Certain Optical Disc Drives, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Commission Determination To Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation Based on Complainant's Lack of Standing and on Review To Modify-in-Part, Vacate-in-Part, and Remand the Investigation in Part to the Presiding Administrative Law Judge for Further Proceedings, 73335-73336 [2014-28871]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 237 / Wednesday, December 10, 2014 / Notices minimize the information collection burdens on respondents, such as use of automated means of collections of the information, to the addresses listed under ADDRESSES. Please refer to the appropriate OMB control number in all correspondence. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: December 3, 2014. Harry J. Payne, Chief, Division of Regulatory Support. [FR Doc. 2014–28883 Filed 12–9–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–05–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–897] Certain Optical Disc Drives, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Commission Determination To Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation Based on Complainant’s Lack of Standing and on Review To Modify-in-Part, Vacate-in-Part, and Remand the Investigation in Part to the Presiding Administrative Law Judge for Further Proceedings U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to review the presiding administrative law judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 113) granting respondents’ motion to terminate the abovereferenced investigation based on the lack of standing of complainant Optical Devices, LLC of Peterborough, New Hampshire (‘‘Optical’’). The Commission modifies-in-part and vacates-in-part the subject ID and remands the investigation to the presiding ALJ for further proceedings consistent with its concurrently issued opinion and remand order. 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) mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Dec 09, 2014 Jkt 235001 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 October 25, 2013, based on a Complaint filed by Optical, as supplemented. 78 FR 64009 (Oct. 25, 2013). The Complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section 337’’), in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain optical disc drives, components thereof, and products containing the same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,904,007 (‘‘the ’007 patent’’); 7,196,979 (‘‘the ’979 patent’’); 8,416,651 (‘‘the ’651 patent’’); RE40,927 (‘‘the ’927 patent’’); RE42,913 (‘‘the ’913 patent’’); and RE43,681 the (’681 patent’’). The Complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The Commission’s Notice of Investigation named as respondents Lenovo Group Ltd. of Quarry Bay, Hong Kong and Lenovo (United States) Inc., of Morrisville, North Carolina; LG Electronics, Inc. of Seoul, Republic of Korea and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey; Panasonic Corp. of Osaka, Japan and Panasonic Corporation of North America of Secaucus, New Jersey; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of Seoul, Republic of Korea and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey (collectively ‘‘Samsung’’); and Toshiba Corporation of Tokyo, Japan and Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. of Irvine, California (collectively ‘‘Respondents’’). The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was not named as a party to the investigation. The Commission later terminated the investigation as to the application of numerous claims of the asserted patents to various named respondents. See PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 73335 Notice of Commission Determination Not to Review an Initial Determination Granting Complainant’s Motions to Partially Terminate the Investigation as to Certain Patents (Aug. 8, 2014). The Commission also later terminated the investigation with respect to Samsung based on a settlement agreement. See Notice of Commission Determination to Grant a Joint Motion to Terminate the Investigation as to Respondents [Samsung] on the Basis of a Settlement Agreement (Sept. 2, 2014). On May 6, 2014, Respondents, including Samsung, filed a motion to terminate the investigation for good cause based on Optical Devices’ lack of prudential standing to bring an infringement action with respect to the asserted patents. On May 16, 2014, Optical Devices filed a response in opposition. On June 3, 2014, Respondents, pursuant to Order No. 83, filed a reply in support of their motion. On June 10, 2014, Optical Devices filed a motion for leave to file a surreply in opposition to Respondent’s reply. On June 11, 2014, Respondents filed an opposition to Optical Devices’ motion for leave to file a surreply. On October 20, 2014, the ALJ issued the subject ID, granting pursuant to section 210.21(a) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.21(a)) Respondents’ motion to terminate the investigation based on Optical Devices’ lack of prudential standing. Specifically, the ALJ found that Optical Devices does not hold all substantial rights to the subject patents and, therefore, lacks prudential standing to maintain an action for infringement without joinder of other necessary parties. The ALJ also granted Optical Devices’ motion for leave to file a surreply. Having examined the record of this investigation, including the subject ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto, the Commission has determined to review the subject ID. On review, the Commission vacates the ALJ’s finding that Optical Devices lacks standing with respect to the ’007, ’979, and ’651 patents (collectively, ‘‘the Kadlec Patents’’) and remands the investigation for further proceedings consistent with the Commission’s concurrently issued opinion and remand order. Further on review, the Commission finds based on modified reasoning that Optical Devices lacks standing with respect to the ’927, ’913, and ’681 patents (collectively, ‘‘the Wild Patents’’) and it would prejudice Respondents to allow Optical Devices to join other necessary parties to remedy its lack of standing at this time. The E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM 10DEN1 73336 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 237 / Wednesday, December 10, 2014 / Notices investigation is, hereby, terminated with respect to the Wild Patents. 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). Dated: December 4, 2014. By order of the Commission. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2014–28871 Filed 12–9–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–903] Certain Antivenom Compositions and Products Containing the Same Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation Based on a Settlement Agreement; Termination of the Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 62) issued by the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on November 13, 2014, terminating the investigation based on a settlement agreement. SUMMARY: mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Needham, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708–5468. 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 (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. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Dec 09, 2014 Jkt 235001 The Commission instituted this investigation on December 11, 2013, based on a complaint filed by BTG International Inc. (‘‘BTG’’) of West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania. 78 FR 75372–73. 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 antivenom compositions and products containing the same through the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,048,414. Id. at 75373. The Commission’s notice of investigation named as respondents Veteria Laboratories of Mexico and BioVeteria Life Sciences, LLC of Prescott, Arizona (together, ‘‘Veteria’’); Instituto Bioclon S.A. de C.V. of Mexico, Laboratorios Silanes S.A. de C.V. of Mexico, and Rare Disease Therapeutics, Inc., of Franklin, Tennessee (collectively, ‘‘Respondents’’); and the Silanes Group of Mexico. Id. The Commission previously terminated the investigation with respect to Veteria based on a partial withdrawal of the complaint. Order No. 14 (Mar. 11, 2014), not reviewed Apr. 1, 2014. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was also named as a party to the investigation. 78 FR 75373. On October 10, 2014, BTG and Respondents filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation in its entirety based on a settlement agreement. The motion attached confidential and public versions of the settlement agreement and stated that there were no other agreements, written or oral, express or implied, between BTG and Respondents. The motion also stated that terminating the investigation would not adversely affect the public interest. On October 23, 2014, the Commission Investigative Attorney (‘‘IA’’) filed a response in support of the parties’ motion. The IA stated that the termination of the investigation was in the public interest. On October 30, 2014, the parties filed a modified public version of the settlement agreement with fewer redactions. On November 13, 2014, the ALJ issued the subject ID, granting the parties’ motion and terminating the investigation in its entirety. The ALJ found that the motion complied with the Commission rules and does not impose any undue burden on the public interest. The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID. The authority for the Commission’s determination is contained in section SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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: December 5, 2014. By order of the Commission. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2014–28901 Filed 12–9–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–938] Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors and Components Thereof and Products Containing Same Institution of Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on November 5, 2014, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of PPC Broadband, Inc. of East Syracuse, New York. Supplements to the complaint were filed on November 17 and 20, 2014. The complaint, as supplemented, 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 coaxial cable connectors and components thereof and products containing same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,801,448 (‘‘the ‘448 patent’’). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist order. 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 SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\10DEN1.SGM 10DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 237 (Wednesday, December 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73335-73336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28871]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-897]


Certain Optical Disc Drives, Components Thereof, and Products 
Containing the Same; Commission Determination To Review an Initial 
Determination Terminating the Investigation Based on Complainant's Lack 
of Standing and on Review To Modify-in-Part, Vacate-in-Part, and Remand 
the Investigation in Part to the Presiding Administrative Law Judge for 
Further Proceedings

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined to review the presiding administrative law 
judge's (``ALJ'') initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 113) 
granting respondents' motion to terminate the above-referenced 
investigation based on the lack of standing of complainant Optical 
Devices, LLC of Peterborough, New Hampshire (``Optical''). The 
Commission modifies-in-part and vacates-in-part the subject ID and 
remands the investigation to the presiding ALJ for further proceedings 
consistent with its concurrently issued opinion and remand order.

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 October 25, 2013, based on a Complaint filed by Optical, as 
supplemented. 78 FR 64009 (Oct. 25, 2013). The Complaint alleges 
violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 
U.S.C. 1337 (``section 337''), in the importation into the United 
States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States 
after importation of certain optical disc drives, components thereof, 
and products containing the same by reason of infringement of certain 
claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,904,007 (``the '007 patent''); 7,196,979 
(``the '979 patent''); 8,416,651 (``the '651 patent''); RE40,927 (``the 
'927 patent''); RE42,913 (``the '913 patent''); and RE43,681 the ('681 
patent''). The Complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic 
industry. The Commission's Notice of Investigation named as respondents 
Lenovo Group Ltd. of Quarry Bay, Hong Kong and Lenovo (United States) 
Inc., of Morrisville, North Carolina; LG Electronics, Inc. of Seoul, 
Republic of Korea and LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, 
New Jersey; Panasonic Corp. of Osaka, Japan and Panasonic Corporation 
of North America of Secaucus, New Jersey; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. 
of Seoul, Republic of Korea and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of 
Ridgefield Park, New Jersey (collectively ``Samsung''); and Toshiba 
Corporation of Tokyo, Japan and Toshiba America Information Systems, 
Inc. of Irvine, California (collectively ``Respondents''). The Office 
of Unfair Import Investigations was not named as a party to the 
investigation.
    The Commission later terminated the investigation as to the 
application of numerous claims of the asserted patents to various named 
respondents. See Notice of Commission Determination Not to Review an 
Initial Determination Granting Complainant's Motions to Partially 
Terminate the Investigation as to Certain Patents (Aug. 8, 2014). The 
Commission also later terminated the investigation with respect to 
Samsung based on a settlement agreement. See Notice of Commission 
Determination to Grant a Joint Motion to Terminate the Investigation as 
to Respondents [Samsung] on the Basis of a Settlement Agreement (Sept. 
2, 2014).
    On May 6, 2014, Respondents, including Samsung, filed a motion to 
terminate the investigation for good cause based on Optical Devices' 
lack of prudential standing to bring an infringement action with 
respect to the asserted patents. On May 16, 2014, Optical Devices filed 
a response in opposition. On June 3, 2014, Respondents, pursuant to 
Order No. 83, filed a reply in support of their motion. On June 10, 
2014, Optical Devices filed a motion for leave to file a surreply in 
opposition to Respondent's reply. On June 11, 2014, Respondents filed 
an opposition to Optical Devices' motion for leave to file a surreply.
    On October 20, 2014, the ALJ issued the subject ID, granting 
pursuant to section 210.21(a) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure (19 CFR 210.21(a)) Respondents' motion to terminate the 
investigation based on Optical Devices' lack of prudential standing. 
Specifically, the ALJ found that Optical Devices does not hold all 
substantial rights to the subject patents and, therefore, lacks 
prudential standing to maintain an action for infringement without 
joinder of other necessary parties. The ALJ also granted Optical 
Devices' motion for leave to file a surreply.
    Having examined the record of this investigation, including the 
subject ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto, the 
Commission has determined to review the subject ID. On review, the 
Commission vacates the ALJ's finding that Optical Devices lacks 
standing with respect to the '007, '979, and '651 patents 
(collectively, ``the Kadlec Patents'') and remands the investigation 
for further proceedings consistent with the Commission's concurrently 
issued opinion and remand order. Further on review, the Commission 
finds based on modified reasoning that Optical Devices lacks standing 
with respect to the '927, '913, and '681 patents (collectively, ``the 
Wild Patents'') and it would prejudice Respondents to allow Optical 
Devices to join other necessary parties to remedy its lack of standing 
at this time. The

[[Page 73336]]

investigation is, hereby, terminated with respect to the Wild Patents.
    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).

    Dated: December 4, 2014.

    By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014-28871 Filed 12-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P