Certain Radio Frequency Identification (“RFID”) Products and Components Thereof Commission Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337; Termination of the Investigation, 49847-49848 [2017-23366]

Download as PDF asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 207 / Friday, October 27, 2017 / Notices this Draft Supplemental EIS/EIR and Draft Plan Amendment. For the PSP Project, the BLM held public meetings on the revised ROW application in June and August 2016 in Palm Springs, California. The Draft Supplemental EIS/EIR includes analysis of the revised ROW application as it relates to the following issues: (1) Updated description of the Proposed Project, based on the revised ROW application; (2) Impacts to cultural resources and tribal concerns; (3) Impacts to the Sand Transport Corridor and Mojave fringe-toed lizard habitat and washes; (4) Impacts to Joshua Tree National Park; (5) Impacts to avian species; (6) Impacts to visual resources; and (7) Relationship between the project and the regional renewable energy planning in the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan. In addition to the Proposed Action, the Draft Supplemental EIS/EIR considers a No-Action Alternative and two additional action alternatives. Alternative 1, Reduced Footprint, would be a 500 MW Photovoltaic (PV) array on about 3,100 acres. It avoids the central and largest desert wash and incorporates a more efficient use of the land for the solar array. Alternative 2, Avoidance Alternative, would be an up to 230 MW solar PV array on about 1,620 acres. Like the Proposed Action, under each of these alternatives, the BLM would amend the CDCA Plan to allow the project. Under the No-Action Alternative, the BLM would deny the ROW application, and would not amend the CDCA Plan to allow the project. The BLM has selected Alternative 1— Reduced Footprint Alternative—as the Agency-Preferred Alternative for the Draft Supplemental EIS. The BLM and other cooperating agencies involved are inviting Draft Supplemental EIS reviewers to offer comments on the comparison of alternatives, as presented in the document. Your input is important and will be considered in the environmental and land-use planning analysis. Please note that public comments and information submitted, including names, street addresses, and email addresses of persons who submit comments will be available for public review and disclosure at the above address during regular business hours (8 a.m. to 4 p.m.), Monday through Friday, except holidays. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:54 Oct 26, 2017 Jkt 244001 your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Authority: 40 CFR 1506.6, 40 CFR 1506.10, 43 CFR 1610.2. Danielle Chi, Deputy State Director, California. [FR Doc. 2017–23417 Filed 10–26–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–40–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–979] Certain Radio Frequency Identification (‘‘RFID’’) Products and Components Thereof Commission Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337; Termination of the Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to find no violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, in the above-identified investigation. The investigation is terminated in its entirety. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cathy Chen, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–2392. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at 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 January 11, 2016, based on a complaint filed by Neology, Inc. of Poway, California (‘‘Neology’’). 81 FR SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 49847 1205–06 (Jan. 11, 2016). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain radio frequency identification (‘‘RFID’’) products and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,325,044 (‘‘the ’044 patent’’); 7,119,664 (‘‘the ’664 patent’’); and 8,587,436 (‘‘the ’436 patent’’). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(2). The notice of investigation named numerous respondents. Respondents Kapsch TrafficCom IVHS, Inc. of McLean, Virginia; Kapsch TrafficCom Holding Corp. of McLean, Virginia; Kapsch TrafficCom Canada, Inc. of Mississauga, Ontario, Canada; Star Systems International, Ltd. of Kwai Chung, Hong Kong; and STAR RFID Co., Ltd. of Bangkok, Thailand (collectively, ‘‘Respondents’’) remain in the investigation. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is also a party in this investigation. All asserted claims of the ’664 patent and certain asserted claims of the ’044 patent and the ’436 patent have been terminated from the investigation. See Comm’n Notice (Sept. 27, 2016). Only claims 13, 14, and 25 of the ’044 patent and claims 1, 2, and 4 of the ’436 patent remain in the investigation (collectively, ‘‘the Asserted Claims’’). On June 22, 2017, the ALJ issued her final ID finding no violation of section 337 by the Respondents in connection with the Asserted Claims. The final ID found that all of the Asserted Claims are invalid on multiple grounds. Had the Asserted Claims not been found invalid, the final ID also found that the accused products infringe the Asserted Claims; that Neology’s domestic industry products practice claim 25 of the ’044 patent and claims 1, 2, and 4 of the ’436 patent; and that Neology has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement as to the ’044 and the ’436 patents. Neology filed a timely petition for review of the final ID, challenging the final ID’s finding that the Asserted Claims are invalid. That same day, the Commission’s Investigative Attorney (‘‘IA’’) filed a contingent petition for review of the final ID and Respondents filed a joint contingent petition for review of the final ID. Neology and the IA both challenge certain of the final ID’s findings with respect to the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement as to the ’436 patent. Respondents also challenge the final ID’s finding that the Asserted E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM 27OCN1 asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with NOTICES 49848 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 207 / Friday, October 27, 2017 / Notices Claims are not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101. On July 13, 2017, the parties each filed a timely response to the petitions for review. On July 24, 2017, Respondents filed their public interest comments pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(a)(4). Two days later, Neology filed a response to Respondents’ public interest comments. The Commission also received public interest comments from multiple non-parties. On August 16, 2017, the Commission determined to review-in-part the final ID. Specifically, the Commission determined to review the following findings in the final ID: (1) The Asserted Claims are not entitled to claim priority to an earlier filing date; (2) the Asserted Claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102, 103, and/or 112; (3) the Asserted Claims are not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101; and (4) Neology has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement with respect to the ’436 patent. The Commission requested briefing from the parties on certain issues under review. The Commission did not solicit briefing from the parties and from the public on the issues of remedy, bonding, and the public interest. Having reviewed the parties’ submissions and the record evidence, the Commission has determined to affirm, with modified reasoning, the ID’s finding of no violation of section 337 by the Respondents in connection with the Asserted Claims because Respondents have shown that the Asserted Claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102, 103 and/ or 112. The Commission has also determined to affirm with modifications the ID’s finding that the Asserted Claims are not entitled to claim priority to an earlier filing date. The Commission has further determined to take no position on the ID’s findings that the Asserted Claims are directed at patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101 and that Neology has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement with respect to the ’436 patent. A Commission opinion will be issued shortly. 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: October 23, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2017–23366 Filed 10–26–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:54 Oct 26, 2017 Jkt 244001 INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–567–569 and 731–TA–1343–1345 (Final)] Silicon Metal From Australia, Brazil, Kazakhstan, and Norway; Scheduling of the Final Phase of Countervailing Duty and Antidumping Duty Investigations United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of the final phase of antidumping and countervailing duty investigation Nos. 701–TA–567–569 and 731–TA–1343– 1345 (Final) pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’) to determine whether an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of imports of silicon metal, provided for in subheadings 2804.69.1000 and 2804.69.5000 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, from Australia, Brazil, and Norway preliminarily determined by the Department of Commerce to be sold at less than fair value, and imports of silicon metal preliminarily determined to be subsidized by the governments of Australia, Brazil, and Kazakhstan. SUMMARY: DATES: October 12, 2017. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lawrence Jones ((202) 205–3358), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 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 these investigations may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope.—For purposes of these investigations, the Department of Commerce has defined the subject merchandise as follows: ‘‘all forms and sizes of silicon metal, including silicon metal powder. Silicon metal contains at least 85.00 percent but less than 99.99 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 percent silicon, and less than 4.00 percent iron, by actual weight. Semiconductor grade silicon (merchandise containing at least 99.99 percent silicon by actual weight and classifiable under Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) subheading 2804.61.0000) is excluded from the scope of this investigation. Silicon metal is currently classifiable under subheadings 2804.69.1000 and 2804.69.5000 of the HTSUS. While HTSUS numbers are provided for convenience and customs purposes, the written description of the scope remains dispositive.’’ Background.—The final phase of these investigations is being scheduled pursuant to sections 705(b) and 731(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671d(b) and 1673d(b)), as a result of affirmative preliminary determinations by the Department of Commerce that certain benefits which constitute subsidies within the meaning of section 703 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1671b) are being provided to manufacturers, producers, or exporters in Australia, Brazil, and Kazakhstan of silicon metal, and that such products imported from Australia, Brazil, and Norway are being sold in the United States at less than fair value within the meaning of section 733 of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b). The investigations were requested in petitions filed on March 8, 2017, by Globe Specialty Metals, Inc., Beverly, Ohio. For further information concerning the conduct of this phase of the investigations, hearing procedures, and rules of general application, consult the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A and C (19 CFR part 207). Participation in the investigations and public service list.—Persons, including industrial users of the subject merchandise and, if the merchandise is sold at the retail level, representative consumer organizations, wishing to participate in the final phase of these investigations as parties must file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as provided in section 201.11 of the Commission’s rules, no later than 21 days prior to the hearing date specified in this notice. A party that filed a notice of appearance during the preliminary phase of the investigations need not file an additional notice of appearance during this final phase. The Secretary will maintain a public service list containing the names and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties to the investigations. E:\FR\FM\27OCN1.SGM 27OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 207 (Friday, October 27, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49847-49848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23366]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-979]


Certain Radio Frequency Identification (``RFID'') Products and 
Components Thereof Commission Determination Finding No Violation of 
Section 337; 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 to find no violation of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, in the above-identified investigation. The 
investigation is terminated in its entirety.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cathy Chen, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2392. Copies of non-
confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are 
or will be available for inspection during official business hours 
(8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. 
International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, 
telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission 
may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at 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 January 11, 2016, based on a complaint filed by Neology, Inc. of 
Poway, California (``Neology''). 81 FR 1205-06 (Jan. 11, 2016). The 
complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 in the 
importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the 
sale within the United States after importation of certain radio 
frequency identification (``RFID'') products and components thereof by 
reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,325,044 
(``the '044 patent''); 7,119,664 (``the '664 patent''); and 8,587,436 
(``the '436 patent''). The complaint further alleges that an industry 
in the United States exists as required by 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(2). The 
notice of investigation named numerous respondents. Respondents Kapsch 
TrafficCom IVHS, Inc. of McLean, Virginia; Kapsch TrafficCom Holding 
Corp. of McLean, Virginia; Kapsch TrafficCom Canada, Inc. of 
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada; Star Systems International, Ltd. of Kwai 
Chung, Hong Kong; and STAR RFID Co., Ltd. of Bangkok, Thailand 
(collectively, ``Respondents'') remain in the investigation. The Office 
of Unfair Import Investigations is also a party in this investigation.
    All asserted claims of the '664 patent and certain asserted claims 
of the '044 patent and the '436 patent have been terminated from the 
investigation. See Comm'n Notice (Sept. 27, 2016). Only claims 13, 14, 
and 25 of the '044 patent and claims 1, 2, and 4 of the '436 patent 
remain in the investigation (collectively, ``the Asserted Claims'').
    On June 22, 2017, the ALJ issued her final ID finding no violation 
of section 337 by the Respondents in connection with the Asserted 
Claims. The final ID found that all of the Asserted Claims are invalid 
on multiple grounds. Had the Asserted Claims not been found invalid, 
the final ID also found that the accused products infringe the Asserted 
Claims; that Neology's domestic industry products practice claim 25 of 
the '044 patent and claims 1, 2, and 4 of the '436 patent; and that 
Neology has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry 
requirement as to the '044 and the '436 patents.
    Neology filed a timely petition for review of the final ID, 
challenging the final ID's finding that the Asserted Claims are 
invalid. That same day, the Commission's Investigative Attorney 
(``IA'') filed a contingent petition for review of the final ID and 
Respondents filed a joint contingent petition for review of the final 
ID. Neology and the IA both challenge certain of the final ID's 
findings with respect to the economic prong of the domestic industry 
requirement as to the '436 patent. Respondents also challenge the final 
ID's finding that the Asserted

[[Page 49848]]

Claims are not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101. On July 13, 2017, the 
parties each filed a timely response to the petitions for review. On 
July 24, 2017, Respondents filed their public interest comments 
pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(a)(4). Two days later, Neology filed 
a response to Respondents' public interest comments. The Commission 
also received public interest comments from multiple non-parties.
    On August 16, 2017, the Commission determined to review-in-part the 
final ID. Specifically, the Commission determined to review the 
following findings in the final ID: (1) The Asserted Claims are not 
entitled to claim priority to an earlier filing date; (2) the Asserted 
Claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102, 103, and/or 112; (3) the 
Asserted Claims are not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101; and (4) Neology 
has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement 
with respect to the '436 patent. The Commission requested briefing from 
the parties on certain issues under review. The Commission did not 
solicit briefing from the parties and from the public on the issues of 
remedy, bonding, and the public interest.
    Having reviewed the parties' submissions and the record evidence, 
the Commission has determined to affirm, with modified reasoning, the 
ID's finding of no violation of section 337 by the Respondents in 
connection with the Asserted Claims because Respondents have shown that 
the Asserted Claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102, 103 and/or 112. 
The Commission has also determined to affirm with modifications the 
ID's finding that the Asserted Claims are not entitled to claim 
priority to an earlier filing date. The Commission has further 
determined to take no position on the ID's findings that the Asserted 
Claims are directed at patent eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 
101 and that Neology has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic 
industry requirement with respect to the '436 patent. A Commission 
opinion will be issued shortly.
    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: October 23, 2017.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2017-23366 Filed 10-26-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.