Certain Audio Processing Hardware and Software and Products Containing Same: Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial Determination Terminating Dell Inc.; and Termination of the Investigation, 27173-27174 [2016-10575]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2016 / Notices Geographic Sciences, Bureau of Land Management, 1220 SW 3rd Avenue Portland, Oregon 97204. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1– 800–877–8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A person or party who wishes to protest against this survey must file a written notice with the Oregon State Director, Bureau of Land Management, stating that they wish to protest. A statement of reasons for a protest may be filed with the notice of protest and must be filed with the Oregon State Director within thirty days after the protest is filed. If a protest against the survey is received prior to the date of official filing, the filing will be stayed pending consideration of the protest. A plat will not be officially filed until the day after all protests have been dismissed or otherwise resolved. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personally identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personally identifying information— may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personally identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Mary J.M. Hartel, Chief Cadastral Surveyor of Oregon/ Washington. Comments on the Draft EIS will be accepted until close of business on Wednesday, June 8, 2016. DATES: Reclamation has changed the point of contact for this Draft EIS. Please send written comments to Ms. Nancy Coulam, Bureau of Reclamation, 125 South State Street, Room 8100, Salt Lake City, Utah 84138–1147; or via email to ncoulam@usbr.gov. ADDRESSES: Ms. Nancy Coulam, EIS Project Manager, Bureau of Reclamation, via email at ncoulam@usbr.gov, or at (801) 524– 3684. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In response to two requests for an extension, the Bureau of Reclamation is extending the close of the public comment period for the Draft EIS to Wednesday, June 8, 2016. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Disclosure [FR Doc. 2016–10516 Filed 5–4–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–33–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Reclamation [RR43100000, 16XR0680A1, RX002361010021000] mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on continuing to implement the 2008 Operating Agreement for the Rio Grande Project (Operating Agreement), and to implement long-term contracts for storage of San Juan-Chama Project water in Elephant Butte Reservoir, to Wednesday, June 8, 2016. The Notice of Availability and Notice of Public Hearings for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement was published in the Federal Register on March 18, 2016 (81 FR 14886). The public comment period for the Draft EIS was originally scheduled to end on Monday, May 9, 2016. Notice To Extend the Public Comment Period and Change Point of Contact for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Continued Implementation of the 2008 Operating Agreement for the Rio Grande Project, New Mexico and Texas 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: April 27, 2016. Brent Rhees, Regional Director. [FR Doc. 2016–10526 Filed 5–4–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4332–90–P AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior. Notice of extension. ACTION: The Bureau of Reclamation is extending the public comment period SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 May 04, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 27173 INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–949] Certain Audio Processing Hardware and Software and Products Containing Same: Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial Determination Terminating Dell Inc.; and 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 the presiding administrative law judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 40) terminating the investigation on the basis of withdrawal of the complainant as to the last remaining respondent, Dell Inc. (‘‘Dell’’) of Round Rock, Texas. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cathy Chen, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–2392. 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 March 18, 2015, based on a complaint filed by Andrea Electronics Corp. (‘‘Andrea’’) of Bohemia, New York. 80 FR 14,159 (Mar. 18, 2015). 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 audio processing hardware and software and products containing same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,825,898 (‘‘the ’898 patent’’); 6,483,923 (‘‘the ’923 patent’’); 6,049,607 (‘‘the ’607 patent’’); SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM 05MYN1 mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES 27174 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2016 / Notices 6,363,345 (‘‘the ’345 patent’’); and 6,377,637 (‘‘the ’637 patent’’). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(2). The notice of investigation named Dell and the following 12 respondents: Acer Inc. of New Taipei City, Taiwan; Acer America Corp. of San Jose, California (collectively, ‘‘Acer’’); ASUSTeK Computer Inc. of Taipei, Taiwan; ASUS Computer International of Fremont, California (collectively, ‘‘ASUS’’); Hewlett Packard Co. (‘‘HP’’) of Palo Alto, California; Lenovo Holding Co., Inc. and Lenovo (United States) Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Lenovo’’), both of Morrisville, North Carolina; Lenovo Group Ltd. of Beijing, China; Toshiba Corp. of Tokyo, Japan; Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘Toshiba’’) of Irvine, California; Toshiba America, Inc. of New York City, New York; and Realtek Semiconductor Corp. (‘‘Realtek’’) of Hsinchu, Taiwan. Also, intervenors Waves Audio Ltd. (‘‘Waves’’) of Tel Aviv, Israel and Conexant Systems Inc. (‘‘Conexant’’) of Irvine, California were subsequently added to the investigation. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is a party in this investigation. The 12 other respondents and the two intervenors, as detailed below, have been terminated from the investigation based on settlement or stipulation. On July 13, 2015, the Commission determined not to review an ID finding that Andre has standing to bring the complaint in this investigation and to deny respondents’ motion for oral argument. On May 1, 2015, the Commission determined not to review two IDs (Order Nos. 4, 5) granting motions of Andrea terminating the investigation as to Lenovo Group Ltd. and Toshiba America, Inc., respectively, based on stipulation. On December 8, 2015, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 23) granting a joint motion of Andrea and Realtek terminating the investigation as to Realtek based on a settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On December 21, 2015, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 24) granting a joint motion of Andrea and Acer terminating the investigation as to Acer based on a settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On January 5, 2016, the Commission determined not to review two IDs (Order Nos. 25, 26) granting a motion of Andrea to terminate the investigation as to all infringement allegations relating to the ’637 patent; the ’898 patent; the ’923 patent; claims 4–11, 18–20, 22, and 39– VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 May 04, 2016 Jkt 238001 46 of the ’345 patent; and claims 5–7, 9–12, 29–31, and 33–37 of the ’607 patent. On February 3, 2016, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 30) granting a joint motion of Andrea and HP terminating the investigation as to HP based on a settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On March 4, 2016, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 33) granting a joint motion of Andrea and ASUS terminating the investigation as to ASUS based on a settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On March 17, 2016, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 36) granting a joint motion of Andrea and Lenovo terminating the investigation as to Lenovo based on a settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On April 5, 2016, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 37) granting a joint motion of Andrea and Conexant terminating the investigation as to Conexant based on a settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On April 19, 2016, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 38) granting a joint motion of Andrea and Waves terminating the investigation as to Waves based on a settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On the same date, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 39) granting a joint motion of Andrea and Toshiba terminating the investigation as to Toshiba based on a settlement agreement. On March 25, 2016, Andrea filed a motion to terminate the last remaining respondent, Dell, from the investigation on the basis of withdrawal of the complaint as to Dell. Andrea affirmed that there are no agreements, written or oral, express or implied, between itself and Dell concerning the subject matter of the investigation. None of the other parties opposed the motion. On April 6, 2016, the ALJ granted the motion as an ID. The ALJ found no information indicating that termination of the investigation with respect to Dell on the basis of the withdrawal of the complaint is contrary to the public health and welfare, competitive conditions in the U.S. economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or U.S. consumers. The ALJ also terminated the investigation. Order No. 40 at 2. No petitions for review of the ID were filed. The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID, and has terminated the investigation. PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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. Dated: May 2, 2016. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2016–10575 Filed 5–4–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Proposed Consent Decree Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability On April 29, 2016, the Department of Justice lodged a consent decree with the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida in the lawsuit entitled United States v. EG&G Florida, Inc., Civil Action No. 6:16–cv–0716. The United States filed this lawsuit under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) for the recovery of costs that the United States incurred responding to releases of hazardous substances at Space Launch Complex 15 at the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Brevard County, Florida. The consent decree requires the defendant, EG&G Florida, Inc., to pay $331,556 to the United States. In return, the United States agrees not to sue the defendant under sections 106 and 107 of CERCLA. The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the consent decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to United States v. EG&G Florida, Inc., D.J. Ref. No. 90–11–3–10477/2. All comments must be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the publication date of this notice. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail: To submit comments: Send them to: By email ....... pubcomment-ees.enrd@ usdoj.gov. Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044–7611. By mail ......... During the public comment period, the consent decree may be examined E:\FR\FM\05MYN1.SGM 05MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 87 (Thursday, May 5, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27173-27174]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10575]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-949]


Certain Audio Processing Hardware and Software and Products 
Containing Same: Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial 
Determination Terminating Dell Inc.; and Termination of the 
Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined not to review the presiding administrative 
law judge's (``ALJ'') initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 40) 
terminating the investigation on the basis of withdrawal of the 
complainant as to the last remaining respondent, Dell Inc. (``Dell'') 
of Round Rock, Texas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cathy Chen, Office of the General 
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2392. 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 March 18, 2015, based on a complaint filed by Andrea Electronics 
Corp. (``Andrea'') of Bohemia, New York. 80 FR 14,159 (Mar. 18, 2015). 
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 audio processing hardware and software and 
products containing same by reason of infringement of certain claims of 
U.S. Patent Nos. 5,825,898 (``the '898 patent''); 6,483,923 (``the '923 
patent''); 6,049,607 (``the '607 patent'');

[[Page 27174]]

6,363,345 (``the '345 patent''); and 6,377,637 (``the '637 patent''). 
The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States 
exists as required by 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(2). The notice of investigation 
named Dell and the following 12 respondents: Acer Inc. of New Taipei 
City, Taiwan; Acer America Corp. of San Jose, California (collectively, 
``Acer''); ASUSTeK Computer Inc. of Taipei, Taiwan; ASUS Computer 
International of Fremont, California (collectively, ``ASUS''); Hewlett 
Packard Co. (``HP'') of Palo Alto, California; Lenovo Holding Co., Inc. 
and Lenovo (United States) Inc. (collectively, ``Lenovo''), both of 
Morrisville, North Carolina; Lenovo Group Ltd. of Beijing, China; 
Toshiba Corp. of Tokyo, Japan; Toshiba America Information Systems, 
Inc. (collectively, ``Toshiba'') of Irvine, California; Toshiba 
America, Inc. of New York City, New York; and Realtek Semiconductor 
Corp. (``Realtek'') of Hsinchu, Taiwan. Also, intervenors Waves Audio 
Ltd. (``Waves'') of Tel Aviv, Israel and Conexant Systems Inc. 
(``Conexant'') of Irvine, California were subsequently added to the 
investigation. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is a party in 
this investigation. The 12 other respondents and the two intervenors, 
as detailed below, have been terminated from the investigation based on 
settlement or stipulation.
    On July 13, 2015, the Commission determined not to review an ID 
finding that Andre has standing to bring the complaint in this 
investigation and to deny respondents' motion for oral argument. On May 
1, 2015, the Commission determined not to review two IDs (Order Nos. 4, 
5) granting motions of Andrea terminating the investigation as to 
Lenovo Group Ltd. and Toshiba America, Inc., respectively, based on 
stipulation. On December 8, 2015, the Commission determined not to 
review an ID (Order No. 23) granting a joint motion of Andrea and 
Realtek terminating the investigation as to Realtek based on a 
settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On December 21, 
2015, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 24) 
granting a joint motion of Andrea and Acer terminating the 
investigation as to Acer based on a settlement agreement and a patent 
license agreement. On January 5, 2016, the Commission determined not to 
review two IDs (Order Nos. 25, 26) granting a motion of Andrea to 
terminate the investigation as to all infringement allegations relating 
to the '637 patent; the '898 patent; the '923 patent; claims 4-11, 18-
20, 22, and 39-46 of the '345 patent; and claims 5-7, 9-12, 29-31, and 
33-37 of the '607 patent. On February 3, 2016, the Commission 
determined not to review an ID (Order No. 30) granting a joint motion 
of Andrea and HP terminating the investigation as to HP based on a 
settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On March 4, 2016, 
the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 33) granting a 
joint motion of Andrea and ASUS terminating the investigation as to 
ASUS based on a settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On 
March 17, 2016, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order 
No. 36) granting a joint motion of Andrea and Lenovo terminating the 
investigation as to Lenovo based on a settlement agreement and a patent 
license agreement. On April 5, 2016, the Commission determined not to 
review an ID (Order No. 37) granting a joint motion of Andrea and 
Conexant terminating the investigation as to Conexant based on a 
settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. On April 19, 2016, 
the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 38) granting a 
joint motion of Andrea and Waves terminating the investigation as to 
Waves based on a settlement agreement and a patent license agreement. 
On the same date, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order 
No. 39) granting a joint motion of Andrea and Toshiba terminating the 
investigation as to Toshiba based on a settlement agreement.
    On March 25, 2016, Andrea filed a motion to terminate the last 
remaining respondent, Dell, from the investigation on the basis of 
withdrawal of the complaint as to Dell. Andrea affirmed that there are 
no agreements, written or oral, express or implied, between itself and 
Dell concerning the subject matter of the investigation. None of the 
other parties opposed the motion.
    On April 6, 2016, the ALJ granted the motion as an ID. The ALJ 
found no information indicating that termination of the investigation 
with respect to Dell on the basis of the withdrawal of the complaint is 
contrary to the public health and welfare, competitive conditions in 
the U.S. economy, the production of like or directly competitive 
articles in the United States, or U.S. consumers. The ALJ also 
terminated the investigation. Order No. 40 at 2.
    No petitions for review of the ID were filed. The Commission has 
determined not to review the subject ID, and has terminated the 
investigation.
    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.

    Dated: May 2, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016-10575 Filed 5-4-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7020-02-P