M.A.Berry@ojp.usdoj.gov or by
facsimile at (202) 305–1367.
Written comments and/or suggestions
from the public and affected agencies
concerning the proposed collection of
information should address one or more
of the following four points:
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
function of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including through the
use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology,
e.g., permitting electronic submission of
responses.
Overview of This information
(1) Type of information collection:
(2) The title of the form/collection:
Bureau of Justice Assistance
Application Form for the Southwest
Border Prosecution Initiative.
(3) The agency form number, if any
and the applicable component of the
Department sponsoring the collection:
None.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: State, Local or Tribal
government.
Other: None.
Abstract: The Southwest Border
Prosecutor Initiative was enacted in FY
2002 to reimburse state, county, parish,
or municipal governments for the costs
associated with the prosecution of
criminal cases declined by local U.S.
Attorneys. Each year, hundreds of
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16867
criminal cases resulting from federal
arrests are referred to local prosecutors
to handle when the cases fall below
certain monetary, quantity, or severity
thresholds. This places additional
burdens on local government resources
that are already stretched by the
demands of prosecuting violations of
local and state laws. This program
provides funds to eligible jurisdictions
in the four Southwest Border States,
using a uniform payment-per-case basis
for qualifying federally initiated and
declined-referred criminal cases that
were disposed of after October 1, 2001.
Up to 220 eligible jurisdictions may
apply. This includes county
governments and the four state
governments in Arizona, California,
New Mexico, and Texas.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond/reply: It is estimated that no
more than 220 respondents will apply.
Each application takes approximately 60
minutes to complete and is submitted 4
times per year (quarterly).
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The total hour burden to
complete the applications is 880 hours
(880 applications (220 × 4 times a year)
× 60 minutes per application = 52,800/
60 minutes per hour = 880 burden
hours).
If additional information is required
contact: Jerri Murray, Department
Clearance Officer, U.S. Department of
Justice, Justice Management Division,
Policy and Planning Staff, 145 N Street
NE., Room 3W–1407B, Washington, DC
20530.
Dated: March 14, 2013.
Jerri Murray,
Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S.
Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 2013–06286 Filed 3–18–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–18–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
[Docket No. OTJ 105]
Solicitation of Comments on Request
for United States Assumption of
Concurrent Federal Criminal
Jurisdiction; Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe
Office of Tribal Justice,
Department of Justice.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice solicits public
comments on the Request for United
States Assumption of Concurrent
Federal Criminal Jurisdiction recently
submitted to the Office of Tribal Justice,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19MRN1.SGM
19MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 53 (Tuesday, March 19, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16865-16867]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06252]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-794]
Certain Electronic Devices, Including Wireless Communication
Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, and Tablet
Computers; Investigations: Terminations, Modifications and Rulings
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to extend the target date for completion of
the investigation until May 31, 2013. The Commission requests
additional written submissions from the parties and from the public on
the issues indicated in this notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clark S. Cheney, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-2661. 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 (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 Samsung Electronics
Co., Ltd. of Seoul, Republic of Korea, and Samsung Telecommunications
America, LLC of Richardson, Texas (collectively, ``Samsung''). 76 FR
45860 (Aug. 1, 2011). The complaint 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 wireless communication devices, portable music and
data processing devices, and tablet computers, by reason of
infringement of various patents,
[[Page 16866]]
including U.S. Patent Nos. 7,706,348 (``the '348 patent''), 7,486,644
(``the '644 patent''), 7,450,114 (``the '114 patent''), and 6,771,980
(``the '980 patent''). The notice of investigation names Apple Inc. of
Cupertino, California (``Apple''), as the only respondent.
On September 14, 2012, the presiding administrative law judge
(``ALJ'') issued his final initial determination (``ID'') in this
investigation finding no violation of section 337. The ALJ determined
that the '348, '644, and '980 patents are valid but not infringed and
that the '114 patent is both invalid and not infringed. The ALJ further
determined that the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement
is satisfied for all four patents at issue, but that the technical
prong is not satisfied for any of the asserted patents.
On November 19, 2012, the Commission determined to review the ID in
its entirety and issued a notice requesting written submissions from
the parties and from the public on certain patent issues, on the
assertion of FRAND-encumbered patents at the Commission, and on the
issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. 77 FR 70464. The
Commission received written submissions from the parties and from the
public in response to the notice.
The Commission has determined to seek additional information on the
potential effect on the public interest, as identified in 19 U.S.C.
1337(d)(1) and (f)(1), if the Commission were to order remedies against
articles alleged by Samsung to infringe claims 75, 76, and 82-84 of the
'348 patent. (A dissenting memorandum from Commissioner Aranoff can be
found on EDIS under Inv. No. 337-TA-794.) Parties to the investigation,
interested government agencies, the Office of Unfair Import
Investigations, and any other interested persons are encouraged to file
written submissions on the following issues, with reference to the
applicable law, the existing evidentiary record, and if necessary,
additional sworn testimony or expert declarations:
1. How would remedial orders barring the entry and further
distribution of the Apple articles alleged to infringe the asserted
claims of the '348 patent affect the public interest, as identified in
19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1) and (f)(1)? The Commission is particularly
interested in the effect on the public interest with respect to (a) the
percentage of the total number of imported mobile telephone handsets
that would be affected by such orders, (b) the percentage of the total
number of imported cellular-network-enabled tablets that would be
affected by such orders, and (c) the qualitative impact of exclusion of
such handsets and tablets. The Commission is also interested in any
other relevant market information bearing on the four statutory public
interest factors. In addressing these issues, the Commission requests
that submitters avoid discussing issues related to standards-setting
organizations, as the record concerning those issues has been well
developed.
2. What third, fourth, and later generation products (if any) are
currently available in the U.S. market that are authorized by Samsung
to utilize the technology covered by the asserted claims of the '348
patent? Are these products acceptable substitutes for the accused
iPhones and iPads and are they widely viewed to be acceptable
substitutes for the accused iPhones and iPads?
3. In what ways, if any, should a remedy with respect to
infringement of the '348 patent be specifically tailored to avoid harm
to the public interest, as identified in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1) and
(f)(1)? In addressing this issue, the Commission requests that
submitters avoid discussing issues related to standards-setting
organizations, as the record concerning those issues has been well
developed.
In addition to the foregoing, the parties to the investigation are
requested to brief their positions on the following issues, with
reference to the applicable law, the existing evidentiary record, and
if necessary, additional sworn testimony or expert declarations:
4. With respect to the '348 patent, Samsung's infringement case
before the Commission relied upon accused third and fourth generation
Apple products that operate on the AT&T wireless network. If the
Commission were to issue remedial orders covering articles covered by
the asserted claims of the '348 patent, would such an order cover (a)
Apple products that operate on other wireless networks in the United
States, and (b) later generation Apple products (e.g., iPhone 5, later
iPad versions)?
5. Please summarize the history to date of negotiations between
Samsung and Apple concerning any potential license to the '348 patent,
either alone or in conjunction with other patents. Please provide
copies of all written offers and counteroffers concerning a license
that would cover the '348 patent, whether made by Samsung or Apple.
6. Please summarize all licenses to the '348 patent granted by
Samsung to any entity. Please provide copies of, or cite to their
location in the record of this investigation, all agreements wherein
Samsung grants any entity a license to the '348 patent.
7. Samsung and Apple are each requested to submit specific
licensing terms for the '348 patent that each believes are fair,
reasonable, and non-discriminatory. Would Samsung's terms change if the
Commission were to enter remedial orders against Apple's products
accused in this investigation? If so, please explain whether such an
offer would be fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory.
8. Which factors in Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood
Corp., 318 F. Supp. 1116 (S.D.N.Y. 1970) are most relevant to
determining whether Samsung has offered to license the '348 patent to
Apple on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms? Please apply
any relevant Georgia-Pacific factors to Samsung's offer(s) to license
the '348 patent to Apple. This analysis should include a comparison of
Samsung's licensing offers to a hypothetical negotiation between the
parties prior to adoption of the '348 patent into the standard at issue
here. What other factors, if any, are relevant in determining whether
Samsung has made a fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory offer?
The Commission has invited briefing on only the discrete issues
enumerated above. Other issues on review are adequately presented in
existing filings.
Written Submissions: Written submissions in response to this notice
must be filed no later than close of business on April 3, 2013. Initial
submissions, not including any attachments, expert declarations, or
exhibits, are limited to 50 pages for parties and 25 pages for non-
parties. Reply submissions must be filed no later than the close of
business on April 10, 2013. Reply submissions, not including any
attachments, expert declarations, or exhibits, are limited to 35 pages
for parties and 20 pages for non-parties. No further submissions on
these issues will be permitted unless otherwise ordered by the
Commission.
Persons filing written submissions must file the original document
electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit 8
true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day
pursuant to section 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the
investigation number (``Inv. No. 337-TA-794'') in a prominent place on
the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic
Filing Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf). Persons with questions
regarding filing
[[Page 16867]]
should contact the Secretary (202-205-2000).
Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in
confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests
should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include
a full statement of the reasons why the 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. A
redacted non-confidential version of the document must also be filed
simultaneously with the any confidential filing. All non-confidential
written submissions will be available for public inspection at the
Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.
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 Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR
part 210).
Issued: March 13, 2013.
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013-06252 Filed 3-18-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P