Certain Computing or Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and Vehicles Containing Same; Notice of Termination of the Investigation, 85263-85264 [2016-28358]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 227 / Friday, November 25, 2016 / Notices
The Water
Resources Planning Act of 1965 and the
Water Resources Development Act of
1974 require an annual determination of
a discount rate for Federal water
resources planning. The discount rate
for Federal water resources planning for
fiscal year 2017 is 2.875 percent.
Discounting is to be used to convert
future monetary values to present
values. This rate has been computed in
accordance with Section 80(a), Public
Law 93–251 (88 Stat. 34), and 18 CFR
704.39, which: (1) Specify that the rate
will be based upon the average yield
during the preceding fiscal year on
interest-bearing marketable securities of
the United States which, at the time the
computation is made, have terms of 15
years or more remaining to maturity
(average yield is rounded to nearest oneeighth percent); and (2) provide that the
rate will not be raised or lowered more
than one-quarter of 1 percent for any
year. The U.S. Department of the
Treasury calculated the specified
average to be 2.3596 percent. This rate,
rounded to the nearest one-eighth
percent, is 2.375 percent, which is a
change of more than the allowable onequarter of 1 percent. Therefore, the
fiscal year 2017 rate is 2.875 percent.
The rate of 2.875 percent will be used
by all Federal agencies in the
formulation and evaluation of water and
related land resources plans for the
purpose of discounting future benefits
and computing costs or otherwise
converting benefits and costs to a
common-time basis.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: October 13, 2016.
Roseann Gonzales,
Director, Policy and Administration.
[FR Doc. 2016–28339 Filed 11–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4332–90–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–984]
Certain Computing or Graphics
Systems, Components Thereof, and
Vehicles Containing Same; Notice of
Termination of the Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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 determinations
(‘‘IDs’’) (Order Nos. 57–59), terminating
the above-captioned investigation as to
the remaining respondents Fujitsu Ten
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:57 Nov 23, 2016
Jkt 241001
Limited of Hyogo-ken, Japan and Fujitsu
Ten Corp. of America, Inc. of Novi,
Michigan (collectively, ‘‘Fujitsu Ten’’);
Renesas Electronics Corporation of
Tokyo, Japan and Renesas Electronics
America, Inc. of Santa Clara, California
(collectively, ‘‘Renesas’’); and Honda
Motor Co., Ltd. of Tokyo, Japan; Honda
North America, Inc., American Honda
Motor Co., Inc., and Honda R&D
Americas, Inc., all of Torrance,
California; Honda Engineering North
America, Inc. and Honda of America
Mfg., Inc., both of Marysville, Ohio;
Honda Manufacturing of Alabama, LLC
of Lincoln, Alabama; and Honda
Manufacturing of Indiana, LLC of
Greensburg, Indiana (collectively, the
‘‘Honda respondents’’) based on patent
license agreements. The Commission
has also determined to terminate the
investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Clint Gerdine, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
708–2310. 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 February 3, 2016, based on a
complaint filed by Advanced Silicon
Technologies LLC of Portsmouth, New
Hampshire. 81 FR 5782–84. The
complaint alleged violations of section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, by reason of
infringement of certain claims of U.S.
Patent Nos. 6,339,428 (‘‘the ’428
patent’’); 6,546,439 (‘‘the ’439 patent’’);
6,630,935 (‘‘the ’935 patent’’); and
8,933,945 (‘‘the ’945 patent’’). The
complaint further alleged that a
domestic industry exists. The
Commission’s Notice of Investigation
named several respondents including
Fujitsu Ten, Renesas, and the Honda
respondents. The Office of Unfair
Import Investigations was also named as
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
85263
a party to the investigation. Only
Fujitsu, Renesas, and the Honda
respondents remain in the investigation.
On July 12, 2016, the Commission
authorized judicial enforcement of a
subpoena duces tecum and ad
testificandum issued by the ALJ to nonparty NXP Semiconductors USA, Inc. of
Austin, Texas and authorized its Office
of the General Counsel to seek judicial
enforcement of the subpoena.
Subsequently, on September 14, 2016,
the complainant withdrew its request
for judicial enforcement of the
subpoena.
On April 14, 2016, the Commission
issued notice of its determination not to
review the ALJ’s ID (Order No. 16)
terminating the investigation as to
claims 8–9 and 16–17 of the ’428 patent;
claim 11 of the ’439 patent; and claim
2 of the ’945 patent. On July 20, 2016,
the Commission issued notice of its
determination not to review the ALJ’s ID
(Order No. 41) terminating the
investigation as to: (1) Claims 7 and 14
of the ’439 patent; (2) claim 6 of the ’935
patent; and (3) claim 21 of the ’945
patent as to all respondents; and (4)
claims 8 and 16 of the ’439 patent only
as to Renesas. On August 9, 2016, the
Commission issued notice of its
determination not to review the ALJ’s ID
(Order No. 45) terminating the
investigation as to claims 25–29 of the
’428 patent with respect to all
respondents.
On June 1, 2016, the Commission
issued notice of its determination not to
review the ALJ’s ID (Order No. 33)
terminating the investigation as to
respondent NVIDIA Corporation of
Santa Clara, California based on a
settlement agreement. On August 18,
2016, the Commission issued notice of
its determination not to review the ALJ’s
ID (Order No. 49) terminating the
investigation as to respondent Texas
Instruments Inc. of Dallas, Texas based
on a settlement agreement. On October
13, 2016, the Commission issued notice
of its determination not to review the
ALJ’s IDs (Order Nos. 53–55)
terminating the investigation as to the
following respondents based on
withdrawal of allegations in the
complaint as to these respondents:
Bayerische Motoren Werke AG of
Munich, Germany; BMW of North
America, LLC of Woodcliff Lake, New
Jersey; and BMW Manufacturing Co.,
LLC of Greer, South Carolina; Harman
International Industries Inc. of
Stamford, Connecticut; Harman Becker
Automotive Systems, Inc. of Farmington
Hills, Michigan; and Harman Becker
Automotive Systems GmbH of Karlsbad,
Germany; and Toyota Motor
Corporation of Aichi-ken, Japan; Toyota
E:\FR\FM\25NON1.SGM
25NON1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
85264
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 227 / Friday, November 25, 2016 / Notices
Motor North America, Inc. of New York
City, New York; Toyota Motor Sales,
U.S.A., Inc. of Torrance, California;
Toyota Motor Engineering &
Manufacturing North America, Inc. of
Erlanger, Kentucky; Toyota Motor
Manufacturing, Indiana, Inc. of
Princeton, Indiana; Toyota Motor
Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. of
Georgetown, Kentucky; and Toyota
Motor Manufacturing, Mississippi, Inc.
of Blue Springs, Mississippi. On
October 19, 2016, the Commission
issued notice of its determination not to
review the ALJ’s ID (Order No. 56)
terminating the investigation as to
Volkswagen AG of Wolfsburg, Germany;
Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. and
Audi of America, LLC, both of Herndon,
Virginia; Volkswagen Group of America
Chattanooga Operations, LLC of
Chattanooga, Tennessee; and Audi AG
of Ingolstadt, Germany based on a
settlement agreement.
On August 24, 2016, the complainant
and Fujitsu Ten jointly moved to
terminate the investigation as to Fujitsu
Ten based on a patent license
agreement. On August 25, 2016, the
complainant and Renesas jointly moved
to terminate the investigation as to
Renesas based on a patent license
agreement. On the same date, the
complainant and the Honda
respondents jointly moved to terminate
the investigation as to the Honda
respondents based on a patent license
agreement. OUII filed responses
supporting each motion and no other
responses were received.
On October 24, 2016, the ALJ issued
the subject IDs (Order Nos. 57–59)
granting the joint motions for
termination of the investigation as to
Fujitsu Ten, Renesas, and the Honda
respondents, and finding that the
motions satisfy Commission Rules
210.21(a)(2), (b)(1) (19 CFR 210.21(a)(2),
(b)(1)) and that each termination is in
the public interest. No petitions for
review were filed.
The Commission has determined not
to review the subject IDs 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.
Issued: November 21, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016–28358 Filed 11–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:57 Nov 23, 2016
Jkt 241001
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–929]
Enforcement and Rescission
Proceeding; Certain Beverage Brewing
Capsules, Components Thereof, and
Products Containing the Same; Notice
of Institution of Rescission Proceeding
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has instituted a rescission
proceeding relating to the March 17,
2016 limited exclusion order and cease
and desist order issued in the abovereferenced investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert J. Needham, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–3438. 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 (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 the original
investigation on September 9, 2014,
based on a complaint filed by Adrian
Rivera and Adrian Rivera Maynez
Enterprises, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘ARM’’).
79 FR 53445–46 (Sept. 9, 2016). The
complaint alleged 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 beverage brewing capsules,
components thereof, and products
containing the same, by reason of
infringement of claims 5–8 and 18–20 of
U.S. Patent No. 8,720,320 (‘‘the ’320
patent’’). Id. The notice of institution of
the investigation named as respondents
Solofill, LLC (‘‘Solofill’’); DongGuan Hai
Rui Precision Mould Co., Ltd.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(‘‘DongGuan’’); Eko Brands, LLC (‘‘Eko
Brands’’); Evermuch Technology Co.,
Ltd. and Ever Much Company Ltd.
(together, ‘‘Evermuch’’); and several
additional respondents who were
terminated by reason of consent order or
settlement. 79 FR 53445. The Office of
Unfair Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’)
was also named as a party to the
investigation. Id. The Commission
found Eko Brands and Evermuch in
default for failure to respond to the
complaint and notice of investigation.
Notice (May 18, 2015).
On March 17, 2016, the Commission
found no violation of section 337 by
Solofill and DongGuan because claims
5–7, 18, and 20 were invalid for a lack
of written description and claims 5 and
6 were invalid as anticipated. 81 FR
15742–43 (Mar. 24, 2016). The
Commission, however, presumed that
the allegations were true with respect to
the remaining allegations against the
defaulted parties Eko Brands and
Evermuch, and thus concluded that they
violated section 337 with respect to
claims 8 and 19. Id. at 15743. The
Commission issued a limited exclusion
order prohibiting Eko Brands and
Evermuch from importing certain
beverage brewing capsules, components
thereof, and products containing the
same that infringed claims 8 or 19 of the
’320 patent. Id. The Commission also
issued cease and desist orders against
Eko Brands and Evermuch prohibiting
the sale and distribution within the
United States of articles that infringe
claims 8 or 19. Id.
On June 1, 2016, ARM filed a
complaint requesting that the
Commission institute a formal
enforcement proceeding under
Commission Rule 210.75(b) to
investigate violations of the March 17,
2016, limited exclusion order and cease
and desist order by Eko Brands and
Espresso Supply, Inc. The Commission
instituted a formal enforcement
proceeding on July 1, 2016. 81 FR
43242–43.
On September 12, 2016, Eko Brands
petitioned the Commission to rescind its
limited exclusion order and cease and
desist orders, and to terminate the
enforcement proceeding. Eko Brands
contended that changed circumstances
warranted such relief. On September 22,
2016, ARM opposed the petition. On
September 22, 2016, OUII filed a
response supporting the institution of a
rescission proceeding but opposing the
termination of the enforcement
proceeding.
On September 30, 2016, Eko Brands
moved for leave to file a reply in
support of its petition. ARM opposed
the motion on October 6, 2016.
E:\FR\FM\25NON1.SGM
25NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 227 (Friday, November 25, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 85263-85264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28358]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-984]
Certain Computing or Graphics Systems, Components Thereof, and
Vehicles Containing Same; Notice of 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 determinations (``IDs'') (Order Nos. 57-
59), terminating the above-captioned investigation as to the remaining
respondents Fujitsu Ten Limited of Hyogo-ken, Japan and Fujitsu Ten
Corp. of America, Inc. of Novi, Michigan (collectively, ``Fujitsu
Ten''); Renesas Electronics Corporation of Tokyo, Japan and Renesas
Electronics America, Inc. of Santa Clara, California (collectively,
``Renesas''); and Honda Motor Co., Ltd. of Tokyo, Japan; Honda North
America, Inc., American Honda Motor Co., Inc., and Honda R&D Americas,
Inc., all of Torrance, California; Honda Engineering North America,
Inc. and Honda of America Mfg., Inc., both of Marysville, Ohio; Honda
Manufacturing of Alabama, LLC of Lincoln, Alabama; and Honda
Manufacturing of Indiana, LLC of Greensburg, Indiana (collectively, the
``Honda respondents'') based on patent license agreements. The
Commission has also determined to terminate the investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clint Gerdine, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-2310. 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 February 3, 2016, based on a complaint filed by Advanced Silicon
Technologies LLC of Portsmouth, New Hampshire. 81 FR 5782-84. The
complaint alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, by reason of infringement of certain claims
of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,339,428 (``the '428 patent''); 6,546,439 (``the
'439 patent''); 6,630,935 (``the '935 patent''); and 8,933,945 (``the
'945 patent''). The complaint further alleged that a domestic industry
exists. The Commission's Notice of Investigation named several
respondents including Fujitsu Ten, Renesas, and the Honda respondents.
The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was also named as a party to
the investigation. Only Fujitsu, Renesas, and the Honda respondents
remain in the investigation.
On July 12, 2016, the Commission authorized judicial enforcement of
a subpoena duces tecum and ad testificandum issued by the ALJ to non-
party NXP Semiconductors USA, Inc. of Austin, Texas and authorized its
Office of the General Counsel to seek judicial enforcement of the
subpoena. Subsequently, on September 14, 2016, the complainant withdrew
its request for judicial enforcement of the subpoena.
On April 14, 2016, the Commission issued notice of its
determination not to review the ALJ's ID (Order No. 16) terminating the
investigation as to claims 8-9 and 16-17 of the '428 patent; claim 11
of the '439 patent; and claim 2 of the '945 patent. On July 20, 2016,
the Commission issued notice of its determination not to review the
ALJ's ID (Order No. 41) terminating the investigation as to: (1) Claims
7 and 14 of the '439 patent; (2) claim 6 of the '935 patent; and (3)
claim 21 of the '945 patent as to all respondents; and (4) claims 8 and
16 of the '439 patent only as to Renesas. On August 9, 2016, the
Commission issued notice of its determination not to review the ALJ's
ID (Order No. 45) terminating the investigation as to claims 25-29 of
the '428 patent with respect to all respondents.
On June 1, 2016, the Commission issued notice of its determination
not to review the ALJ's ID (Order No. 33) terminating the investigation
as to respondent NVIDIA Corporation of Santa Clara, California based on
a settlement agreement. On August 18, 2016, the Commission issued
notice of its determination not to review the ALJ's ID (Order No. 49)
terminating the investigation as to respondent Texas Instruments Inc.
of Dallas, Texas based on a settlement agreement. On October 13, 2016,
the Commission issued notice of its determination not to review the
ALJ's IDs (Order Nos. 53-55) terminating the investigation as to the
following respondents based on withdrawal of allegations in the
complaint as to these respondents: Bayerische Motoren Werke AG of
Munich, Germany; BMW of North America, LLC of Woodcliff Lake, New
Jersey; and BMW Manufacturing Co., LLC of Greer, South Carolina; Harman
International Industries Inc. of Stamford, Connecticut; Harman Becker
Automotive Systems, Inc. of Farmington Hills, Michigan; and Harman
Becker Automotive Systems GmbH of Karlsbad, Germany; and Toyota Motor
Corporation of Aichi-ken, Japan; Toyota
[[Page 85264]]
Motor North America, Inc. of New York City, New York; Toyota Motor
Sales, U.S.A., Inc. of Torrance, California; Toyota Motor Engineering &
Manufacturing North America, Inc. of Erlanger, Kentucky; Toyota Motor
Manufacturing, Indiana, Inc. of Princeton, Indiana; Toyota Motor
Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. of Georgetown, Kentucky; and Toyota Motor
Manufacturing, Mississippi, Inc. of Blue Springs, Mississippi. On
October 19, 2016, the Commission issued notice of its determination not
to review the ALJ's ID (Order No. 56) terminating the investigation as
to Volkswagen AG of Wolfsburg, Germany; Volkswagen Group of America,
Inc. and Audi of America, LLC, both of Herndon, Virginia; Volkswagen
Group of America Chattanooga Operations, LLC of Chattanooga, Tennessee;
and Audi AG of Ingolstadt, Germany based on a settlement agreement.
On August 24, 2016, the complainant and Fujitsu Ten jointly moved
to terminate the investigation as to Fujitsu Ten based on a patent
license agreement. On August 25, 2016, the complainant and Renesas
jointly moved to terminate the investigation as to Renesas based on a
patent license agreement. On the same date, the complainant and the
Honda respondents jointly moved to terminate the investigation as to
the Honda respondents based on a patent license agreement. OUII filed
responses supporting each motion and no other responses were received.
On October 24, 2016, the ALJ issued the subject IDs (Order Nos. 57-
59) granting the joint motions for termination of the investigation as
to Fujitsu Ten, Renesas, and the Honda respondents, and finding that
the motions satisfy Commission Rules 210.21(a)(2), (b)(1) (19 CFR
210.21(a)(2), (b)(1)) and that each termination is in the public
interest. No petitions for review were filed.
The Commission has determined not to review the subject IDs 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.
Issued: November 21, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016-28358 Filed 11-23-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
