Certain Windshield Wiper Devices and Components Thereof; Notice of Commission Decision To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Request for Written Submissions, 41303-41305 [2014-16526]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 135 / Tuesday, July 15, 2014 / Notices Effect of Closure FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The entire area encompassed by the legal description above is closed to all unauthorized personnel and will be marked clearly as such on the ground prior to and during the event. Access routes leading to the designated race course are closed to vehicles and people and will be marked as such. Unless specifically addressed by regulations set forth in 43 CFR, the laws of the state of Utah shall govern the use and operation of vehicles. The authorized event organizer or their representatives, in conjunction with the BLM, will post warning signs, control access to and clearly mark, the race course, spectator areas, common access roads and road crossings during the closure period. Spectator and support vehicles may be driven on open roads only. Spectators may only observe from designated spectator areas. Support vehicles under permit for operation by event participants must follow the race permit stipulations. Any person who violates the above rule(s) and/or restriction(s) may be tried before a United States Magistrate and fined no more than $1,000, imprisoned for no more than 12 months, or both. Such violations may also be subject to the enhanced fines provided for by 18 U.S.C. 3571. 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 June 11, 2013, based on a complaint filed by complainants Federal-Mogul Corporation of Southfield, Michigan and Federal-Mogul S.A. of Aubange, Belgium (collectively ‘‘Federal-Mogul’’). 78 FR 35050–51 (June 11, 2013). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 in 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 claims 1–14 of U.S. Patent No. 8,347,449 (‘‘the ’449 patent’’). The complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The Commission’s Notice of Investigation named as respondents Trico Corporation of Rochester Hills, Michigan (‘‘Trico Corp.’’); Trico Products of Brownsville, Texas (‘‘Trico Products’’); and Trico Components, SA de CV of Matamoros, Mexico (collectively ‘‘Trico’’). 78 FR at 35050. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was also named as a party. Id. The Notice of Investigation was later amended to correct the names of Trico Corp. and Trico Products to Trico Products Corporation of New York. 79 FR 9922–923 (Feb. 21, 2014); see Order No. 27 (Jan. 22, 2014). On May 8, 2014, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a violation of section 337. In particular, the final ID finds that Trico’s accused products infringe claims 1 and 5 of the ’449 patent, but that Trico’s accused products do not infringe claims 2–4 and 6–14. The ALJ also found that the asserted claims of the ’449 patent are not invalid for Authority: 43 CFR 8364.1. Jenna Whitlock, Associate State Director. [FR Doc. 2014–16577 Filed 7–14–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–DQ–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–881] Certain Windshield Wiper Devices and Components Thereof; Notice of Commission Decision To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Request for Written Submissions 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 (‘‘final ID’’) issued on May 8, 2014, finding a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (‘‘section 337’’) in the above-captioned investigation. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Jul 14, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 41303 obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 or for lack of written description under 35 U.S.C. 112. The ALJ further found that Federal-Mogul has satisfied the domestic industry requirement. The final ID also includes the ALJ’s recommended determination (‘‘RD’’) on remedy and bonding. The ALJ recommended in his RD that the appropriate remedy is a limited exclusion order barring entry of Trico’s infringing windshield wiper devices and components thereof. The ALJ did not recommend issuance of a cease and desist order against any respondent. The ALJ recommended the imposition of a bond of $0.75 per imported unit during the period of Presidential review. On May 21, 2014, Trico filed a petition for review concerning, inter alia, the final ID’s finding of violation with respect to claims 1 and 5 of the ’449 patent. In particular, Trico requested review of the final ID’s construction of the claim limitation ‘‘detachable,’’ the final ID’s finding that claims 1 and 5 are infringed, and the final ID’s finding that the asserted claims of the ’449 patent are not invalid for obviousness. Also on May 21, 2014, Federal-Mogul and the Commission investigative attorney (‘‘IA’’) each filed a petition for review of certain aspects of the final ID concerning the ALJ’s finding of no violation with respect to claims 2–4 and 6–14 of the ’449 patent. In particular, Federal-Mogul and the IA requested that the Commission review the final ID’s construction of the claim limitation ‘‘clamping’’ and the final ID’s finding of non-infringement with respect to claims 2–4 and 6–14 of the ’449 patent. On May 29, 2014, Federal-Mogul filed a response to Trico’s petition for review. Also on May 29, 2014, Trico filed a combined response to Federal-Mogul’s and the IA’s petitions for review. Further on May 29, 2014, the IA filed a joint response to the private parties’ petitions. None of the parties filed a post-RD statement on the public interest pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(a)(4). Furthermore, no responses were filed by the public in response to the post-RD Commission Notice issued on May 9, 2014. See Notice of Request for Statements on the Public Interest, 79 FR 27934–35 (May 9, 2014). 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 the ALJ’s omission of the caveat ‘‘without E:\FR\FM\15JYN1.SGM 15JYN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 41304 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 135 / Tuesday, July 15, 2014 / Notices damage’’ in the construction of the limitations ‘‘detachable therefrom,’’ ‘‘detachably engage,’’ ‘‘detachably connected,’’ and ‘‘releasably secure’’ recited in claims 1, 2, 8, and 12 of the ’449 patent. The Commission has also determined to review the final ID’s construction of the ‘‘clamping’’ limitation recited in claims 2, 3, 6, 7, and 12 of the ’449 patent. With respect to infringement, the Commission has determined to review the final ID’s finding that the accused OE blade products satisfy the ‘‘detachable’’ limitation of claims 1 and 5 of the ’449 patent. The Commission has also determined to review the final ID’s finding of no infringement with respect to claims 2–4 and 6–7 of the ’449 patent. The Commission has further determined to review the final ID’s finding of no infringement with respect to claims 8–14 of the ’449 patent. The Commission has also determined to review the final ID’s finding that the asserted domestic industry products satisfy the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement with respect to claim 1 of the ’449 patent. The Commission has further determined to review the final ID’s finding that Trico failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that the asserted claims of the ’449 patent are obvious in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,713,099 in combination with U.S. Patent No. 6,799,348. The Commission has determined not to review the remaining issues decided in the final ID. The parties are requested to brief their positions on the issues under review with reference to the applicable law and the evidentiary record. In connection with its review, the Commission is particularly interested in responses to the following questions: 1. Address whether the claim limitations ‘‘clamping features,’’ ‘‘clamping members,’’ and ‘‘clamping edge portions’’ recited in the asserted claims of the ’449 patent should be construed independently of the generic term ‘‘clamping’’ and, if so, how should the Commission construe those claim limitations in light of the intrinsic evidence. 2. Address whether the accused wiper blade products satisfy the ‘‘clamping features’’ limitation recited in claim 2 and the ‘‘clamping members’’ limitation recited in claims 3, 6, and 7 of the ’449 patent under the proper construction of those limitations. Please specifically discuss this issue in relation to your position concerning whether claim limitations ‘‘clamping features’’ and ‘‘clamping members’’ should be VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Jul 14, 2014 Jkt 232001 construed independently of the generic term ‘‘clamping.’’ 3. Address whether the accused wiper blade products infringe claims 8–14 of the ’449 patent in light of the fact that the Commission has determined to review the construction of the claim limitations ‘‘detachably connected’’ (relevant to claims 8–11), ‘‘releasably secure’’ (relevant to claims 12–14), and ‘‘clamping edge portions’’ (relevant to claims 12–14). Regarding the latter claim limitation, please specifically discuss this issue in relation to your position concerning whether the claim limitation ‘‘clamping edge portions’’ should be construed independently of the generic term ‘‘clamping.’’ The parties have been invited to brief only these discrete issues, as enumerated above, with reference to the applicable law and evidentiary record. The parties are not to brief other issues on review, which are adequately presented in the parties’ existing filings. In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the Commission may (1) issue an order that could result in the exclusion of the subject articles from entry into the United States, and/or (2) issue one or more cease and desist orders that could result in the respondent(s) being required to cease and desist from engaging in unfair acts in the importation and sale of such articles. Accordingly, the Commission is interested in receiving written submissions that address the form of remedy, if any, that should be ordered. If a party seeks exclusion of an article from entry into the United States for purposes other than entry for consumption, the party should so indicate and provide information establishing that activities involving other types of entry either are adversely affecting it or likely to do so. For background, see In the Matter of Certain Devices for Connecting Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994) (Commission Opinion). If the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders would have on (1) the public health and welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S. production of articles that are like or directly competitive with those that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. consumers. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving written submissions that address the PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 aforementioned public interest factors in the context of this investigation. If the Commission orders some form of remedy, the U.S. Trade Representative, as delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve or disapprove the Commission’s action. See Presidential Memorandum of July 21, 2005, 70 Fed. Reg. 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period, the subject articles would be entitled to enter the United States under bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of the bond that should be imposed if a remedy is ordered. Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation, including the Office of Unfair Import Investigations, are requested to file written submissions on the issues identified in this notice. Parties to the investigation, including the Office of Unfair Import Investigations, interested government agencies, and any other interested parties are encouraged to file written submissions on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Such submissions should address the recommended determination by the ALJ on remedy and bonding. Complainant is also requested to submit proposed remedial orders for the Commission’s consideration. Complainant is also requested to state the dates that the patents expire and the HTSUS numbers under which the accused products are imported. The written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later than close of business on July 22, 2014. Initial submissions are limited to 70 pages, not including any attachments or exhibits related to discussion of the public interest. Reply submissions must be filed no later than the close of business on July 30, 2014. Reply submissions are limited to 25 pages, not including any attachments or exhibits related to discussion of the public interest. 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–881’’) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/ E:\FR\FM\15JYN1.SGM 15JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 135 / Tuesday, July 15, 2014 / Notices secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/ handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf). Persons with questions regarding filing 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). By order of the Commission. Issued: July 9, 2014. Jennifer D. Rohrbach, Supervisory Attorney. [FR Doc. 2014–16526 Filed 7–14–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P response, and estimated total burden may be obtained free of charge from the RegInfo.gov Web site at http:// www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201403-1240-003 (this link will only become active on the day following publication of this notice) or by contacting Michel Smyth by telephone at 202–693–4129, TTY 202– 693–8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or sending an email to DOL_ PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov. Submit comments about this request by mail or courier to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: OMB Desk Officer for DOL– OWCP, Office of Management and Budget, Room 10235, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; by Fax: 202–395–6881 (this is not a toll-free number); or by email: OIRA_ submission@omb.eop.gov. Commenters are encouraged, but not required, to send a courtesy copy of any comments by mail or courier to the U.S. Department of Labor-OASAM, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Attn: Departmental Information Compliance Management Program, Room N1301, 200 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20210; or by email: DOL_PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Contact Michel Smyth by telephone at 202–693– 4129, TTY 202–693–8064, (these are not toll-free numbers) or sending an email to DOL_PRA_PUBLIC@dol.gov. Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D). DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of the Secretary Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Rehabilitation Plan and Award ACTION: Notice. The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs sponsored information collection request (ICR) revision titled, ‘‘Rehabilitation Plan and Award,’’ to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval for use in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Public comments on the ICR are invited. DATES: The OMB will consider all written comments that agency receives on or before August 14, 2014. ADDRESSES: A copy of this ICR with applicable supporting documentation; including a description of the likely respondents, proposed frequency of mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:46 Jul 14, 2014 This ICR seeks approval under the PRA for revisions to the Rehabilitation Plan and Award, Form OWCP–16, information collection. Vocational rehabilitation counselors use Form OWCP–16 to submit an agreed upon rehabilitation plan for OWCP approval. The form also documents any OWCP payment award for approved services. This information collection has been classified as a revision, because of format changes to allow respondents more room to provide responses, to make a minor clarification as to which entities must respond, and to enhance various disclosures to respondents. The Federal Employees’ Compensation Act and Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act authorize this information collection. See 5 U.S.C. 8103, 8193; 33 U.S.C. 907. This information collection is subject to the PRA. A Federal agency generally cannot conduct or sponsor a collection of information, and the public is generally not required to respond to an information collection, unless it is approved by the OMB under the PRA and displays a currently valid OMB SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 41305 Control Number. In addition, notwithstanding any other provisions of law, no person shall generally be subject to penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information that does not display a valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 1320.5(a) and 1320.6. The DOL obtains OMB approval for this information collection under Control Number 1240–0045. The current approval is scheduled to expire on July 31, 2014; however, the DOL notes that existing information collection requirements submitted to the OMB receive a month-to-month extension while they undergo review. New requirements would only take effect upon OMB approval. For additional substantive information about this ICR, see the related notice published in the Federal Register on March 27, 2014 (79 FR 17193). Interested parties are encouraged to send comments to the OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section within thirty (30) days of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. In order to help ensure appropriate consideration, comments should mention OMB Control Number 1240–0045. The OMB is particularly interested in comments that: • 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. Agency: DOL–OWCP. Title of Collection: Rehabilitation Plan and Award. OMB Control Number: 1240–0045. Affected Public: Private Sector— businesses or other for-profits and notfor-profit institutions. Total Estimated Number of Respondents: 4,590. Total Estimated Number of Responses: 4,590. Total Estimated Annual Time Burden: 2,295 hours. E:\FR\FM\15JYN1.SGM 15JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 135 (Tuesday, July 15, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41303-41305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-16526]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-881]


Certain Windshield Wiper Devices and Components Thereof; Notice 
of Commission Decision To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination 
Finding a Violation of Section 337; Request for Written Submissions

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 
(``final ID'') issued on May 8, 2014, finding a violation of section 
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. Sec.  1337 
(``section 337'') in the above-captioned 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 June 11, 2013, based on a complaint filed by complainants Federal-
Mogul Corporation of Southfield, Michigan and Federal-Mogul S.A. of 
Aubange, Belgium (collectively ``Federal-Mogul''). 78 FR 35050-51 (June 
11, 2013). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 in 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 
claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 8,347,449 (``the '449 patent''). The 
complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The 
Commission's Notice of Investigation named as respondents Trico 
Corporation of Rochester Hills, Michigan (``Trico Corp.''); Trico 
Products of Brownsville, Texas (``Trico Products''); and Trico 
Components, SA de CV of Matamoros, Mexico (collectively ``Trico''). 78 
FR at 35050. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was also named 
as a party. Id. The Notice of Investigation was later amended to 
correct the names of Trico Corp. and Trico Products to Trico Products 
Corporation of New York. 79 FR 9922-923 (Feb. 21, 2014); see Order No. 
27 (Jan. 22, 2014).
    On May 8, 2014, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a violation of 
section 337. In particular, the final ID finds that Trico's accused 
products infringe claims 1 and 5 of the '449 patent, but that Trico's 
accused products do not infringe claims 2-4 and 6-14. The ALJ also 
found that the asserted claims of the '449 patent are not invalid for 
obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 or for lack of written description 
under 35 U.S.C. 112. The ALJ further found that Federal-Mogul has 
satisfied the domestic industry requirement.
    The final ID also includes the ALJ's recommended determination 
(``RD'') on remedy and bonding. The ALJ recommended in his RD that the 
appropriate remedy is a limited exclusion order barring entry of 
Trico's infringing windshield wiper devices and components thereof. The 
ALJ did not recommend issuance of a cease and desist order against any 
respondent. The ALJ recommended the imposition of a bond of $0.75 per 
imported unit during the period of Presidential review.
    On May 21, 2014, Trico filed a petition for review concerning, 
inter alia, the final ID's finding of violation with respect to claims 
1 and 5 of the '449 patent. In particular, Trico requested review of 
the final ID's construction of the claim limitation ``detachable,'' the 
final ID's finding that claims 1 and 5 are infringed, and the final 
ID's finding that the asserted claims of the '449 patent are not 
invalid for obviousness. Also on May 21, 2014, Federal-Mogul and the 
Commission investigative attorney (``IA'') each filed a petition for 
review of certain aspects of the final ID concerning the ALJ's finding 
of no violation with respect to claims 2-4 and 6-14 of the '449 patent. 
In particular, Federal-Mogul and the IA requested that the Commission 
review the final ID's construction of the claim limitation ``clamping'' 
and the final ID's finding of non-infringement with respect to claims 
2-4 and 6-14 of the '449 patent.
    On May 29, 2014, Federal-Mogul filed a response to Trico's petition 
for review. Also on May 29, 2014, Trico filed a combined response to 
Federal-Mogul's and the IA's petitions for review. Further on May 29, 
2014, the IA filed a joint response to the private parties' petitions.
    None of the parties filed a post-RD statement on the public 
interest pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(a)(4). Furthermore, no 
responses were filed by the public in response to the post-RD 
Commission Notice issued on May 9, 2014. See Notice of Request for 
Statements on the Public Interest, 79 FR 27934-35 (May 9, 2014).
    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 the ALJ's 
omission of the caveat ``without

[[Page 41304]]

damage'' in the construction of the limitations ``detachable 
therefrom,'' ``detachably engage,'' ``detachably connected,'' and 
``releasably secure'' recited in claims 1, 2, 8, and 12 of the '449 
patent. The Commission has also determined to review the final ID's 
construction of the ``clamping'' limitation recited in claims 2, 3, 6, 
7, and 12 of the '449 patent.
    With respect to infringement, the Commission has determined to 
review the final ID's finding that the accused OE blade products 
satisfy the ``detachable'' limitation of claims 1 and 5 of the '449 
patent. The Commission has also determined to review the final ID's 
finding of no infringement with respect to claims 2-4 and 6-7 of the 
'449 patent. The Commission has further determined to review the final 
ID's finding of no infringement with respect to claims 8-14 of the '449 
patent.
    The Commission has also determined to review the final ID's finding 
that the asserted domestic industry products satisfy the technical 
prong of the domestic industry requirement with respect to claim 1 of 
the '449 patent. The Commission has further determined to review the 
final ID's finding that Trico failed to show by clear and convincing 
evidence that the asserted claims of the '449 patent are obvious in 
view of U.S. Patent No. 5,713,099 in combination with U.S. Patent No. 
6,799,348.
    The Commission has determined not to review the remaining issues 
decided in the final ID.
    The parties are requested to brief their positions on the issues 
under review with reference to the applicable law and the evidentiary 
record. In connection with its review, the Commission is particularly 
interested in responses to the following questions:
    1. Address whether the claim limitations ``clamping features,'' 
``clamping members,'' and ``clamping edge portions'' recited in the 
asserted claims of the '449 patent should be construed independently of 
the generic term ``clamping'' and, if so, how should the Commission 
construe those claim limitations in light of the intrinsic evidence.
    2. Address whether the accused wiper blade products satisfy the 
``clamping features'' limitation recited in claim 2 and the ``clamping 
members'' limitation recited in claims 3, 6, and 7 of the '449 patent 
under the proper construction of those limitations. Please specifically 
discuss this issue in relation to your position concerning whether 
claim limitations ``clamping features'' and ``clamping members'' should 
be construed independently of the generic term ``clamping.''
    3. Address whether the accused wiper blade products infringe claims 
8-14 of the '449 patent in light of the fact that the Commission has 
determined to review the construction of the claim limitations 
``detachably connected'' (relevant to claims 8-11), ``releasably 
secure'' (relevant to claims 12-14), and ``clamping edge portions'' 
(relevant to claims 12-14). Regarding the latter claim limitation, 
please specifically discuss this issue in relation to your position 
concerning whether the claim limitation ``clamping edge portions'' 
should be construed independently of the generic term ``clamping.''
    The parties have been invited to brief only these discrete issues, 
as enumerated above, with reference to the applicable law and 
evidentiary record. The parties are not to brief other issues on 
review, which are adequately presented in the parties' existing 
filings.
    In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the 
Commission may (1) issue an order that could result in the exclusion of 
the subject articles from entry into the United States, and/or (2) 
issue one or more cease and desist orders that could result in the 
respondent(s) being required to cease and desist from engaging in 
unfair acts in the importation and sale of such articles. Accordingly, 
the Commission is interested in receiving written submissions that 
address the form of remedy, if any, that should be ordered. If a party 
seeks exclusion of an article from entry into the United States for 
purposes other than entry for consumption, the party should so indicate 
and provide information establishing that activities involving other 
types of entry either are adversely affecting it or likely to do so. 
For background, see In the Matter of Certain Devices for Connecting 
Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337-TA-360, USITC Pub. No. 2843 
(December 1994) (Commission Opinion).
    If the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must 
consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The 
factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an 
exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders would have on (1) the 
public health and welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S. 
economy, (3) U.S. production of articles that are like or directly 
competitive with those that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. 
consumers. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving written 
submissions that address the aforementioned public interest factors in 
the context of this investigation.
    If the Commission orders some form of remedy, the U.S. Trade 
Representative, as delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve 
or disapprove the Commission's action. See Presidential Memorandum of 
July 21, 2005, 70 Fed. Reg. 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period, 
the subject articles would be entitled to enter the United States under 
bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and prescribed by the 
Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is therefore interested in 
receiving submissions concerning the amount of the bond that should be 
imposed if a remedy is ordered.
    Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation, including 
the Office of Unfair Import Investigations, are requested to file 
written submissions on the issues identified in this notice. Parties to 
the investigation, including the Office of Unfair Import 
Investigations, interested government agencies, and any other 
interested parties are encouraged to file written submissions on the 
issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Such submissions 
should address the recommended determination by the ALJ on remedy and 
bonding. Complainant is also requested to submit proposed remedial 
orders for the Commission's consideration. Complainant is also 
requested to state the dates that the patents expire and the HTSUS 
numbers under which the accused products are imported. The written 
submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later than 
close of business on July 22, 2014. Initial submissions are limited to 
70 pages, not including any attachments or exhibits related to 
discussion of the public interest. Reply submissions must be filed no 
later than the close of business on July 30, 2014. Reply submissions 
are limited to 25 pages, not including any attachments or exhibits 
related to discussion of the public interest. 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-881'') in a prominent place on 
the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic 
Filing Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/

[[Page 41305]]

secretary/fed--reg--notices/rules/handbook--on--electronic--
filing.pdf). Persons with questions regarding filing 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).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: July 9, 2014.
Jennifer D. Rohrbach,
Supervisory Attorney.
[FR Doc. 2014-16526 Filed 7-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P