Certain IoT Devices and Components Thereof (IoT, the Internet of Things)-Web Applications Displayed on a Web Browser; Institution of Investigation, 3021-3022 [2018-01035]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 14 / Monday, January 22, 2018 / Notices
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 701–TA–590 and 731–
TA–1397–98 (Preliminary)]
Sodium Gluconate, Gluconic Acid, and
Derivative Products From China and
France
Determinations
On the basis of the record 1 developed
in the subject investigations, the United
States International Trade Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) determines, pursuant
to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’),
that there is a reasonable indication that
an industry in the United States is
threatened with material injury by
reason of imports of sodium gluconate,
gluconic acid, and derivative products
from China, provided for in subheadings
2918.16.10, 2918.16.50 and 2932.20.50
of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States, that are alleged to be
sold in the United States at less than fair
value (‘‘LTFV’’) and to be subsidized by
the government of China. The
Commission further determines that
there is no reasonable indication that an
industry in the United States is
materially injured or threatened with
material injury by reason of imports of
sodium gluconate, gluconic acid, and
derivative products from France that are
alleged to be sold in the United States
at LTFV.2
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Commencement of Final Phase
Investigations
Pursuant to section 207.18 of the
Commission’s rules, the Commission
also gives notice of the commencement
of the final phase of its investigations.
The Commission will issue a final phase
notice of scheduling, which will be
published in the Federal Register as
provided in section 207.21 of the
Commission’s rules, upon notice from
the Department of Commerce
(‘‘Commerce’’) of affirmative
preliminary determinations in the
investigations under sections 703(b) or
733(b) of the Act, or, if the preliminary
determinations are negative, upon
notice of affirmative final
determinations in those investigations
under sections 705(a) or 735(a) of the
Act. Parties that filed entries of
appearance in the preliminary phase of
the investigations need not enter a
separate appearance for the final phase
1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19
CFR 207.2(f)).
2 Chairman Rhonda K. Schmidtlein dissenting.
Chairman Schmidtlein determines that there is a
reasonable indication that an industry in the United
States is materially injured by reason of imports of
the subject product from China and France.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:00 Jan 19, 2018
Jkt 244001
of the investigations. Industrial users,
and, if the merchandise under
investigation is sold at the retail level,
representative consumer organizations
have the right to appear as parties in
Commission antidumping and
countervailing duty investigations. The
Secretary will prepare a public service
list containing the names and addresses
of all persons, or their representatives,
who are parties to the investigations.
Background
On November 30, 2017, PMP
Fermentation Products, Inc., Peoria,
Illinois, filed a petition with the
Commission and Commerce, alleging
that an industry in the United States is
materially injured or threatened with
material injury by reason of LTFV and
subsidized imports of sodium gluconate,
gluconic acid, and derivative products
from China and LTFV imports of
sodium gluconate, gluconic acid, and
derivative products from France.
Accordingly, effective November 30,
2017, the Commission, pursuant to
sections 703(a) and 733(a) of the Act (19
U.S.C. 1671b(a) and 1673b(a)), instituted
countervailing duty investigation No.
701–TA–590 and antidumping duty
investigation Nos. 731–TA–1397–98
(Preliminary).
Notice of the institution of the
Commission’s investigations and of a
public conference to be held in
connection therewith was given by
posting copies of the notice in the Office
of the Secretary, U.S. International
Trade Commission, Washington, DC,
and by publishing the notice in the
Federal Register of December 6, 2017
(82 FR 57614). The conference was held
in Washington, DC, on December 21,
2017, and all persons who requested the
opportunity were permitted to appear in
person or by counsel.
The Commission made these
determinations pursuant to sections
703(a) and 733(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C.
1671b(a) and 1673b(a)). It completed
and filed its determinations in these
investigations on January 16, 2018. The
views of the Commission are contained
in USITC Publication 4756 (January
2018), entitled Sodium Gluconate,
Gluconic Acid, and Derivative Products
from China and France: Investigation
Nos. 701 TA–590 and 731–TA–1397–98
(Preliminary).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: January 16, 2018.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2018–00984 Filed 1–19–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3021
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1094]
Certain IoT Devices and Components
Thereof (IoT, the Internet of Things)—
Web Applications Displayed on a Web
Browser; Institution of Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that a
complaint was filed with the U.S.
International Trade Commission on
October 3, 2017, under section 337 of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on
behalf of Lakshmi Arunachalam, Ph.D.
of Menlo Park, California. Supplements
were filed on October 24, October 30,
and November 3, 2017. On November 7,
2017, an amended complaint was filed
with the U.S. International Trade
Commission under section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on
behalf of Lakshmi Arunachalam, Ph.D.
and WebXchange, Inc., both of Menlo
Park, California. Supplements were filed
on November 7, 13, and December 21,
2017. On December 6, 2017, the
Commission postponed the vote on
whether to institute an investigation
based on the amended complaint to
January 9, 2017. The amended
complaint alleges violations of section
337 based upon the importation into the
United States, the sale for importation,
and the sale within the United States
after importation of certain IOT devices
and components thereof (IOT, the
Internet of Things)—web applications
displayed on a web browser by reason
of infringement of certain claims of U.S.
Patent No. 7,930,340 (‘‘the ’340 patent’’),
and that an industry in the United
States exists as required by the
applicable Federal Statute. The
amended complaint further alleges
unfair methods of competition and
unfair acts (criminal and civil RICO
violations, breach of contract, theft of
intellectual property, antitrust
violations, and trade secret
misappropriation), the threat or effect of
which is to destroy or substantially
injure an industry in the United States.
The complainant requests that the
Commission institute an investigation
and, after the investigation, issue a
limited exclusion order and cease and
desist orders.
ADDRESSES: The amended complaint,
except for any confidential information
contained therein, is available for
inspection during official business
hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the
Office of the Secretary, U.S.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22JAN1.SGM
22JAN1
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
3022
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 14 / Monday, January 22, 2018 / Notices
International Trade Commission, 500 E
Street SW, Room 112, Washington, DC
20436, telephone (202) 205–2000.
Hearing impaired individuals are
advised that information on this matter
can be obtained 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 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Pathenia M. Proctor, The Office of
Unfair Import Investigations, U.S.
International Trade Commission,
telephone (202) 205–2560.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority:
The authority for institution of this
investigation is contained in section 337
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended,
19 U.S.C. 1337 and in section 210.10 of
the Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2018).
Scope of Investigation: Having
considered the complaint, the U.S.
International Trade Commission, on
January 12, 2018, Ordered That—
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, an investigation be instituted
to determine whether there is a
violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of
section 337 in the importation into the
United States, the sale for importation,
or the sale within the United States after
importation of certain IoT devices and
components thereof (IoT, the Internet of
Things)—web applications displayed on
a web browser by reason of infringement
of one or more of claims 1–40 of the
’340 patent; and whether an industry in
the United States exists as required by
subsection (a)(2) of section 337;
(2) Pursuant to Commission Rule
210.50(b)(1), 19 CFR 210.50(b)(1), the
presiding Administrative Law Judge
shall take evidence or other information
and hear arguments from the parties or
other interested persons with respect to
the public interest in his investigation,
as appropriate, and provide the
Commission with findings of fact and a
recommended determination on this
issue, which shall be limited to the
statutory public interest factors set forth
in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1), (f)(1), (g)(1);
(3) Notwithstanding any Commission
Rules that would otherwise apply, the
presiding Administrative Law Judge
shall hold an early evidentiary hearing,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:00 Jan 19, 2018
Jkt 244001
find facts, and issue an early decision,
as to whether the complainant has
satisfied the domestic industry
requirement. Any such decision shall be
in the form of an initial determination
(ID). Petitions for review of such an ID
shall be due five calendar days after
service of the ID; any replies shall be
due three business days after service of
a petition. The ID will become the
Commission’s final determination 30
days after the date of service of the ID
unless the Commission determines to
review the ID. Any such review will be
conducted in accordance with
Commission Rules 210.43, 210.44, and
210.45, 19 CFR 210.43, 210.44, and
210.45. The Commission expects the
issuance of an early ID relating to the
domestic industry requirement within
100 days of institution, except that the
presiding ALJ may grant a limited
extension of the ID for good cause
shown. The issuance of an early ID
finding that complainants do not satisfy
the domestic industry requirement shall
stay the investigation unless the
Commission orders otherwise; any other
decision shall not stay the investigation
or delay the issuance of a final ID
covering the other issues of the
investigation.
(4) For the purpose of the
investigation so instituted, the following
are hereby named as parties upon which
this notice of investigation shall be
served:
(a) The complainants are:
Lakshmi-Arunachalam, Ph.D., 222
Stanford Avenue, Menlo Park, CA
94025
WebXchange, Inc., 222 Stanford
Avenue, Menlo Park, CA 94025
(b) The respondents are the following
entities alleged to be in violation of
section 337, and are the parties upon
which the complaint is to be served:
Apple Inc., 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino,
California 95014
Facebook, Inc., 1 Hacker Way, Menlo
Park, CA 94025
Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 85
Challenger Road, Ridgefield Park, NJ
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 129,
Samsung-ro, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon-si,
Gyeonggi-do, Korea; Headquarters:
40th floor Samsung Electronics,
Building, 11, Seocho-daero 74-gil,
Seocho District, Seoul, South Korea
(c) The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW, Suite
401, Washington, DC 20436; and
(5) For the investigation so instituted,
the Chief Administrative Law Judge,
U.S. International Trade Commission,
shall designate the presiding
Administrative Law Judge.
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Responses to the complaint and the
notice of investigation must be
submitted by the named respondents in
accordance with section 210.13 of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to
19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such
responses will be considered by the
Commission if received not later than 20
days after the date of service by the
Commission of the complaint and the
notice of investigation. Extensions of
time for submitting responses to the
complaint and the notice of
investigation will not be granted unless
good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of a respondent to file a timely
response to each allegation in the
complaint and in this notice may be
deemed to constitute a waiver of the
right to appear and contest the
allegations of the complaint and this
notice, and to authorize the
administrative law judge and the
Commission, without further notice to
the respondent, to find the facts to be as
alleged in the complaint and this notice
and to enter an initial determination
and a final determination containing
such findings, and may result in the
issuance of an exclusion order or a cease
and desist order or both directed against
the respondent.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: January 17, 2018.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2018–01035 Filed 1–19–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1095]
Certain Load Supporting Systems,
Including Composite Mat Systems, and
Components Thereof; Institution of
Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that a
complaint was filed with the U.S.
International Trade Commission on
December 15, 2017, under section 337 of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on
behalf of Newpark Mats & Integrated
Services LLC of The Woodlands, Texas.
The complaint alleges violations of
section 337 based upon the importation
into the United States, the sale for
importation, and the sale within the
United States after importation of
certain load supporting systems,
including composite mat systems, and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22JAN1.SGM
22JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 14 (Monday, January 22, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3021-3022]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01035]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1094]
Certain IoT Devices and Components Thereof (IoT, the Internet of
Things)--Web Applications Displayed on a Web Browser; Institution of
Investigation
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the
U.S. International Trade Commission on October 3, 2017, under section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Lakshmi
Arunachalam, Ph.D. of Menlo Park, California. Supplements were filed on
October 24, October 30, and November 3, 2017. On November 7, 2017, an
amended complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade
Commission under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on
behalf of Lakshmi Arunachalam, Ph.D. and WebXchange, Inc., both of
Menlo Park, California. Supplements were filed on November 7, 13, and
December 21, 2017. On December 6, 2017, the Commission postponed the
vote on whether to institute an investigation based on the amended
complaint to January 9, 2017. The amended complaint alleges violations
of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the
sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after
importation of certain IOT devices and components thereof (IOT, the
Internet of Things)--web applications displayed on a web browser by
reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,930,340
(``the '340 patent''), and that an industry in the United States exists
as required by the applicable Federal Statute. The amended complaint
further alleges unfair methods of competition and unfair acts (criminal
and civil RICO violations, breach of contract, theft of intellectual
property, antitrust violations, and trade secret misappropriation), the
threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an
industry in the United States.
The complainant requests that the Commission institute an
investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion
order and cease and desist orders.
ADDRESSES: The amended complaint, except for any confidential
information contained therein, is available for inspection during
official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the
Secretary, U.S.
[[Page 3022]]
International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Room 112, Washington,
DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. Hearing impaired individuals are
advised that information on this matter can be obtained 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 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pathenia M. Proctor, The Office of
Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission,
telephone (202) 205-2560.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Authority: The authority for institution of
this investigation is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 and in section 210.10 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2018).
Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S.
International Trade Commission, on January 12, 2018, Ordered That--
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether
there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of section 337 in the
importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the
sale within the United States after importation of certain IoT devices
and components thereof (IoT, the Internet of Things)--web applications
displayed on a web browser by reason of infringement of one or more of
claims 1-40 of the '340 patent; and whether an industry in the United
States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;
(2) Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(b)(1), 19 CFR 210.50(b)(1),
the presiding Administrative Law Judge shall take evidence or other
information and hear arguments from the parties or other interested
persons with respect to the public interest in his investigation, as
appropriate, and provide the Commission with findings of fact and a
recommended determination on this issue, which shall be limited to the
statutory public interest factors set forth in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1),
(f)(1), (g)(1);
(3) Notwithstanding any Commission Rules that would otherwise
apply, the presiding Administrative Law Judge shall hold an early
evidentiary hearing, find facts, and issue an early decision, as to
whether the complainant has satisfied the domestic industry
requirement. Any such decision shall be in the form of an initial
determination (ID). Petitions for review of such an ID shall be due
five calendar days after service of the ID; any replies shall be due
three business days after service of a petition. The ID will become the
Commission's final determination 30 days after the date of service of
the ID unless the Commission determines to review the ID. Any such
review will be conducted in accordance with Commission Rules 210.43,
210.44, and 210.45, 19 CFR 210.43, 210.44, and 210.45. The Commission
expects the issuance of an early ID relating to the domestic industry
requirement within 100 days of institution, except that the presiding
ALJ may grant a limited extension of the ID for good cause shown. The
issuance of an early ID finding that complainants do not satisfy the
domestic industry requirement shall stay the investigation unless the
Commission orders otherwise; any other decision shall not stay the
investigation or delay the issuance of a final ID covering the other
issues of the investigation.
(4) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the
following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of
investigation shall be served:
(a) The complainants are:
Lakshmi-Arunachalam, Ph.D., 222 Stanford Avenue, Menlo Park, CA 94025
WebXchange, Inc., 222 Stanford Avenue, Menlo Park, CA 94025
(b) The respondents are the following entities alleged to be in
violation of section 337, and are the parties upon which the complaint
is to be served:
Apple Inc., 1 Infinite Loop, Cupertino, California 95014
Facebook, Inc., 1 Hacker Way, Menlo Park, CA 94025
Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 85 Challenger Road, Ridgefield Park,
NJ
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 129, Samsung-ro, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon-si,
Gyeonggi-do, Korea; Headquarters: 40th floor Samsung Electronics,
Building, 11, Seocho-daero 74-gil, Seocho District, Seoul, South Korea
(c) The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Suite 401, Washington, DC 20436; and
(5) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative
Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the
presiding Administrative Law Judge.
Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be
submitted by the named respondents in accordance with section 210.13 of
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be
considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after
the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the notice
of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to the
complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted unless
good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each
allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to
constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations
of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative
law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent,
to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and
to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing
such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or
a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: January 17, 2018.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2018-01035 Filed 1-19-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
