Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Systems, Products Containing the Same, and Components Thereof; Commission Determination to Review a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on the Issues Under Review and on Remedy, the Public Interest and Bonding, 55872-55874 [2015-23329]

Download as PDF 55872 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 180 / Thursday, September 17, 2015 / Notices TEXAS rolled steel flat products that are allegedly subsidized by the governments of Brazil, China, Korea, and Russia. The Commission also determines, pursuant to the Act, that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is threatened with material injury by reason of imports of cold-rolled steel flat products that are allegedly subsidized by the government of India. The Commission further determines that imports of cold-rolled steel flat products from the Netherlands are negligible pursuant to section 771(24) of the Act, and its investigation with regard to cold-rolled steel flat products from this country is thereby terminated pursuant to section 733(a)(1) of the Act. Dallas County Lamar—McKinney Bridge, (Road Infrastructure of Texas, 1866–1965 MPS) Across Trinity R. at Continental Ave., Dallas, 15000708 WISCONSIN Brown County Nicolet High School, 111 3rd St., De Pere, 15000703 Door County HANOVER (schooner) Shipwreck, (Great Lakes Shipwreck Sites of Wisconsin MPS) 1.75 mi. NW. of Fish Cr., Gibralter, 15000710 UCCESS (scow schooner) Shipwreck, (Great Lakes Shipwreck Sites of Wisconsin MPS) .13 mi. SW. of Whitefish Dunes State Park, Sevastopal, 15000711 Manitowoc County PATHFINDER (schooner) Shipwreck, (Great Lakes Shipwreck Sites of Wisconsin MPS) 2.6 mi. N. of Rawley Point Lighthouse, Two Creeks, 15000712 Marinette County Brown, Mary and Harry, House, 1931 Riverside Ave., Marinette, 15000713 [FR Doc. 2015–23316 Filed 9–16–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–51–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–540–544 and 731–TA–1283–1290 (Preliminary)] tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products From Brazil, China, India, Japan, Korea, Netherlands, Russia, and the United Kingdom Determinations On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigations, the United States International Trade Commission (‘‘Commission’’) determines,2 pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’), that there is a reasonable indication that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports of cold-rolled steel flat products from Brazil, China, India, Japan, Korea, Russia, and the United Kingdom, provided for in subheadings 7209.15, 7209.16, 7209.17, 7209.18, 7209.25, 7209.26, 7209.27, 7209.28, 7209.90, 7210.70, 7211.23, 7211.29, 7211.90, 7212.40, 7225.50, 7225.99, and 7226.92 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that are allegedly sold in the United States at less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’), and by imports of cold1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). 2 Commissioner F. Scott Kieff not participating. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:30 Sep 16, 2015 Jkt 235001 Commencement of Final Phase Investigations Pursuant to section 207.18 of the Commission’s rules, the Commission also gives notice of the commencement of the final phase of its investigations. The Commission will issue a final phase notice of scheduling, which will be published in the Federal Register as provided in section 207.21 of the Commission’s rules, upon notice from the Department of Commerce (‘‘Commerce’’) of affirmative preliminary determinations in the investigations under sections 703(b) or 733(b) of the Act, or, if the preliminary determinations are negative, upon notice of affirmative final determinations in those investigations under sections 705(a) or 735(a) of the Act. Parties that filed entries of appearance in the preliminary phase of the investigations need not enter a separate appearance for the final phase of the investigations. Industrial users, and, if the merchandise under investigation is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations have the right to appear as parties in Commission antidumping and countervailing duty investigations. The Secretary will prepare a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigations. Background On July 28, 2015, AK Steel Corporation (West Chester, Ohio), ArcelorMittal USA LLC (Chicago, Illinois), Nucor Corporation (Charlotte, North Carolina), Steel Dynamics, Inc. (Fort Wayne, Indiana), and United States Steel Corporation (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) filed a petition with the Commission and Commerce, alleging that an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of subsidized PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 imports of cold-rolled steel flat products from Brazil, China, India, Korea, and Russia and LTFV imports of cold-rolled steel flat products from Brazil, China, India, Japan, Korea, Netherlands, Russia, and the United Kingdom. Accordingly, effective July 28, 2015, the Commission, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 733(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671b(a) and 1673b(a)), instituted countervailing duty investigation Nos. 701–TA–540–544 and antidumping duty investigation Nos. 731–TA–1283– 1290 (Preliminary). Notice of the institution of the Commission’s investigations and of a public conference to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of August 3, 2015 (80 FR 46047). The conference was held in Washington, DC, on August 18, 2015, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission made these determinations pursuant to sections 703(a) and 733(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671b(a) and 1673b(a)). It completed and filed its determinations in these investigations on September 11, 2015. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4564 (September 2015), entitled Cold-Rolled Steel Flat Products from Brazil, China, India, Japan, Korea, Netherlands, Russia, and the United Kingdom: Investigation Nos. 701–TA– 540–544 and 731–TA–1283–1290 (Preliminary). By order of the Commission. Issued: September 11, 2015. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2015–23325 Filed 9–16–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–926] Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Systems, Products Containing the Same, and Components Thereof; Commission Determination to Review a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on the Issues Under Review and on Remedy, the Public Interest and Bonding U.S. International Trade Commission. AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM 17SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 180 / Thursday, September 17, 2015 / Notices ACTION: Notice. Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to review the final initial determination (‘‘ID’’) issued by the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on July 13, 2015, finding a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), as to certain asserted patent claims in this investigation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202– 205–3042. 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation on August 21, 2014, based on a complaint filed by Johnson Outdoors lnc. of Racine, Wisconsin and Johnson Outdoors Marine Electronics, Inc. of Eufaula, Alabama (collectively, ‘‘Johnson Outdoors’’). 79 FR 49536 (Aug. 21, 2014). 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 marine sonar imaging systems, products containing the same, and components thereof by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1, 2, 17, 25, 26, 31, 32, 35, 36, 41–43, 53, and 56 of U.S. Patent No. 7,652,952 (‘‘the ’952 patent’’); claims 1, 5, 7, 8, 21, 22, 24, 25, 28, and 29 of U.S. Patent No. 7,710,825 (‘‘the ’825 patent’’); and claims 14, 18, 21–23, 25, and 33 of U.S. Patent No. 7,755,974 (‘‘the ’974 patent’’). Id. The notice of investigation named the following respondents: Garmin International, Inc.; Garmin North America, Inc.; Garmin USA, Inc. all of Olathe, Kansas; and Garmin Corporation of New Taipei City, Taiwan tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:30 Sep 16, 2015 Jkt 235001 (collectively, ‘‘Garmin’’). Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is not a party to the investigation. On January 30, 2015, the parties entered into a stipulation that the domestic industry requirement was met. The parties also agreed to a stipulation regarding importation of Garmin accused products. That same day, Johnson Outdoors filed two unopposed motions for summary determination: (1) That Garmin’s importation and sales satisfy the importation requirement and (2) that Johnson Outdoors satisfies the domestic industry requirement. On March 24, 2015, the ALJ granted Johnson Outdoors’ summary determination motions in Order Nos. 14 and 15, respectively. The Commission determined not to review. See Notice of Commission Determination Not to Review Two Initial Determinations Granting Unopposed Motions for Summary Determinations of Importation and the Existence of a Domestic Industry That Practices the Asserted Patents (April 22, 2015). On July 13, 2015, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a violation of section 337 by Garmin in connection with claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, and 33 of the ’974 patent. The ALJ found no violation of section 337 in connection with the asserted claims of the ’952 and ’825 patents; and claim 25 of the ’974 patent. Specifically, the ALJ found that the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction over the accused products, and in personam jurisdiction over Garmin. ID at 21. The ALJ further found that the accused products infringe asserted claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, and 33 of the ’974 patent but do not infringe the asserted claims of the ’952 and ’825 patents or claim 25 of the ’974 patent. See ID at 55–57, 58–59, 60–62. The ALJ also found that Garmin failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that the asserted claims of the ’952, ’825, or ’974 patents were anticipated or rendered obvious by the cited prior art references. See id. at 68–80, 89–100. Finally, the ALJ found that the ’952, ’825, and ’974 patents are not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct and that the’952 patent is not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(f) for derivation. ID at 80–83, 100–109. On July 27, 2015, Garmin filed a petition for review of the ID. That same day, Johnson Outdoors filed a contingent petition for review of the ID. On August 4, 2015, the parties filed responses to the petitions. Having examined the record of this investigation, including the ALJ’s final ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto, the Commission has PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 55873 determined to review the final ID on all issues petitioned. The parties are requested to provide any comments they may have as to the Commission’s proposed construction below with reference to the applicable law and the evidentiary record. In connection with its review, the Commission is particularly interested in a response to the following: If the Commission were to construe the claim term ‘‘mounted to a boat’’ to mean ‘‘proximately secured to the boat in a fixed manner,’’ please discuss any impact this construction may have on the ID’s findings. 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 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 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 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period, the subject articles would be entitled to enter the United E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM 17SEN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 55874 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 180 / Thursday, September 17, 2015 / Notices 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 are requested to file written submissions on the issues identified in this notice. Parties to the investigation, 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. Complainants are requested to submit proposed remedial orders for the Commission’s consideration. Complainants are also requested to state the date that the patents expire and the HTSUS numbers under which the accused products are imported. Complainants are further requested to supply the names of known importers of the Garmin products at issue in this investigation. The written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later than close of business on September 21, 2015. Reply submissions must be filed no later than the close of business on September 28, 2015. Such submissions should address the ALJ’s recommended determinations on remedy and bonding. No further submissions on any of 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 eight 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–926’’) in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/ 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:30 Sep 16, 2015 Jkt 235001 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 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: September 11, 2015. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2015–23329 Filed 9–16–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P on-line instructions for submitting comments for docket number MSHA– 2015–0022. • Regular Mail: Send comments to USDOL–MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA 22202–5452. • Hand Delivery: USDOL–Mine Safety and Health Administration, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, VA 22202–5452. Sign in at the receptionist’s desk on the 4th floor via the East elevator. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheila McConnell, Acting Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA, at MSHA.information.collections@dol.gov (email); 202–693–9440 (voice); or 202– 693–9441 (facsimile). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Mine Safety and Health Administration [OMB Control No. 1219–0011] Revision of a Currently Approved Collection; Respirable Coal Mine Dust Sampling Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor. ACTION: Request for public comments. AGENCY: The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a pre-clearance consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies with an opportunity to comment on proposed collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). This program helps to assure that requested data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents can be properly assessed. Currently, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is soliciting comments on the information collection for Respirable Coal Mine Dust Sampling. DATES: All comments must be received on or before November 16, 2015. ADDRESSES: Comments concerning the information collection requirements of this notice may be sent by any of the methods listed below. • Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Chronic exposure to respirable coal mine dust causes lung diseases including coal workers’ pneumoconiosis (CWP), emphysema, silicosis, and chronic bronchitis, known collectively as ‘‘black lung.’’ These diseases are debilitating and can result in disability and premature death. While considerable progress has been made in lowering dust levels since 1970 and, consequently, lowering the prevalence rate of black lung among coal miners, severe forms of black lung continue to be identified. Information from the federally funded Coal Workers’ Health Surveillance Programs administered by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) clearly indicates that black lung remains a key occupational health risk among our nation’s coal miners. According to NIOSH, 933 or 3.7 percent of the 25,558 underground coal miners x-rayed between January 2003 and September 2011 were found to have CWP. Also, in FY 2011, over 28,600 former coal miners and the dependents of miners received $417 million in ‘‘black lung’’ benefits. Since inception of the federal Black Lung Benefits Program in 1970, over $45 billion in total benefits have been paid out to former miners and their dependents. Section 103(h) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act), 30 U.S.C. 813(h), authorizes MSHA to collect information necessary to carry out its duty to protect the safety and health of miners. Further, Section 101(a) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. 811(a), authorizes the Secretary to develop, promulgate, and revise as may be appropriate, improved mandatory health or safety standards for the E:\FR\FM\17SEN1.SGM 17SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 180 (Thursday, September 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55872-55874]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23329]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-926]


Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Systems, Products Containing the 
Same, and Components Thereof; Commission Determination to Review a 
Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; 
Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on the Issues Under Review and 
on Remedy, the Public Interest and Bonding

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

[[Page 55873]]


ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined to review the final initial determination 
(``ID'') issued by the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') on 
July 13, 2015, finding a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), as to certain asserted patent claims 
in this investigation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-3042. 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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation 
on August 21, 2014, based on a complaint filed by Johnson Outdoors lnc. 
of Racine, Wisconsin and Johnson Outdoors Marine Electronics, Inc. of 
Eufaula, Alabama (collectively, ``Johnson Outdoors''). 79 FR 49536 
(Aug. 21, 2014). 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 marine sonar imaging 
systems, products containing the same, and components thereof by reason 
of infringement of one or more of claims 1, 2, 17, 25, 26, 31, 32, 35, 
36, 41-43, 53, and 56 of U.S. Patent No. 7,652,952 (``the '952 
patent''); claims 1, 5, 7, 8, 21, 22, 24, 25, 28, and 29 of U.S. Patent 
No. 7,710,825 (``the '825 patent''); and claims 14, 18, 21-23, 25, and 
33 of U.S. Patent No. 7,755,974 (``the '974 patent''). Id. The notice 
of investigation named the following respondents: Garmin International, 
Inc.; Garmin North America, Inc.; Garmin USA, Inc. all of Olathe, 
Kansas; and Garmin Corporation of New Taipei City, Taiwan 
(collectively, ``Garmin''). Id. The Office of Unfair Import 
Investigations is not a party to the investigation.
    On January 30, 2015, the parties entered into a stipulation that 
the domestic industry requirement was met. The parties also agreed to a 
stipulation regarding importation of Garmin accused products. That same 
day, Johnson Outdoors filed two unopposed motions for summary 
determination: (1) That Garmin's importation and sales satisfy the 
importation requirement and (2) that Johnson Outdoors satisfies the 
domestic industry requirement. On March 24, 2015, the ALJ granted 
Johnson Outdoors' summary determination motions in Order Nos. 14 and 
15, respectively. The Commission determined not to review. See Notice 
of Commission Determination Not to Review Two Initial Determinations 
Granting Unopposed Motions for Summary Determinations of Importation 
and the Existence of a Domestic Industry That Practices the Asserted 
Patents (April 22, 2015).
    On July 13, 2015, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a violation 
of section 337 by Garmin in connection with claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, 
and 33 of the '974 patent. The ALJ found no violation of section 337 in 
connection with the asserted claims of the '952 and '825 patents; and 
claim 25 of the '974 patent. Specifically, the ALJ found that the 
Commission has subject matter jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction over 
the accused products, and in personam jurisdiction over Garmin. ID at 
21. The ALJ further found that the accused products infringe asserted 
claims 14, 18, 21, 22, 23, and 33 of the '974 patent but do not 
infringe the asserted claims of the '952 and '825 patents or claim 25 
of the '974 patent. See ID at 55-57, 58-59, 60-62. The ALJ also found 
that Garmin failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that 
the asserted claims of the '952, '825, or '974 patents were anticipated 
or rendered obvious by the cited prior art references. See id. at 68-
80, 89-100. Finally, the ALJ found that the '952, '825, and '974 
patents are not unenforceable due to inequitable conduct and that 
the'952 patent is not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(f) for derivation. ID 
at 80-83, 100-109.
    On July 27, 2015, Garmin filed a petition for review of the ID. 
That same day, Johnson Outdoors filed a contingent petition for review 
of the ID. On August 4, 2015, the parties filed responses to the 
petitions.
    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 on all issues 
petitioned.
    The parties are requested to provide any comments they may have as 
to the Commission's proposed construction below with reference to the 
applicable law and the evidentiary record. In connection with its 
review, the Commission is particularly interested in a response to the 
following:

    If the Commission were to construe the claim term ``mounted to a 
boat'' to mean ``proximately secured to the boat in a fixed 
manner,'' please discuss any impact this construction may have on 
the ID's findings.

    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 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 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 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period, the 
subject articles would be entitled to enter the United

[[Page 55874]]

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 are requested 
to file written submissions on the issues identified in this notice. 
Parties to the investigation, 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. Complainants are requested to submit proposed 
remedial orders for the Commission's consideration. Complainants are 
also requested to state the date that the patents expire and the HTSUS 
numbers under which the accused products are imported. Complainants are 
further requested to supply the names of known importers of the Garmin 
products at issue in this investigation. The written submissions and 
proposed remedial orders must be filed no later than close of business 
on September 21, 2015. Reply submissions must be filed no later than 
the close of business on September 28, 2015. Such submissions should 
address the ALJ's recommended determinations on remedy and bonding. No 
further submissions on any of 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 eight 
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-926'') in a prominent place on 
the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic 
Filing Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/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 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: September 11, 2015.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015-23329 Filed 9-16-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P