Certain Point-to-Point Network Communication Devices and Products Containing the Same Notice of Amendment of the Complaint and Notice of Investigation; Termination of the Investigation as to Two Respondents, 66952-66953 [2013-26698]

Download as PDF tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 66952 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 216 / Thursday, November 7, 2013 / Notices 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 June 6, 2012, based on a complaint filed by Rovi Corporation; Rovi Guides, Inc.; Rovi Technologies Corporation; Starsight Telecast, Inc.; United Video Properties, Inc.; and Index Systems, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Complainants’’). 77 FR 33487–88. The notice of investigation named LG Electronics, Inc.; LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. (collectively, ‘‘LGE’’); Mitsubishi Electric Corp.; Mitsubishi Electric US Holdings, Inc.; Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc.; Mitsubishi Electric Visual Solutions America, Inc.; Mitsubishi Digital Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Mitsubishi’’); Netflix Inc. (‘‘Netflix’’); Roku, Inc. (‘‘Roku’’); and Vizio, Inc. (‘‘Vizio’’) as respondents. Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations did not participate in this investigation. Originally, Complainants asserted numerous claims from seven patents against various respondents. Complainants later moved to terminate the investigation as to three of the seven patents, as to certain claims of one of the remaining four patents, and as to respondents LGE, Mitsubishi, and Vizio. Order No. 9 (Sept. 4, 2012), not reviewed, Oct. 2, 2012; Order No 16 (Nov. 6, 2012), not reviewed, December 7, 2012; Order Nos. 17 (Dec. 19, 2012) and 19 (Dec. 20, 2012), not reviewed, January 18, 2013; Order No. 21 (Jan. 22, 2013), not reviewed Feb. 13, 2013; Order Nos. 34 (Feb. 27, 2013) and 36 (Mar. 1, 2013), not reviewed (Mar. 22, 2013). Netflix and Roku (‘‘Respondents’’) remain in the investigation, as well as claims 1, 6, 13, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 6,898,762 (‘‘the ’762 patent’’), claims 13–20 of U.S. Patent No. 7,065,709 (‘‘the ’709 patent’’); claims 1– 3, 10, and 11 of U.S. Patent No. 7,103,906 (‘‘the ’906 patent’’); and claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 14, 15, 17, and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 8,112,776 (‘‘the ’776 patent’’). On June 7, 2013, the presiding ALJ issued his final initial determination (‘‘ID’’), finding no violation of section 337. Specifically, the ALJ found that none of the accused products met the importation requirement of section 337. While the ALJ found that his importation finding was dispositive, he VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:24 Nov 06, 2013 Jkt 232001 made additional findings in the event that the Commission determined that the importation requirement was met. The ALJ found that no party infringed any of the four asserted patents. He also found that the ’776 patent is invalid as anticipated and obvious, but that Respondents had failed to show that the other three asserted patents were invalid. The ALJ found a domestic industry for articles protected by each of the patents-in-suit, but no domestic industry based on substantial investment in licensing the asserted patents. The ALJ also rejected Respondents’ patent misuse, implied license, and patent exhaustion defenses. On June 24, 2013, Complainants filed a petition for review challenging the ALJ’s findings that the importation requirement is not met, that Netflix does not induce infringement, and that the economic prong of the domestic industry is not met by Complainants’ licensing activity. That same day, Respondents filed a joint contingent petition for review arguing additional bases for finding no violation. On July 2, 2013, the parties filed oppositions to each other’s petitions. On August 9, 2013, the Commission determined to review the ID in its entirety. 78 FR 49766–67 (Aug. 15, 2013). The Commission requested written submissions from the parties on seven issues. It also requested submissions on remedy, bonding, and the public interest from the parties and the public. The Commission only received submissions from the Complainants and Respondents. Having examined the record of this investigation, including the ALJ’s final ID and the submissions from the parties, the Commission has determined that Complainants have not proven a violation of section 337. The Commission affirms with modified reasoning the ALJ’s finding that the importation requirement is not met for all of the asserted patents. The Commission affirms with modified reasoning the ALJ’s finding that the ’762, ’709, and ’906 patents are valid but not infringed, and that the ’776 patent is invalid and not infringed. The Commission also determines to modify the ALJ’s claim construction regarding the order of steps of the asserted claims of the ’709 patent, and, under the modified construction, reverses the ALJ’s finding that Complainants have shown that the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement has been met for the ’709 patent. The Commission also affirms the ALJ’s findings that Complainants have shown that a domestic industry exists for the ’762, ’906, and ’776 patents with respect PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 to articles protected by the patents based on their investments in plant and equipment, labor and capital, research and development, and exploitation of engineering, as set forth in the ID. Accordingly, the Commission need not reach the issue of whether Complainants have also shown that a domestic industry exists based on substantial investments in licensing, and the Commission takes no position on the issue. The Commission also corrects a typographical error on page 49 of the ID. The citation CX–4481C at .10 is corrected to be CX–4145C at .9. All other findings in the ID that are consistent with the Commission’s determinations are affirmed. 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 210.45, .49, and .50 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.45, .49. and .50). Issued: November 1, 2013. By order of the Commission. Lisa R. Barton, Acting Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2013–26661 Filed 11–6–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–892] Certain Point-to-Point Network Communication Devices and Products Containing the Same Notice of Amendment of the Complaint and Notice of Investigation; Termination of the Investigation as to Two Respondents U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review the presiding administrative law judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 2) amending the complaint and notice of investigation in the above-captioned investigation. The amended complaint withdraws two respondents from the investigation. 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 SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\07NON1.SGM 07NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 216 / Thursday, November 7, 2013 / Notices 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 9, 2013, based on a complaint filed by Straight Path IP Group, Inc., of Glen Allen, Virginia (‘‘Straight Path’’). 78 FR 55096 (Sept. 9, 2013). The complaint alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 19 U.S.C. 1337, by reason of the infringement of certain claims from three United States Patents. The notice of institution named twenty-two respondents, including Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. of Foster City, California (‘‘SCEA Inc.’’) and Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications (USA) Inc. of Atlanta, Georgia (‘‘Sony Ericsson’’). On September 20, 2013, Straight Path filed an unopposed motion to amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation to remove references to SCEA Inc. and Sony Ericsson. These respondents no longer exist as corporate entities and have been replaced by certain other entities, who are already respondents in the investigation. Order No. 2 at 1–2. On September 23, 2013, the ALJ granted the motion as an ID. He found that good cause exists for the amendments. Id. 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 210.14 and 210.42 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.14, 210.42). tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By order of the Commission. Issued: November 4, 2013. Lisa R. Barton, Acting Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2013–26698 Filed 11–6–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:24 Nov 06, 2013 Jkt 232001 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1103–0110] Office of Community Oriented Policing Services; Agency Information Collection Activities: Revision of a Previously Approved Collection, With Change; Comments Requested COPS Grant Status Implementation Facsimile ACTION: 60-Day notice. The Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS), 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 revision of a previously approved information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. The purpose of this notice is to allow for 60 days for public comment until January 6, 2014. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. If you have comments, especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Danielle Ouellette, Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 145 N Street NE., Washington, DC 20530. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points: —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; —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; —Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and —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. PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 66953 Overview of This Information Collection (1) Type of Information Collection: Revision of a previously approved collection, with change; comments requested. (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Status of Grant Implementation Template (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department sponsoring the collection: None. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Under the Violent Crime and Control Act of 1994, the U.S. Department of Justice COPS Office would require the completion of the Status of COPS Grant Implementation Facsimile from law enforcement agencies if they have yet to send in their current Federal Financial Report (SF– 425). This is to ensure that these agencies are planning on implementing their COPS grant program and/or project that they had previously been awarded. (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 200 respondents annually will complete the form within 0.1 hours. (6) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with the collection: There are an estimated 20 total annual burden hours associated with this collection. If additional information is required contact: Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice, Justice Management Division, Policy and Planning Staff, Two Constitution Square, 145 N Street NE., Room 3W– 1407B, Washington, DC 20530. Dated: November 4, 2013. Jerri Murray, Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice. [FR Doc. 2013–26688 Filed 11–6–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410–AT–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE [OMB Number 1122–0003] Agency Information Collection Activities: Extension of a Currently Approved Collection; Annual Progress Report for the STOP Formula Grants Program ACTION: 60-Day notice. The Department of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) will be E:\FR\FM\07NON1.SGM 07NON1

Agencies

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 216 (Thursday, November 7, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66952-66953]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-26698]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-892]


Certain Point-to-Point Network Communication Devices and Products 
Containing the Same Notice of Amendment of the Complaint and Notice of 
Investigation; Termination of the Investigation as to Two Respondents

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 the presiding administrative 
law judge's (``ALJ'') initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 2) 
amending the complaint and notice of investigation in the above-
captioned investigation. The amended complaint withdraws two 
respondents from the investigation.

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

[[Page 66953]]

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 
on September 9, 2013, based on a complaint filed by Straight Path IP 
Group, Inc., of Glen Allen, Virginia (``Straight Path''). 78 FR 55096 
(Sept. 9, 2013). The complaint alleged violations of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended 19 U.S.C. 1337, by reason of the 
infringement of certain claims from three United States Patents. The 
notice of institution named twenty-two respondents, including Sony 
Computer Entertainment America Inc. of Foster City, California (``SCEA 
Inc.'') and Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications (USA) Inc. of Atlanta, 
Georgia (``Sony Ericsson'').
    On September 20, 2013, Straight Path filed an unopposed motion to 
amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation to remove references to 
SCEA Inc. and Sony Ericsson. These respondents no longer exist as 
corporate entities and have been replaced by certain other entities, 
who are already respondents in the investigation. Order No. 2 at 1-2.
    On September 23, 2013, the ALJ granted the motion as an ID. He 
found that good cause exists for the amendments. Id.
    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 210.14 and 210.42 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure (19 CFR 210.14, 210.42).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 4, 2013.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013-26698 Filed 11-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.