Certain Portable Electronic Devices and Components Thereof; Commission Determination Not To Review the 100-Day Initial Determination Finding the Asserted Claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,928,433 Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. 101; Termination of Investigation, 66295-66296 [2016-23243]
Download as PDF
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices
request permission to present a short
statement at the conference.
Written Submissions.—As provided in
sections 201.8 and 207.15 of the
Commission’s rules, any person may
submit to the Commission on or before
October 14, 2016, a written brief
containing information and arguments
pertinent to the subject matter of the
investigations. Parties may file written
testimony in connection with their
presentation at the conference. All
written submissions must conform with
the provisions of section 201.8 of the
Commission’s rules; any submissions
that contain BPI must also conform with
the requirements of sections 201.6,
207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission’s
rules. The Commission’s Handbook on
E-Filing, available on the Commission’s
Web site at https://edis.usitc.gov,
elaborates upon the Commission’s rules
with respect to electronic filing.
In accordance with sections 201.16(c)
and 207.3 of the rules, each document
filed by a party to the investigations
must be served on all other parties to
the investigations (as identified by
either the public or BPI service list), and
a certificate of service must be timely
filed. The Secretary will not accept a
document for filing without a certificate
of service.
Certification.—Pursuant to section
207.3 of the Commission’s rules, any
person submitting information to the
Commission in connection with these
investigations must certify that the
information is accurate and complete to
the best of the submitter’s knowledge. In
making the certification, the submitter
will acknowledge that any information
that it submits to the Commission
during these investigations may be
disclosed to and used: (i) By the
Commission, its employees and Offices,
and contract personnel (a) for
developing or maintaining the records
of this/these or related investigations or
reviews, or (b) in internal investigations,
audits, reviews, and evaluations relating
to the programs, personnel, and
operations of the Commission including
under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by
U.S. government employees and
contract personnel, solely for
cybersecurity purposes. All contract
personnel will sign appropriate
nondisclosure agreements.
Authority: These investigations are being
conducted under authority of title VII of the
Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published
pursuant to section 207.12 of the
Commission’s rules.
By order of the Commission.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:08 Sep 26, 2016
Jkt 238001
Issued: September 21, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016–23207 Filed 9–26–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–994]
Certain Portable Electronic Devices
and Components Thereof;
Commission Determination Not To
Review the 100-Day Initial
Determination Finding the Asserted
Claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,928,433
Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. 101;
Termination of 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 100-day initial determination
(‘‘ID’’) of the presiding administrative
law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) finding the asserted
claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,928,433
invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101. The
investigation is terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Houda Morad, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
708–4716. 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 Investigation No.
337–TA–994 on May 11, 2016, based on
a complaint filed by Creative
Technology Ltd. of Singapore and
Creative Labs, Inc. of Milpitas,
California (collectively, ‘‘Creative’’). See
81 FR 29307 (May 11, 2016). The
complaint alleges violations of section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
66295
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 portable electronic devices and
components thereof by reason of
infringement of certain claims of U.S.
Patent No. 6,928,433 (‘‘the ’433 patent’’).
The notice of investigation named the
following respondents: ZTE Corporation
of Guangdong, China; ZTE (USA) Inc. of
Richardson, Texas; Sony Corporation of
Tokyo, Japan; Sony Mobile
Communications, Inc. of Tokyo, Japan;
Sony Mobile Communications AB of
Lund, Sweden; Sony Mobile
Communications (USA), Inc. of Atlanta,
Georgia; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
of Seoul, Republic of Korea; Samsung
Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield
Park, New Jersey; LG Electronics, Inc. of
Seoul, Republic of Korea; LG Electronics
U.S.A., Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey; LG Electronics Mobilecomm
U.S.A., Inc. of San Diego, California;
Lenovo Group Ltd. of Beijing, China;
Lenovo (United States) Inc. of
Morrisville, North Carolina; Motorola
Mobility LLC of Chicago, Illinois; HTC
Corporation of Taoyuan, Taiwan; HTC
America, Inc. of Bellevue, Washington;
Blackberry Ltd. of Waterloo, Ontario,
Canada; and Blackberry Corporation of
Irving, Texas (collectively,
‘‘Respondents’’). In addition, on May 19,
2016, the ALJ issued an initial
determination granting Google Inc.’s
(‘‘Intervenor’’) motion to intervene as a
party in the investigation. See Order No.
5, unreviewed, Comm’n Notice
(U.S.I.T.C. June 21, 2016). The Office of
Unfair Import Investigations (OUII) is
also a party to the investigation.
The notice of investigation also
directed the ALJ to ‘‘hold an early
evidentiary hearing, find facts, and issue
an early decision, as to whether the
asserted claims of the ’433 patent recite
patent-eligible subject matter under 35
U.S.C. 101’’ (i.e., the 100-day pilot
program). See 81 FR 29307 (May 11,
2016).
Accordingly, the ALJ conducted an
evidentiary hearing on July 6–7, 2016,
and on August 19, 2016, within 100
days of institution, the ALJ issued his ID
finding that the asserted claims are
directed to ineligible subject matter (i.e.,
invalid) under 35 U.S.C. 101. In
addition, although the ID noted that
construction of the disputed term
‘‘portable media player’’ was not
necessary to decide patent-eligibility
under 35 U.S.C. 101, the ALJ construed
the term to mean ‘‘portable media
playback device, as distinguished from
a general-purpose device such as a
handheld computer or a personal digital
assistant.’’
E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM
27SEN1
66296
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices
On August 29, 2016, Creative filed a
petition for review and on September 1,
2016, Respondents, Intervenor, and
OUII filed replies in opposition to
Creative’s petition.
The Commission has determined not
to review the ID. The investigation is
terminated.
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 21, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016–23243 Filed 9–26–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
U.S. Copyright Office
[Docket No. 2015–8]
Section 1201 Study: Request for
Additional Comments
U.S. Copyright Office, Library
of Congress.
ACTION: Notice of Inquiry.
AGENCY:
The United States Copyright
Office is requesting additional written
comments in connection with its
ongoing study on the operation of the
statutory provisions regarding the
circumvention of copyright protection
systems. This request provides an
opportunity for interested parties to
address certain issues raised by various
members of the public in response to
the Office’s initial Notice of Inquiry.
DATES: Written comments must be
received no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on October 27, 2016.
Written reply comments must be
received no later than 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on November 16, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The Copyright Office is
using the regulations.gov system for the
submission and posting of public
comments in this proceeding. All
comments are therefore to be submitted
electronically through regulations.gov.
Specific instructions for submitting
comments are available on the
Copyright Office Web site at https://
copyright.gov/policy/1201/
commentsubmission/. If electronic
submission of comments is not feasible,
please contact the Office using the
contact information below for special
instructions.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:08 Sep 26, 2016
Jkt 238001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin R. Amer, Senior Counsel for
Policy and International Affairs, by
email at kamer@loc.gov or by telephone
at 202–707–8350; or Regan A. Smith,
Associate General Counsel, by email at
resm@loc.gov or by telephone at 202–
707–8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
At the request of the Ranking Member
of the House Committee on the
Judiciary, the Copyright Office is
conducting a study to assess the
operation of section 1201 of title 17. In
December 2015, the Office issued a
Notice of Inquiry identifying several
aspects of the statutory and regulatory
framework that the Office believes are
ripe for review, and inviting public
comment on those and any other
pertinent issues.1 The Notice provided
for two rounds of written comments. In
response, the Office received sixty-eight
initial comments and sixteen reply
comments.2 The Office then announced
public roundtables on the topics
addressed in the Notice and comments.3
These sessions, held in Washington, DC
and San Francisco, California in May
2016, involved participation by more
than thirty panelists, representing a
wide range of interests and perspectives.
Transcripts of the roundtables are
available at https://copyright.gov/policy/
1201/, and video recordings will be
available at that location at a later date.
In the written comments and during
the roundtables, parties expressed a
variety of views regarding whether
legislative amendments to section 1201
may be warranted. Among other
suggested changes, commenters
discussed proposals to update the
statute’s permanent exemption
framework and to amend the antitrafficking provisions to permit thirdparty assistance with lawful
circumvention activities. At this time, as
explained below, the Office is interested
in receiving additional stakeholder
input on particular aspects of those
proposals. In addition, parties submitted
numerous and varied views regarding
the triennial rulemaking process under
section 1201(a)(1)(C); while the Office
continues to thoroughly evaluate these
comments in conducting its study, this
1 Section 1201 Study: Notice and Request for
Public Comment, 80 FR 81369 (Dec. 29, 2015).
2 All comments may be accessed from the
Copyright Office Web site at https://copyright.gov/
policy/1201/ by clicking the ‘‘Public Comments’’
tab, followed by the ‘‘Comments’’ link.
3 Software-Enabled Consumer Products Study and
Section 1201 Study: Announcement of Public
Roundtables, 81 FR 17206 (Mar. 28, 2016).
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
second Notice of Inquiry does not
specifically address those issues.
A party choosing to respond to this
Notice of Inquiry need not address every
topic below, but the Office requests that
responding parties clearly identify and
separately address those subjects for
which a response is submitted. Parties
also are invited to address any other
pertinent issues that the Office should
consider in conducting its study.
II. Subjects of Inquiry
1. Proposals for New Permanent
Exemptions
a. Assistive Technologies for Use by
Persons Who Are Blind, Visually
Impaired, or Print Disabled. The written
comments and roundtable discussions
revealed widespread support for
adoption of a permanent exemption to
facilitate access to works in electronic
formats by persons who are blind,
visually impaired, or print disabled. The
Office invites comment regarding
specific provisions that commenters
believe should be included in
legislation proposing such an
exemption. For example, the exemption
for this purpose granted in the 2015
rulemaking permits circumvention of
access controls applied to literary works
distributed electronically, where the
access controls ‘‘either prevent the
enabling of read-aloud functionality or
interfere with screen readers or other
applications or assistive technologies.’’ 4
The exemption applies in the following
circumstances:
(i) When a copy of such a work is lawfully
obtained by a blind or other person with a
disability, as such a person is defined in 17
U.S.C. 121; provided, however, that the rights
owner is remunerated, as appropriate, for the
price of the mainstream copy of the work as
made available to the general public through
customary channels, or
(ii) When such work is a nondramatic
literary work, lawfully obtained and used by
an authorized entity pursuant to 17 U.S.C.
121.5
The Office is interested in commenters’
views on whether this language would
be appropriate for adoption as a
permanent exemption, or whether there
are specific changes or additional
provisions that Congress may wish to
consider.
b. Device Unlocking. Some
commenters advocated the adoption of
a permanent exemption to permit
circumvention of access controls on
wireless devices for purposes of
4 Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of
Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control
Technologies, 80 FR 65944, 65950 (Oct. 28, 2015)
(‘‘2015 Final Rule’’).
5 Id.
E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM
27SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 187 (Tuesday, September 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66295-66296]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23243]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-994]
Certain Portable Electronic Devices and Components Thereof;
Commission Determination Not To Review the 100-Day Initial
Determination Finding the Asserted Claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,928,433
Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. 101; Termination of 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 100-day initial
determination (``ID'') of the presiding administrative law judge
(``ALJ'') finding the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,928,433
invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101. The investigation is terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Houda Morad, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-4716. 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 Investigation No.
337-TA-994 on May 11, 2016, based on a complaint filed by Creative
Technology Ltd. of Singapore and Creative Labs, Inc. of Milpitas,
California (collectively, ``Creative''). See 81 FR 29307 (May 11,
2016). 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 portable electronic devices and
components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S.
Patent No. 6,928,433 (``the '433 patent''). The notice of investigation
named the following respondents: ZTE Corporation of Guangdong, China;
ZTE (USA) Inc. of Richardson, Texas; Sony Corporation of Tokyo, Japan;
Sony Mobile Communications, Inc. of Tokyo, Japan; Sony Mobile
Communications AB of Lund, Sweden; Sony Mobile Communications (USA),
Inc. of Atlanta, Georgia; Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. of Seoul,
Republic of Korea; Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield
Park, New Jersey; LG Electronics, Inc. of Seoul, Republic of Korea; LG
Electronics U.S.A., Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey; LG
Electronics Mobilecomm U.S.A., Inc. of San Diego, California; Lenovo
Group Ltd. of Beijing, China; Lenovo (United States) Inc. of
Morrisville, North Carolina; Motorola Mobility LLC of Chicago,
Illinois; HTC Corporation of Taoyuan, Taiwan; HTC America, Inc. of
Bellevue, Washington; Blackberry Ltd. of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada; and
Blackberry Corporation of Irving, Texas (collectively,
``Respondents''). In addition, on May 19, 2016, the ALJ issued an
initial determination granting Google Inc.'s (``Intervenor'') motion to
intervene as a party in the investigation. See Order No. 5, unreviewed,
Comm'n Notice (U.S.I.T.C. June 21, 2016). The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations (OUII) is also a party to the investigation.
The notice of investigation also directed the ALJ to ``hold an
early evidentiary hearing, find facts, and issue an early decision, as
to whether the asserted claims of the '433 patent recite patent-
eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101'' (i.e., the 100-day pilot
program). See 81 FR 29307 (May 11, 2016).
Accordingly, the ALJ conducted an evidentiary hearing on July 6-7,
2016, and on August 19, 2016, within 100 days of institution, the ALJ
issued his ID finding that the asserted claims are directed to
ineligible subject matter (i.e., invalid) under 35 U.S.C. 101. In
addition, although the ID noted that construction of the disputed term
``portable media player'' was not necessary to decide patent-
eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, the ALJ construed the term to mean
``portable media playback device, as distinguished from a general-
purpose device such as a handheld computer or a personal digital
assistant.''
[[Page 66296]]
On August 29, 2016, Creative filed a petition for review and on
September 1, 2016, Respondents, Intervenor, and OUII filed replies in
opposition to Creative's petition.
The Commission has determined not to review the ID. The
investigation is terminated.
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 21, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016-23243 Filed 9-26-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P