Certain Lithium Metal Oxide Cathode Materials, Lithium-Ion Batteries for Power Tool Products Containing Same, and Power Tool Products With Lithium-Ion Batteries Containing Same Commission's Final Determination; Issuance of a Limited Exclusion Order; Termination of the Investigation, 93960-93962 [2016-30811]
Download as PDF
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
93960
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2016 / Notices
requests that the Commission issue a
limited exclusion order, cease and
desist orders and impose a bond upon
respondents’ alleged infringing articles
during the 60-day Presidential review
period pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j).
Proposed respondents, other
interested parties, and members of the
public are invited to file comments, not
to exceed five (5) pages in length,
inclusive of attachments, on any public
interest issues raised by the complaint
or § 210.8(b) filing. Comments should
address whether issuance of the relief
specifically requested by the
complainant in this investigation would
affect the public health and welfare in
the United States, competitive
conditions in the United States
economy, the production of like or
directly competitive articles in the
United States, or United States
consumers.
In particular, the Commission is
interested in comments that:
(i) Explain how the articles
potentially subject to the requested
remedial orders are used in the United
States;
(ii) identify any public health, safety,
or welfare concerns in the United States
relating to the requested remedial
orders;
(iii) identify like or directly
competitive articles that complainant,
its licensees, or third parties make in the
United States which could replace the
subject articles if they were to be
excluded;
(iv) indicate whether complainant,
complainant’s licensees, and/or third
party suppliers have the capacity to
replace the volume of articles
potentially subject to the requested
exclusion order and/or a cease and
desist order within a commercially
reasonable time; and
(v) explain how the requested
remedial orders would impact United
States consumers.
Written submissions must be filed no
later than by close of business, eight
calendar days after the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register. There will be further
opportunities for comment on the
public interest after the issuance of any
final initial determination in this
investigation.
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 § 210.4(f)
of the Commission’s Rules of Practice
and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)).
Submissions should refer to the docket
number (‘‘Docket No. 3189’’) in a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:40 Dec 21, 2016
Jkt 241001
prominent place on the cover page and/
or the first page. (See Handbook for
Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic
Filing Procedures 1). 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. 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. All information,
including confidential business
information and documents for which
confidential treatment is properly
sought, submitted to the Commission for
purposes of this Investigation 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 or a related proceeding, 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,2 solely for cybersecurity
purposes. All nonconfidential written
submissions will be available for public
inspection at the Office of the Secretary
and on EDIS.3
This action is taken under the
authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337),
and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: December 19, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016–30856 Filed 12–21–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
1 Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures:
https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_
filing_procedures.pdf.
2 All contract personnel will sign appropriate
nondisclosure agreements.
3 Electronic Document Information System
(EDIS): https://edis.usitc.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–951]
Certain Lithium Metal Oxide Cathode
Materials, Lithium-Ion Batteries for
Power Tool Products Containing
Same, and Power Tool Products With
Lithium-Ion Batteries Containing Same
Commission’s Final Determination;
Issuance of a Limited Exclusion Order;
Termination of the Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has found a violation of
section 337 in this investigation and has
issued a limited exclusion order
prohibiting importation of infringing
lithium metal oxide cathode materials
for consumption in the United States.
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 (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 March 30, 2015, based on a
complaint filed by BASF Corporation of
Florham Park, New Jersey and UChicago
Argonne LLC of Lemont, Illinois
(collectively, ‘‘Complainants’’). 80 FR
16696 (Mar. 30, 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 lithium
metal oxide cathode materials, lithiumion batteries for power tool products
containing same, and power tool
products with lithium-ion batteries
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2016 / Notices
containing same by reason of
infringement of one or more of claims
1–4, 7, 13, and 14 of U.S. Patent No.
6,677,082 (‘‘the ’082 patent’’) and claims
1–4, 8, 9, and 17 of U.S. Patent No.
6,680,143 (‘‘the ’143 patent’’). Id. The
notice of investigation named the
following respondents: Umicore N.V. of
Brussels, Belgium; Umicore USA Inc. of
Raleigh, North Carolina (collectively,
‘‘Umicore’’); Makita Corporation of
Anjo, Japan; Makita Corporation of
America of Buford, Georgia; and Makita
U.S.A. Inc. of La Mirada, California
(collectively, ‘‘Makita’’). Id. The Office
of Unfair Import Investigations is a party
to the investigation.
On November 5, 2015, the ALJ
granted a joint motion by Complainants
and Makita to terminate the
investigation as to Makita based upon
settlement. See Order No. 32 (Nov. 5,
2015). The Commission determined not
to review. See Notice (Nov. 23, 2015).
On December 1, 2015, the ALJ granted
an unopposed motion by Complainants
to terminate the investigation as to
claim 8 of the ’082 patent. See Order No.
35 (Dec. 1, 2015). The Commission
determined not to review Order No. 35.
See Notice (Dec. 22, 2015).
On February 29, 2016, the ALJ issued
his final ID, finding a violation of
section 337 by Umicore in connection
with claims 1–4, 7, 13, and 14 of the
’082 patent and claims 1–4, 8, 9, and 17
of the ’143 patent. Specifically, the ID
found that the Commission has subject
matter jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction
over the accused products, and in
personam jurisdiction over Umicore. ID
at 10–11. The ID found that
Complainants satisfied the importation
requirement of section 337 (19 U.S.C.
1337(a)(1)(B)). Id. at 9–10. The ID found
that the accused products directly
infringe asserted claims 1–4, 7, 13, and
14 of the ’082 patent; and asserted
claims 1–4, 8, 9, and 17 of the ’143
patent, and that Umicore contributorily
infringes those claims. See ID at 65–71,
83–85. The ID, however, found that
Complainants failed to show that
Umicore induces infringement of the
asserted claims. Id. at 79–83. The ID
further found that Umicore failed to
establish that the asserted claims of the
’082 or ’143 patents are invalid for lack
of enablement or incorrect inventorship.
ID at 118–20. The ID also found that
Umicore’s laches defense fails as a
matter of law (ID at 122–124) and also
fails on the merits (ID at 124–126).
Finally, the ID found that Complainants
established the existence of a domestic
industry that practices the asserted
patents under 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(2). See
ID at 18, 24.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:40 Dec 21, 2016
Jkt 241001
On March 14, 2016, Umicore filed a
petition for review of the ID and a
motion for a Commission hearing. Also
on March 14, 2016, the Commission
investigative attorney (‘‘IA’’) petitioned
for review of the ID’s finding that a
laches defense fails as a matter of law
in section 337 investigations. Further on
March 14, 2016, Complainants filed a
contingent petition for review of the ID.
On March 22, 2016, the parties filed
responses to the petitions for review.
On April 8, 2016, 3M Corporation
(‘‘3M’’) filed a motion to intervene
under Commission Rule 210.19. 3M
requested that the Commission grant it
‘‘with full participation rights in this
Investigation in order to protect its
significant interests in the accused
materials.’’
On May 11, 2016, the Commission
determined to review the final ID in
part. 81 FR 30548–50 (May 17, 2016).
Specifically, the Commission
determined to review (1) the ID’s
contributory and induced infringement
findings; (2) the ID’s domestic industry
findings under 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)(C);
and (3) the ID’s findings on laches. The
Commission determined to deny 3M’s
motion to intervene, but stated that it
would consider 3M’s comments in
considering remedy, bonding and the
public interest this investigation if a
violation of Section 337 is found.
Pursuant to Commission rule 210.45 (19
CFR 210.45), Umicore’s request for a
Commission hearing was granted.
The Commission requested the parties
to brief their positions on the issues
under review with reference to the
applicable law and the evidentiary
record, and posed specific briefing
questions. On May 23, 2016, the parties
filed submissions to the Commission’s
questions. On June 3, 2016, the parties
filed responses to the initial
submissions. Interested public entities,
including 3M and the Belgian
Ambassador also submitted comments
on the public interest.
On August 2, 2016, Complainants
filed a motion pursuant to 19 CFR
210.15(a)(2) and 19 CFR 210.38(a) for
the Commission to reopen the record in
this Investigation to admit a July 6, 2016
news article that allegedly includes
statements by Umicore Greater China
Senior Vice President Chuxian Feng as
to this investigation. On August 11 & 12,
2016, Umicore and the IA filed
respective oppositions to the motion.
The Commission has determined to
deny Complainants motion to reopen
the record.
The Commission was interested in
hearing presentations concerning the
appropriate remedy (if any) and the
effect that such remedy would have
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
93961
upon the public interest. The
Commission invited Government
agencies, public-interest groups, and
interested members of the public to
make oral presentations on the issues of
remedy and the public interest. The
Commission held a public hearing on
Thursday, November 17, 2016, in the
USITC Main Hearing Room. The hearing
was limited to the issues of laches,
contributory infringement, and the
public interest. The hearing consisted of
two panels. The first panel was limited
to the parties (i.e., complainants,
respondents, and the IA), who were
given an opportunity to comment on the
issues identified above. The second
panel consisted of non-party witnesses
on the public interest.
The Commission thanks the various
entities who appeared to testify on the
public interest.
Having examined the record of this
investigation, including the final ID, the
petitions for review, responses thereto,
and all other appropriate submissions,
the Commission has determined to
reverse the ALJ’s finding that Umicore
does not induce infringement. The
Commission finds that the record
evidence fails to support the ALJ’s
finding that Umicore had a good faith
belief of non-infringement. The
Commission has determined to affirm
the ALJ’s finding that Umicore’s laches
defense fails on the merits. The
Commission vacates and takes no
position on the legal question of
whether laches is an available defense at
the Commission. The Commission has
determined to vacate and take no
position on the ALJ’s finding that
Complainants established the existence
of a domestic industry under 19 U.S.C.
1337(a)(3)(C) with respect to BASF.
Having found a violation of section
337 in this investigation, the
Commission has determined that the
appropriate form of relief is a limited
exclusion order prohibiting the
unlicensed entry of lithium metal oxide
cathode materials that infringe one or
more of claims 1–4, 7, 13, and 14 of the
’082 patent, or claims 1–4, 8, 9, and 17
of the ’143 patent that are manufactured
by, or on behalf of, or imported by or on
behalf of Umicore N.V. and Umicore
USA Inc. or any of their affiliated
companies, parents, subsidiaries, agents,
or other related business entities, or
their successors or assigns.
The Commission has also determined
that the public interest factors
enumerated in section 337(d) (19 U.S.C.
1337(d)) does not preclude issuance of
the limited exclusion order. Finally, the
Commission has determined that a bond
in the amount of three percent of
entered value is required to permit
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
93962
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2016 / Notices
temporary importation during the
period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C.
1337(j)) of lithium metal oxide cathode
materials that are subject to the limited
exclusion order. The Commission’s
orders and opinion were delivered to
the President and to the United States
Trade Representative on the day of their
issuance.
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).
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
By order of the Commission.
Issued: December 16, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
OSHA solicits public
comments concerning its proposal to
extend the Office of Management and
Budget’s (OMB) approval of the
information collection requirements
specified in the Standard on Presence
Sensing Device Initiation (29 CFR
1910.217(h)).
DATES: Comments must be submitted
(postmarked, sent, or received) by
February 21, 2017.
ADDRESSES:
Electronically: You may submit
comments and attachments
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov, which is the
Federal eRulemaking Portal. Follow the
instructions online for submitting
comments.
Facsimile: If your comments,
including attachments, are not longer
than 10 pages you may fax them to the
OSHA Docket Office at (202) 693–1648.
Mail, hand delivery, express mail,
messenger, or courier service: When
using this method, you must submit
your comments and attachments to the
OSHA Docket Office, Docket No.
OSHA–2010–0009 Occupational Safety
and Health Administration, U.S.
Department of Labor, Room N–3653,
200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210. Deliveries
(hand, express mail, messenger, and
courier service) are accepted during the
Department of Labor’s and Docket
Office’s normal business hours, 10:00
a.m. to 3:00 p.m., e.t.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the Agency name and the OSHA
docket number (OSHA–2010–0009) for
the Information Collection Request
(ICR). All comments, including any
personal information you provide, are
placed in the public docket without
change, and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov.
For further information on submitting
comments see the ‘‘Public
Participation’’ heading in the section of
this notice titled SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[USITC SE–16–043]
Government in the Sunshine Act
Meeting Notice
United
States International Trade Commission.
TIME AND DATE: December 30, 2016 at
11:00 a.m.
PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, Telephone:
(202) 205–2000.
STATUS: Open to the public.
MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
1. Agendas for future meetings: None.
2. Minutes.
3. Ratification List.
4. Vote in Inv. Nos. 701–TA–565 and
731–TA–1341 (Preliminary) (Hardwood
Plywood from China). The Commission
is currently scheduled to complete and
file its determinations on January 3,
2017; views of the Commission are
currently scheduled to be completed
and filed on January 10, 2017.
5. Outstanding action jackets: None.
In accordance with Commission
policy, subject matter listed above, not
disposed of at the scheduled meeting,
may be carried over to the agenda of the
following meeting.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING:
By order of the Commission.
Issued: December 19, 2016.
William R. Bishop,
Supervisory Hearings and Information
Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016–31021 Filed 12–20–16; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
17:40 Dec 21, 2016
[Docket No. OSHA–2010–0009
The Standard on Presence Sensing
Device Initiation (PSDI) (Extension of
the Office of Management and
Budget’s (OMB) Approval of
Collections of Information (Paperwork)
Requirements
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA), Labor.
ACTION: Request for public comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
[FR Doc. 2016–30811 Filed 12–21–16; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Docket: To read or download
comments or other material in the
docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov
or the OSHA Docket Office at the
address above. All documents in the
docket (including this Federal Register
notice) are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index; however,
some information (e.g., copyrighted
material) is not publicly available to
read or download from the Web site. All
submissions, including copyrighted
material, are available for inspection
and copying at the OSHA Docket Office.
You also may contact Theda Kenney at
the address below to obtain a copy of
the ICR.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Theda Kenney or Todd Owen,
Directorate of Standards and Guidance,
OSHA, U.S. Department of Labor, Room
N–3609, 200 Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone (202)
693–2222.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Department of Labor, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
and respondent (i.e., employer) burden,
conducts a preclearance consultation
program to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on proposed
and continuing information collection
requirements in accord with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
(44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). This program
ensures that information is in the
desired format, reporting burden (time
and costs) is minimal, collection
instruments are clearly understood, and
OSHA’s estimate of the information
collection burden is accurate. The
Occupational Safety and Health Act of
1970 (the OSH Act) (29 U.S.C. 651 et
seq.) authorizes information collection
by employers as necessary or
appropriate for enforcement of the OSH
Act or for developing information
regarding the causes and prevention of
occupational injuries, illnesses, and
accidents (29 U.S.C. 657). The OSH Act
also requires that OSHA obtain such
information with minimum burden
upon employers, especially those
operating small businesses, and to
reduce to the maximum extent feasible
unnecessary duplication of efforts in
obtaining information (29 U.S.C. 657).
Paragraph 1910.217(h) regulates the
use of presence sensing devices
(‘‘PSDs’’) used to initiate the operation
of mechanical power presses; a PSD
(e.g., a photoelectric field or curtain)
automatically stops the stroke of a
mechanical power press when the
device detects an operator entering a
danger zone near the press. A
E:\FR\FM\22DEN1.SGM
22DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 246 (Thursday, December 22, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 93960-93962]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30811]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-951]
Certain Lithium Metal Oxide Cathode Materials, Lithium-Ion
Batteries for Power Tool Products Containing Same, and Power Tool
Products With Lithium-Ion Batteries Containing Same Commission's Final
Determination; Issuance of a Limited Exclusion Order; 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 found a violation of section 337 in this investigation
and has issued a limited exclusion order prohibiting importation of
infringing lithium metal oxide cathode materials for consumption in the
United States.
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 (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 March 30, 2015, based on a complaint filed by BASF Corporation of
Florham Park, New Jersey and UChicago Argonne LLC of Lemont, Illinois
(collectively, ``Complainants''). 80 FR 16696 (Mar. 30, 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 lithium metal oxide cathode materials, lithium-
ion batteries for power tool products containing same, and power tool
products with lithium-ion batteries
[[Page 93961]]
containing same by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1-4,
7, 13, and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 6,677,082 (``the '082 patent'') and
claims 1-4, 8, 9, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 6,680,143 (``the '143
patent''). Id. The notice of investigation named the following
respondents: Umicore N.V. of Brussels, Belgium; Umicore USA Inc. of
Raleigh, North Carolina (collectively, ``Umicore''); Makita Corporation
of Anjo, Japan; Makita Corporation of America of Buford, Georgia; and
Makita U.S.A. Inc. of La Mirada, California (collectively, ``Makita'').
Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is a party to the
investigation.
On November 5, 2015, the ALJ granted a joint motion by Complainants
and Makita to terminate the investigation as to Makita based upon
settlement. See Order No. 32 (Nov. 5, 2015). The Commission determined
not to review. See Notice (Nov. 23, 2015).
On December 1, 2015, the ALJ granted an unopposed motion by
Complainants to terminate the investigation as to claim 8 of the '082
patent. See Order No. 35 (Dec. 1, 2015). The Commission determined not
to review Order No. 35. See Notice (Dec. 22, 2015).
On February 29, 2016, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a
violation of section 337 by Umicore in connection with claims 1-4, 7,
13, and 14 of the '082 patent and claims 1-4, 8, 9, and 17 of the '143
patent. Specifically, the ID found that the Commission has subject
matter jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction over the accused products, and
in personam jurisdiction over Umicore. ID at 10-11. The ID found that
Complainants satisfied the importation requirement of section 337 (19
U.S.C. 1337(a)(1)(B)). Id. at 9-10. The ID found that the accused
products directly infringe asserted claims 1-4, 7, 13, and 14 of the
'082 patent; and asserted claims 1-4, 8, 9, and 17 of the '143 patent,
and that Umicore contributorily infringes those claims. See ID at 65-
71, 83-85. The ID, however, found that Complainants failed to show that
Umicore induces infringement of the asserted claims. Id. at 79-83. The
ID further found that Umicore failed to establish that the asserted
claims of the '082 or '143 patents are invalid for lack of enablement
or incorrect inventorship. ID at 118-20. The ID also found that
Umicore's laches defense fails as a matter of law (ID at 122-124) and
also fails on the merits (ID at 124-126). Finally, the ID found that
Complainants established the existence of a domestic industry that
practices the asserted patents under 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(2). See ID at
18, 24.
On March 14, 2016, Umicore filed a petition for review of the ID
and a motion for a Commission hearing. Also on March 14, 2016, the
Commission investigative attorney (``IA'') petitioned for review of the
ID's finding that a laches defense fails as a matter of law in section
337 investigations. Further on March 14, 2016, Complainants filed a
contingent petition for review of the ID. On March 22, 2016, the
parties filed responses to the petitions for review.
On April 8, 2016, 3M Corporation (``3M'') filed a motion to
intervene under Commission Rule 210.19. 3M requested that the
Commission grant it ``with full participation rights in this
Investigation in order to protect its significant interests in the
accused materials.''
On May 11, 2016, the Commission determined to review the final ID
in part. 81 FR 30548-50 (May 17, 2016). Specifically, the Commission
determined to review (1) the ID's contributory and induced infringement
findings; (2) the ID's domestic industry findings under 19 U.S.C.
1337(a)(3)(C); and (3) the ID's findings on laches. The Commission
determined to deny 3M's motion to intervene, but stated that it would
consider 3M's comments in considering remedy, bonding and the public
interest this investigation if a violation of Section 337 is found.
Pursuant to Commission rule 210.45 (19 CFR 210.45), Umicore's request
for a Commission hearing was granted.
The Commission requested the parties to brief their positions on
the issues under review with reference to the applicable law and the
evidentiary record, and posed specific briefing questions. On May 23,
2016, the parties filed submissions to the Commission's questions. On
June 3, 2016, the parties filed responses to the initial submissions.
Interested public entities, including 3M and the Belgian Ambassador
also submitted comments on the public interest.
On August 2, 2016, Complainants filed a motion pursuant to 19 CFR
210.15(a)(2) and 19 CFR 210.38(a) for the Commission to reopen the
record in this Investigation to admit a July 6, 2016 news article that
allegedly includes statements by Umicore Greater China Senior Vice
President Chuxian Feng as to this investigation. On August 11 & 12,
2016, Umicore and the IA filed respective oppositions to the motion.
The Commission has determined to deny Complainants motion to reopen the
record.
The Commission was interested in hearing presentations concerning
the appropriate remedy (if any) and the effect that such remedy would
have upon the public interest. The Commission invited Government
agencies, public-interest groups, and interested members of the public
to make oral presentations on the issues of remedy and the public
interest. The Commission held a public hearing on Thursday, November
17, 2016, in the USITC Main Hearing Room. The hearing was limited to
the issues of laches, contributory infringement, and the public
interest. The hearing consisted of two panels. The first panel was
limited to the parties (i.e., complainants, respondents, and the IA),
who were given an opportunity to comment on the issues identified
above. The second panel consisted of non-party witnesses on the public
interest.
The Commission thanks the various entities who appeared to testify
on the public interest.
Having examined the record of this investigation, including the
final ID, the petitions for review, responses thereto, and all other
appropriate submissions, the Commission has determined to reverse the
ALJ's finding that Umicore does not induce infringement. The Commission
finds that the record evidence fails to support the ALJ's finding that
Umicore had a good faith belief of non-infringement. The Commission has
determined to affirm the ALJ's finding that Umicore's laches defense
fails on the merits. The Commission vacates and takes no position on
the legal question of whether laches is an available defense at the
Commission. The Commission has determined to vacate and take no
position on the ALJ's finding that Complainants established the
existence of a domestic industry under 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)(C) with
respect to BASF.
Having found a violation of section 337 in this investigation, the
Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is a
limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of lithium
metal oxide cathode materials that infringe one or more of claims 1-4,
7, 13, and 14 of the '082 patent, or claims 1-4, 8, 9, and 17 of the
'143 patent that are manufactured by, or on behalf of, or imported by
or on behalf of Umicore N.V. and Umicore USA Inc. or any of their
affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, agents, or other related
business entities, or their successors or assigns.
The Commission has also determined that the public interest factors
enumerated in section 337(d) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d)) does not preclude
issuance of the limited exclusion order. Finally, the Commission has
determined that a bond in the amount of three percent of entered value
is required to permit
[[Page 93962]]
temporary importation during the period of Presidential review (19
U.S.C. 1337(j)) of lithium metal oxide cathode materials that are
subject to the limited exclusion order. The Commission's orders and
opinion were delivered to the President and to the United States Trade
Representative on the day of their issuance.
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: December 16, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016-30811 Filed 12-21-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P