Certain Document Cameras and Software for Use Therewith; Commission's Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Terminating Recordex USA, Inc.; Request for Written Submissions on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding, 31258-31259 [2016-11706]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
31258
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 18, 2016 / Notices
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–967]
Certain Document Cameras and
Software for Use Therewith;
Commission’s Determination Not To
Review an Initial Determination
Terminating Recordex USA, Inc.;
Request for Written Submissions on
Remedy, the Public Interest, and
Bonding
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. 19) terminating
Recordex USA, Inc. The Commission
requests written submissions, under the
schedule set forth below, on remedy,
public interest, and bonding.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amanda Pitcher Fisherow, Esq., Office
of the General Counsel, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E
Street SW., Washington, DC 20436,
telephone (202) 205–2737. 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 https://www.usitc.gov.
The public record for this investigation
may be viewed on the Commission’s
electronic docket (EDIS) at https://
edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired
persons are advised that information on
this matter can be obtained by
contacting the Commission’s TDD
terminal on (202) 205–1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Commission instituted this investigation
on September 24, 2015, based on a
complaint filed on behalf of Pathway
Innovations & Technologies, Inc. of San
Diego, California (‘‘Complainant’’). 80
FR 57642 (September 24, 2015). The
complaint alleges violations of section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the sale for
importation, importation, or sale within
the United States after importation of
certain document cameras and software
for use therewith by reason of
infringement of certain claims of U.S.
Design Patent No. D647,906; U.S. Design
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 May 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
Patent No. D674,389; U.S. Design Patent
No. D715,300; and U.S. Patent No.
8,508,751. The Commission’s notice of
investigation named the following
respondents: Recordex USA, Inc., of
Long Island City, New York
(‘‘Recordex’’); QOMO HiteVision, LLC,
of Wixom, Michigan (‘‘QOMO’’); and
Adesso, Inc. of Walnut, California
(‘‘Adesso’’). The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations was named as a party but
has subsequently withdrawn from the
investigation. Adesso was terminated
based on a consent order stipulation and
consent order. Order No. 5 (unreviewed)
(Nov. 23, 2015). QOMO was found to be
in default. Order No. 10 (unreviewed)
(Dec. 7, 2015). Recordex is the last
remaining respondent in this
investigation.
On April 11, 2016, Complainant and
Recordex filed a joint motion to
terminate the investigation as to
Recordex based on a settlement
agreement. Complainant and Recordex
stated that other than the settlement
agreement, ‘‘[t]here are no other
agreements, written or oral, express or
implied between the moving parties
concerning the subject matter of the
investigation.’’
On April 20, 2016, the ALJ granted
the joint motion. The ID agreed with
Complainant and Recordex that
termination of the investigation as to
Recordex will not negatively impact the
public interest. ID at 2. The parties
provided public and confidential
versions of the settlement agreement.
The Commission has determined not
to review the subject ID.
As noted above, QOMO was
previously found to be in default.
Section 337(g)(1) and Commission Rule
210.16(c) authorize the Commission to
order relief against a respondent found
in default, unless, after considering the
public interest, it finds that such relief
should not issue. Complainant seeks a
limited exclusion order and a cease and
desist order.
In connection with the final
disposition of this investigation, the
Commission may: (1) Issue an order that
could result in the exclusion of articles
manufactured or imported by the
defaulting respondent; and/or (2) issue
a cease and desist order that could
result in the defaulting 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
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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, Comm’n Op. at 7–10
(December 1994).
If the Commission contemplates some
form of remedy, it must consider the
effects of that remedy upon the public
interest. The factors that the
Commission will consider include the
effect that the exclusion order and/or
cease and desists 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
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: 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.
Complainant is also requested to state
the date that the asserted patents expire
and the HTSUS numbers under which
the accused products are imported.
Complainant is further requested to
supply the names of known importers of
the products at issue in this
investigation.
The written submissions and
proposed remedial orders must be filed
no later than close of business on May
23, 2016. Reply submissions must be
filed no later than the close of business
on May 31, 2016. No further
submissions on these issues will be
permitted unless otherwise ordered by
the Commission.
E:\FR\FM\18MYN1.SGM
18MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 96 / Wednesday, May 18, 2016 / Notices
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–967’’) in a prominent place on
the cover page and/or the first page. (See
Handbook for Electronic Filing
Procedures, https://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 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: May 13, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016–11706 Filed 5–17–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
sradovich on DSK3TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Antitrust Division
Notice Pursuant to the National
Cooperative Research and Production
Act of 1993—Heterogeneous System
Architecture Foundation
Notice is hereby given that, on April
12, 2016, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the
National Cooperative Research and
Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301
et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Heterogeneous
System Architecture Foundation (‘‘HSA
Foundation’’) has filed written
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:10 May 17, 2016
Jkt 238001
notifications simultaneously with the
Attorney General and the Federal Trade
Commission disclosing changes in its
membership. The notifications were
filed for the purpose of extending the
Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of
antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages
under specified circumstances.
¨
¨
Specifically, Malardalen hogskola,
˚
¨
Vasteras, SWEDEN, has been added as
a party to this venture.
No other changes have been made in
either the membership or planned
activity of the group research project.
Membership in this group research
project remains open, and HSA
Foundation intends to file additional
written notifications disclosing all
changes in membership.
On August 31, 2012, HSA Foundation
filed its original notification pursuant to
Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department
of Justice published a notice in the
Federal Register pursuant to Section
6(b) of the Act on October 11, 2012 (77
FR 61786).
The last notification was filed with
the Department on January 20, 2016. A
notice was published in the Federal
Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the
Act on February 26, 2016 (81 FR 9884).
Patricia A. Brink,
Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust
Division.
[FR Doc. 2016–11738 Filed 5–17–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Antitrust Division
Notice Pursuant to the National
Cooperative Research and Production
Act of 1993—Yoga Bridge
Accreditation
Notice is hereby given that, on March
24, 2016, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the
National Cooperative Research and
Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301
et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Yoga Bridge
Accreditation (‘‘YBA’’) has filed written
notifications simultaneously with the
Attorney General and the Federal Trade
Commission disclosing (1) the name and
principal place of business of the
standards development organization
and (2) the nature and scope of its
standards development activities. The
notifications were filed for the purpose
of extending the Act’s provisions
limiting the recovery of antitrust
plaintiffs to actual damages under
specified circumstances.
Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act,
the name and principal place of
business of the standards development
organization is: YBA (Yoga Bridge
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
31259
Accreditation), Portland, OR. The nature
and scope of YBA’s standards and
development activities are: To set
industry standards for a diverse research
based yoga training & education. YBA
works on two fronts: To certify
individuals interested in yoga according
to our Standards, and, to offer certified
continuing education classes for
professionals in non-yoga related fields
to incorporate YBA teachings into their
existing professions.
Patricia A. Brink,
Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust
Division.
[FR Doc. 2016–11740 Filed 5–17–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Antitrust Division
Notice Pursuant to the National
Cooperative Research and Production
Act of 1993—Members of SGIP 2.0, Inc.
Notice is hereby given that, on April
12, 2016, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the
National Cooperative Research and
Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301
et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Members of SGIP
2.0, Inc. (‘‘MSGIP 2.0’’) have filed
written notifications simultaneously
with the Attorney General and the
Federal Trade Commission disclosing
changes in its membership. The
notifications were filed for the purpose
of extending the Act’s provisions
limiting the recovery of antitrust
plaintiffs to actual damages under
specified circumstances. Specifically,
Machfu, Germantown, MD; OPC
Foundation, Mantua, OH; Smarter Grid
Solutions, Brooklyn, NY; Korea
Electrotechnology Research Institute,
Gyeongsangnam-do, REPUBLIC OF
KOREA; Hitachi Consulting, Dallas, TX;
and National Grid USA, Waltham, MA,
have been added as parties to this
venture.
Also, Hydro-Quebec, Montreal,
CANADA; Valley View Corporation,
Rockville, MD; Michigan Public Service
Commission, Lansing, MI; WiMAX
Forum, Portland, OR; Lakeview
Consulting Group, Morgan Hill, CA;
Buford Goff & Associates, Inc.,
Columbia, SC; Qualcomm Technologies,
Inc., San Diego, CA; Z-Wave Alliance,
Milpitas, CA; Wells Fargo, San
Francisco, CA; Cetecom, Milpitas, CA;
JKN Consulting, Scotts Valley, CA;
Energy Central, Aurora, CO; and Jamaica
Public Service Company Ltd., Kingston
5, JAMAICA, have withdrawn as parties
to this venture.
No other changes have been made in
either the membership or planned
E:\FR\FM\18MYN1.SGM
18MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 96 (Wednesday, May 18, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31258-31259]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11706]
[[Page 31258]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-967]
Certain Document Cameras and Software for Use Therewith;
Commission's Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination
Terminating Recordex USA, Inc.; Request for Written Submissions on
Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding
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. 19)
terminating Recordex USA, Inc. The Commission requests written
submissions, under the schedule set forth below, on remedy, public
interest, and bonding.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amanda Pitcher Fisherow, Esq., Office
of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E
Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2737. 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 https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed
on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov.
Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter
can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202)
205-1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation
on September 24, 2015, based on a complaint filed on behalf of Pathway
Innovations & Technologies, Inc. of San Diego, California
(``Complainant''). 80 FR 57642 (September 24, 2015). The complaint
alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the sale for importation, importation, or
sale within the United States after importation of certain document
cameras and software for use therewith by reason of infringement of
certain claims of U.S. Design Patent No. D647,906; U.S. Design Patent
No. D674,389; U.S. Design Patent No. D715,300; and U.S. Patent No.
8,508,751. The Commission's notice of investigation named the following
respondents: Recordex USA, Inc., of Long Island City, New York
(``Recordex''); QOMO HiteVision, LLC, of Wixom, Michigan (``QOMO'');
and Adesso, Inc. of Walnut, California (``Adesso''). The Office of
Unfair Import Investigations was named as a party but has subsequently
withdrawn from the investigation. Adesso was terminated based on a
consent order stipulation and consent order. Order No. 5 (unreviewed)
(Nov. 23, 2015). QOMO was found to be in default. Order No. 10
(unreviewed) (Dec. 7, 2015). Recordex is the last remaining respondent
in this investigation.
On April 11, 2016, Complainant and Recordex filed a joint motion to
terminate the investigation as to Recordex based on a settlement
agreement. Complainant and Recordex stated that other than the
settlement agreement, ``[t]here are no other agreements, written or
oral, express or implied between the moving parties concerning the
subject matter of the investigation.''
On April 20, 2016, the ALJ granted the joint motion. The ID agreed
with Complainant and Recordex that termination of the investigation as
to Recordex will not negatively impact the public interest. ID at 2.
The parties provided public and confidential versions of the settlement
agreement.
The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID.
As noted above, QOMO was previously found to be in default. Section
337(g)(1) and Commission Rule 210.16(c) authorize the Commission to
order relief against a respondent found in default, unless, after
considering the public interest, it finds that such relief should not
issue. Complainant seeks a limited exclusion order and a cease and
desist order.
In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the
Commission may: (1) Issue an order that could result in the exclusion
of articles manufactured or imported by the defaulting respondent; and/
or (2) issue a cease and desist order that could result in the
defaulting 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, Comm'n Op. at 7-10 (December 1994).
If the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must
consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The
factors that the Commission will consider include the effect that the
exclusion order and/or cease and desists 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 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: 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. Complainant is also requested to state the date that the
asserted patents expire and the HTSUS numbers under which the accused
products are imported. Complainant is further requested to supply the
names of known importers of the products at issue in this
investigation.
The written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed
no later than close of business on May 23, 2016. Reply submissions must
be filed no later than the close of business on May 31, 2016. No
further submissions on these issues will be permitted unless otherwise
ordered by the Commission.
[[Page 31259]]
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-967'') in a prominent place on
the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic
Filing Procedures, https://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 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: May 13, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016-11706 Filed 5-17-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
