Certain Windshield Wiper Devices and Components Thereof; Notice of Institution of Investigation, 35050-35051 [2013-13745]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
35050
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Notices
This notice provides the public with
60 days in which to comment on the
following information collection
activity:
Title: 30 CFR 822—Special Permanent
Program Performance Standards—
Operations in Alluvial Valley Floors.
OMB Control Number: 1029–0049.
Summary: Sections 510(b)(5) and
515(b)(10)(F) of the Surface Coal Mining
and Reclamation Act of 1977 (the Act)
protect alluvial valley floors from the
adverse effects of surface coal mining
operations west of the 100th meridian.
Part 822 requires the permittee to
install, maintain, and operate a
monitoring system in order to provide
specific protection for alluvial valley
floors. This information is necessary to
determine whether the unique
hydrologic conditions of alluvial valley
floors are protected according to the
Act.
Bureau Form Number: None.
Frequency of Collection: Annually.
Description of Respondents: 21 coal
mining operators who operate on
alluvial valley floors and 4 State
regulatory authorities.
Total Annual Responses: 25.
Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,750.
Total Annual Non-wage Costs: $0.
Dated: June 4, 2013.
Andrew F. DeVito,
Chief, Division of Regulatory Support.
[FR Doc. 2013–13784 Filed 6–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–881]
Certain Windshield Wiper Devices and
Components Thereof; Notice of
Institution of Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a
complaint was filed with the U.S.
International Trade Commission on May
9, 2013, under section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C.
1337, on behalf of Federal-Mogul
Corporation of Southfield, Michigan and
Federal-Mogul S.A. of Belgium. Letters
supplementing the Complaint were filed
on May 21, 2013 and May 30, 2013. The
complaint alleges violations of section
337 based upon the importation into the
United States, the sale for importation,
and the sale within the United States
after importation of certain windshield
wiper devices and components thereof
by reason of infringement of U.S. Patent
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:13 Jun 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
No. 8,347,449 (‘‘the ’449 patent’’). The
complaint further alleges that an
industry in the United States exists as
required by subsection (a)(2) of section
337.
The complainants request that the
Commission institute an investigation
and, after the investigation, issue an
exclusion order and cease and desist
orders.
The complaint, except for
any confidential information contained
therein, is 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., Room
112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone
(202) 205–2000. Hearing impaired
individuals are advised that information
on this matter can be obtained by
contacting the Commission’s TDD
terminal on (202) 205–1810. Persons
with mobility impairments who will
need special assistance in gaining access
to the Commission should contact the
Office of the Secretary at (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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Office of Unfair Import Investigations,
U.S. International Trade Commission,
telephone (202) 205–2560.
Authority: The authority for
institution of this investigation is
contained in section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended, and in section
210.10 of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10
(2012).
Scope of Investigation: Having
considered the complaint, the U.S.
International Trade Commission, on
June 4, 2013, ordered that—
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, an investigation be instituted
to determine whether there is a
violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of
section 337 in the importation into the
United States, the sale for importation,
or the sale within the United States after
importation of certain windshield wiper
devices and components thereof by
reason of infringement of one or more of
claims 1–14 of the ’449 patent, and
whether an industry in the United
States exists as required by subsection
(a)(2) of section 337;
(2) For the purpose of the
investigation so instituted, the following
are hereby named as parties upon which
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
this notice of investigation shall be
served:
(a) The complainants are:
Federal-Mogul Corporation,
26555 Northwestern Highway,
Southfield, MI 48033.
Federal-Mogul S.A.,
Avenue Champion 1,
6790 Aubange,
Belgium.
(b) The respondents are the following
entities alleged to be in violation of
section 337, and are the parties upon
which the complaint is to be served:
Trico Corporation,
3255 West Hamlin Road,
Rochester Hills, MI 48309.
Trico Products,
1995 Billy Mitchell Boulevard,
Brownsville, TX 78521.
Trico Components,
SA de CV,
Ave Michigan #200,
Matamoros, Tamaulipas,
Mexico.
(c) The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW., Suite
401, Washington, DC 20436; and
(3) For the investigation so instituted,
the Chief Administrative Law Judge,
U.S. International Trade Commission,
shall designate the presiding
Administrative Law Judge.
Responses to the complaint and the
notice of investigation must be
submitted by the named respondents in
accordance with section 210.13 of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to
19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such
responses will be considered by the
Commission if received not later than 20
days after the date of service by the
Commission of the complaint and the
notice of investigation. Extensions of
time for submitting responses to the
complaint and the notice of
investigation will not be granted unless
good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of a respondent to file a timely
response to each allegation in the
complaint and in this notice may be
deemed to constitute a waiver of the
right to appear and contest the
allegations of the complaint and this
notice, and to authorize the
administrative law judge and the
Commission, without further notice to
the respondent, to find the facts to be as
alleged in the complaint and this notice
and to enter an initial determination
and a final determination containing
such findings, and may result in the
issuance of an exclusion order or a cease
and desist order or both directed against
the respondent.
Issued: June 5, 2013.
E:\FR\FM\11JNN1.SGM
11JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 11, 2013 / Notices
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013–13745 Filed 6–10–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–501]
Certain Encapsulated Integrated
Circuit Devices and Products
Containing Same; Commission
Determination To Request Briefing and
Set a Schedule for Filing Written
Submissions on the Issues of
Economic Prong of the Domestic
Industry Requirement, and Remedy,
the Public Interest, and Bonding
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to request
briefing on the economic prong of the
domestic industry requirement, and on
remedy, bonding and the public interest
in the above-captioned 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)
205–3115. 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: The
Commission instituted this investigation
under section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on December 19,
2003, based on a complaint filed by
Amkor Technology Inc. (‘‘Amkor’’). See
68 FR 70836 (Dec. 19, 2003). Amkor
alleged a violation of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19
U.S.C. 1337), by respondents Carsem
(M) Sdn Bhd; Carsem Semiconductor
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:13 Jun 10, 2013
Jkt 229001
Sdn Bhd; and Carsem, Inc. (collectively,
‘‘Carsem,’’ or respondents) in the
importation, sale for importation, and
sale within the United States after
importation of certain encapsulated
integrated circuit devices and products
containing same in connection with
claims 1–4, 7, 17, 18 and 20–23 of U.S.
Patent No. 6,433,277 (‘‘the ‘277 patent’’);
claims 1–4, 7 and 8 of U.S. Patent No.
6,630,728 (‘‘the ‘728 patent’’); and
claims 1, 2, 13 and 14 of U.S. Patent No.
6,455,356 (‘‘the ‘356 patent’’).
On November 18, 2004, the ALJ
issued a final initial determination
(‘‘Final ID’’) finding no violation of
section 337. After reviewing the Final ID
in its entirety, the Commission on
March 31, 2005, modified the ALJ’s
claim construction and remanded the
investigation to the ALJ with
instructions ‘‘to conduct further
proceedings and make any new findings
or changes to his original findings that
are necessitated by the Commission’s
new claim construction.’’ Commission
Order ¶ 8 (March 31, 2005). On
November 9, 2005, the ALJ issued a
remand initial determination (‘‘Remand
ID’’). The Remand ID made certain
findings as to the remanded issues.
Specifically, with respect to the issue of
infringement, the Remand ID found that
(1) claims 1–4, 7, 17, 18 and 20–23 of
the ‘277 patent are infringed by some or
all of Carsem’s accused imported
‘‘Micro Leadframe Packages’’ (‘‘MLPs’’)
products; (2) claims 1, 2 and 7 of the
‘728 patent are infringed by some or all
of Carsem’s accused imported MLP
products; and (3) claims 1, 2, 13 and 14
of the ‘356 patent are not infringed by
any of Carsem’s accused imported MLP
products. Furthermore, with respect to
the issue of validity, the Remand ID
found that claims 1, 7, 17, 18 and 20 of
the ‘277 patent are invalid under 35
U.S.C. 102(b) as anticipated by certain
prior art references, but claims 2–4 and
21–23 of the ‘277 patent are not; (2)
claims 1–4, 7 and 8 of the ‘728 patent
are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as
anticipated by certain prior art
references; (3) claims 1, 2, 13 and 14 of
the ’356 patent are not invalid under 35
U.S.C. 102(b) as anticipated by certain
prior art references; (4) claim 1 of the
‘277 patent is invalid under 35 U.S.C.
103(a) as obvious in view of a
combination of certain prior art
references; (5) claims 2–4, 7, 17, 18 and
20–23 of the ‘277 patent are not invalid
under 35 U.S.C. 103(a); (6) claims 3, 4
and 8 of the ‘728 patent are invalid
under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as obvious in
view of a combination of certain prior
art references; (7) claims 1, 2 and 7 of
the ‘728 patent are not invalid under 35
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
35051
U.S.C. 103(a); and (8) claims 1, 2, 13 and
14 of the ‘356 patent are not invalid
under 35 U.S.C. 103(a). Finally, with
respect to the issue of the technical
prong of the domestic industry
requirement, the Remand ID found that
Amkor satisfied the technical prong for
both the ‘277 patent and the ‘728 patent,
but did not meet the technical prong for
the ‘356 patent.
Completion of this investigation was
delayed because of difficulty in
obtaining from third-party ASAT Inc.
certain documents relating to ASAT’s
invention (‘‘ASAT invention’’) that
Carsem asserted were critical for its
affirmative invalidity defenses. The
Commission’s efforts to enforce a
February 11, 2004, subpoena duces
tecum and ad testificandum directed to
ASAT resulted in a July 1, 2008, order
and opinion of the U.S. District Court
for the District of Columbia granting the
Commission’s second enforcement
petition. On July 1, 2009, after ASAT
had complied with the subpoena, the
Commission issued a notice and order
remanding this investigation to the ALJ
so that the ASAT documents could be
considered. On October 30, 2009, the
ALJ issued a supplemental ID (‘‘First
Supplemental ID’’), finding that the
ASAT invention was not prior art.
On February 18, 2010, the
Commission reversed the ALJ’s finding
that ASAT invention is not prior art to
Amkor’s asserted patents, and remanded
the investigation to the ALJ to make
necessary findings with respect to the
issue of validity of the asserted patents
in light of the Commission’s
determination that the ASAT invention
is prior art. On March 22, 2010, the ALJ
issued a Supplemental ID (‘‘Second
Supplemental ID’’) in which he found
that the ‘277 and ‘728 patents were
invalid in view of ASAT prior art. On
July 20, 2010, the Commission
determined not to review the ALJ’s
Remand ID and Second Supplemental
ID. As a result, the Commission
determined that there is no violation of
section 337 in this investigation. Amkor
appealed the Commission’s decision to
the Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit.
On August 22, 2012, the Federal
Circuit ruled on Amkor’s appeal
reversing the Commission’s
determination that the ‘277 Patent is
invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(g)(2),
declining to affirm the Commission’s
invalidity determination on the
alternative grounds raised by Carsem,
and remanding for further proceedings
consistent with its opinion. Amkor
Technology Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n,
692 F.3d 1250 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (‘‘Amkor
Technology’’). On October 5, 2012,
E:\FR\FM\11JNN1.SGM
11JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 112 (Tuesday, June 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35050-35051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-13745]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-881]
Certain Windshield Wiper Devices and Components Thereof; Notice
of Institution of Investigation
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the
U.S. International Trade Commission on May 9, 2013, under section 337
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of
Federal-Mogul Corporation of Southfield, Michigan and Federal-Mogul
S.A. of Belgium. Letters supplementing the Complaint were filed on May
21, 2013 and May 30, 2013. The complaint alleges violations of section
337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for
importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of
certain windshield wiper devices and components thereof by reason of
infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,347,449 (``the '449 patent''). The
complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists
as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337.
The complainants request that the Commission institute an
investigation and, after the investigation, issue an exclusion order
and cease and desist orders.
ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for any confidential information
contained therein, is 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., Room 112, Washington,
DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. Hearing impaired individuals are
advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting
the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810. Persons with mobility
impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the
Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at (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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202)
205-2560.
Authority: The authority for institution of this investigation is
contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and in
section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19
CFR 210.10 (2012).
Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S.
International Trade Commission, on June 4, 2013, ordered that--
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether
there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the
importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the
sale within the United States after importation of certain windshield
wiper devices and components thereof by reason of infringement of one
or more of claims 1-14 of the '449 patent, and whether an industry in
the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section
337;
(2) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the
following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of
investigation shall be served:
(a) The complainants are:
Federal-Mogul Corporation,
26555 Northwestern Highway,
Southfield, MI 48033.
Federal-Mogul S.A.,
Avenue Champion 1,
6790 Aubange,
Belgium.
(b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in
violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint
is to be served:
Trico Corporation,
3255 West Hamlin Road,
Rochester Hills, MI 48309.
Trico Products,
1995 Billy Mitchell Boulevard,
Brownsville, TX 78521.
Trico Components,
SA de CV,
Ave Michigan 200,
Matamoros, Tamaulipas,
Mexico.
(c) The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Suite 401, Washington, DC 20436;
and
(3) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative
Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the
presiding Administrative Law Judge.
Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be
submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be
considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after
the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice
of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the
complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless
good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each
allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to
constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations
of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative
law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent,
to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and
to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing
such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or
a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.
Issued: June 5, 2013.
[[Page 35051]]
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013-13745 Filed 6-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
