Certain Toner Cartridges and Components Thereof; Notice of a Commission Determination To Affirm an Initial Determination Granting Respondents' Motions for Summary Determination of Non-Infringement; Finding of No Violation of Section 337; Termination of the Investigation, 24182-24183 [2019-10848]
Download as PDF
24182
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2019 / Notices
is made normally through a notice of
appearance. Id. No party petitioned for
review.
The Commission has determined not
to review the ID. The notice of
investigation and complaint are
amended.
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: May 20, 2019.
Katherine Hiner,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2019–10852 Filed 5–23–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1106]
Certain Toner Cartridges and
Components Thereof; Notice of a
Commission Determination To Affirm
an Initial Determination Granting
Respondents’ Motions for Summary
Determination of Non-Infringement;
Finding of 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 affirm
the initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order
No. 40) of the presiding administrative
law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) granting certain
respondents’ respective motions for
summary determination of noninfringement. Accordingly, the
Commission has determined to find no
violation of section 337. The
investigation is terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Clint Gerdine, Esq., 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.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:10 May 23, 2019
Jkt 247001
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 29, 2018, based on a
complaint filed on behalf of Canon Inc.
of Tokyo, Japan; Canon U.S.A. Inc. of
Melville, New York; and Canon
Virginia, Inc. of Newport News, Virginia
(collectively, ‘‘Canon’’). 83 FR 13516–
17. The complaint alleges violations of
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘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 toner cartridges and components
thereof by reason of infringement of
certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos.
9,746,826; 9,836,026; 9,841,727 (‘‘the
’727 patent’’); 9,841,728 (‘‘the ’728
patent’’); 9,841,729; 9,857,764;
9,857,765; 9,869,960; and 9,874,846.
The Commission’s notice of
investigation named numerous
respondents, including: Ninestar
Corporation and Ninestar Image Tech
Limited, both of Guangdong, China;
Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd. of
City of Industry, California; and Static
Control Components, Inc. of Stanford,
North Carolina (collectively,
‘‘Ninestar’’); Print-Rite N.A., Inc. of La
Vergne, Tennessee; Union Technology
International (M.C.O.) Co. Ltd. of
Rodrigues, Macau; Print-Rite Unicorn
Image Products Co. Ltd. of Zhuhai,
China; The Supplies Guys, Inc. of
Lancaster, Pennsylvania; and LD
Products, Inc. of Long Beach, California
(collectively, ‘‘Print-Rite’’); and Aster
Graphics, Inc. of Placentia, California;
Aster Graphics Co., Ltd. of Guangdong,
China; and Jiangxi Yibo E-tech Co., Ltd.
of Jiangxi, China (collectively, ‘‘Aster’’;
all collectively, ‘‘the active
respondents’’). The Office of Unfair
Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) is also a
party to the investigation. The ’727 and
’728 patents have been terminated from
the investigation. See Order No. 18
(June 28, 2018), unreviewed by Comm’n
Notice (July 23, 2018).
All other respondents have been
found in default or terminated from the
investigation based on withdrawal of
Canon’s allegations as to those
respondents. See, e.g., Order No. 11
(May 2, 2018) (ID finding eleven
respondents in default); unreviewed by
Comm’n Notice (May 23, 2018); Order
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
No. 30 (Oct. 22, 2018) (ID terminating
the investigation as to a single
respondent); unreviewed by Comm’n
Notice (Nov. 19, 2018). Specifically, the
following thirty-five respondents have
been found in default: Arlington
Industries, Inc. of Waukegan, Illinois;
Ourway US Inc. of City of Industry,
California; Print After Print, Inc. d/b/a
OutOfToner.com of Phoenix, Arizona;
GPC Trading Co. Limited d/b/a GPC
Image of Kowloon, Hong Kong; ACM
Technologies, Inc. of Corona, California;
Ourway Image Tech. Co., Ltd., Ourway
Image Co., Ltd., and Zhuhai Aowei
Electronics Co., Ltd., all of Zhuhai,
China; Acecom, Inc.—San Antonio d/b/
a InkSell.com of San Antonio, Texas;
Bluedog Distribution Inc. of Hollywood,
Florida; i8 International, Inc. d/b/a
Ink4Work.com of City of Industry,
California; Ink Technologies Printer
Supplies, LLC of Dayton, Ohio; Linkyo
Corp. d/b/a SuperMediaStore.com of La
Puente, California; CLT Computers, Inc.
d/b/a Multiwave and MWave of Walnut,
California; Imaging Supplies Investors,
LLC d/b/a SuppliesOutlet.com,
SuppliesWholesalers.com, and
OnlineTechStores.com of Reno, Nevada;
Online Tech Stores, LLC d/b/a
SuppliesOutlet.com,
SuppliesWholesalers.com, and
OnlineTechStores.com of Grand Rapids,
Michigan; Fairland, LLC d/b/a ProPrint
of Anaheim Hills, California; 9010–8077
Quebec Inc. d/b/a Zeetoner of Quebec,
Canada; World Class Ink Supply, Inc. of
Woodbury, New Jersey; EIS Office
Solutions, Inc. and Zinyaw LLC d/b/a
TonerPirate.com, both of Houston,
Texas; eReplacements, LLC of
Grapevine, Texas; Garvey’s Office
Products, Inc. of Niles, Illinois; Master
Print Supplies, Inc. d/b/a HQ Products
of Burlingame, California; Reliable
Imaging Computer Products, Inc. of
Northridge, California; Frontier Imaging
Inc. of Compton, California; Hong Kong
BoZe Company Limited d/b/a Greensky
of New Kowloon, Hong Kong; Apex
Excel Limited d/b/a ShopAt247 of
Rowland Heights, California; Billiontree
Technology USA Inc. d/b/a Toner
Kingdom of City of Industry, California;
Kuhlmann Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a
Precision Roller of Phoenix, Arizona;
FTrade Inc. d/b/a ValueToner of Staten
Island, New York; V4INK, Inc. of
Ontario, California; Do It Wiser LLC d/
b/a Image Toner of Alpharetta, Georgia;
Global Cartridges of Burlingame,
California; and Kingway Image Co., Ltd.
d/b/a Zhu Hai Kingway Image Co., Ltd.
of Zhuhai, China.
On November 28, 2018, Print-Rite and
Aster each moved for summary
determination that their respective
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 101 / Friday, May 24, 2019 / Notices
accused products do not infringe the
asserted patents. On the same date,
Ninestar filed an unopposed motion for
leave to file a motion for summary
determination that its accused products
do not infringe the asserted patents. All
of the active respondents’ motions were
contingent on the ALJ construing the
asserted claims to require a pivotable
coupling member. Also, on the same
date, Canon moved for summary
determination of infringement with
respect to all of the respondents’
accused products, both active and
defaulting. Canon’s motion was
contingent on the ALJ construing the
asserted claims to require a coupling
member that does not need to pivot or
incline. On December 10, 2018, Canon
stated in its response to the two pending
summary determination motions that it
would not oppose the motions if the ALJ
construed the asserted claims to require
a pivotable coupling member. On the
same date, OUII filed a response
supporting all of the motions for
summary determination of noninfringement, including Ninestar’s
motion for leave to file its motion for
summary determination of noninfringement.
On February 28, 2019, the ALJ issued
her Markman Order (Order No. 38)
construing the asserted claims to require
a pivotable coupling member. On March
6, 2019, Ninestar moved, based on the
Markman Order’s claim construction,
for summary determination of noninfringement. On March 8, 2019, Canon
stated in its response to Ninestar’s
motion that it would not oppose the
motion based on the Markman Order.
On March 13, 2019, the ALJ issued
the subject ID (Order No. 40) granting
each motion for summary determination
of non-infringement. In the subject ID,
the ALJ also denied Canon’s motion for
summary determination of infringement
as moot. On March 25, 2019, Canon and
the Active Respondents each petitioned
for review of the subject ID. On April 1,
2019, Canon and the Active
Respondents each filed a response in
opposition to the other party’s petition
for review. On the same date, OUII filed
a response in opposition to each
petition for review.
On May 6, 2019, the Commission
determined to review the ID and the
underlying Markman Order in their
entirety and requested the parties to
respond to certain questions concerning
the issues under review. On May 14,
2019, Canon filed its written submission
in response to the Commission
questions. Canon stated that it does not
seek relief against the defaulting
respondents unless the Markman
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:10 May 23, 2019
Jkt 247001
Order’s construction requiring a
pivotable coupling member is modified.
Having reviewed the record of the
investigation, including Order No. 40
and the Markman Order, the parties’
briefing, and Canon’s response, the
Commission has determined to affirm
the subject ID. Accordingly, the
Commission finds no violation of
section 337. The investigation is
terminated.
The authority for the Commission’s
determination is contained in section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and in Part
210 of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR part
210.
24183
The publication of this notice opens
a period for public comment on the
Consent Decree. Comments should be
addressed to the Assistant Attorney
General, Environment and Natural
Resources Division, and should refer to
United States of America v. BKF Capital
Group, Inc., D.J. Ref. No. 90–11–3–
11242. All comments must be submitted
no later than thirty (30) days after the
publication date of this notice.
Comments may be submitted either by
email or by mail:
To submit
comments:
Send them to:
By email .......
pubcomment-ees.enrd@
usdoj.gov.
Assistant Attorney General,
U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O.
Box 7611, Washington, DC
20044–7611.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: May 20, 2019.
Katherine Hiner,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
By mail .........
[FR Doc. 2019–10848 Filed 5–23–19; 8:45 am]
During the public comment period,
the Consent Decree may be examined
and downloaded at this Justice
Department website: https://
www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees.
We will provide a paper copy of the
Consent Decree upon written request
and payment of reproduction costs.
Please mail your request and payment
to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ–
ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC
20044–7611.
Please enclose a check or money order
for $4.75 (25 cents per page
reproduction cost) payable to the United
States Treasury. For a paper copy
without the appendix and signature
pages, the cost is $3.00.
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of Proposed
Consent Decree Under the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act
On May 17, 2019, the Department of
Justice lodged a proposed Consent
Decree with the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Florida
in the lawsuit entitled United States of
America v. BKF Capital Group, Inc.,
Civil Action No. 8:18–cv–01863–VMC–
TGW.
The Consent Decree resolves the
United States’ claims set forth in its
complaint against BKF Capital Group,
Inc. (‘‘Defendant’’) for cost recovery
under Section 107 of the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (‘‘CERCLA’’) relating to the release
or threatened release of hazardous
substances into the environment at
Cattle Dipping Vat A (Site No. OT–59A)
in Polk County, Florida, and Cattle
Dipping Vats C and D (Site Nos. OT–
59C and OT–59D) in Highlands County,
Florida (together, the ‘‘Vat Sites’’)
within the Avon Park Air Force Range
(‘‘APAFR’’). Under the terms of the
proposed consent decree, Defendant
will reimburse $725,000 of the costs
incurred by the United States Air Force
in connection with response actions at
the Vat Sites. In return, the United
States agrees not to sue or take
administrative action against Defendant
under Section 107(a) or Section 113 of
CERCLA with regard to the Vat Sites.
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Henry Friedman,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental
Enforcement Section, Environment and
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 2019–10941 Filed 5–23–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS
ADMINISTRATION
Office of Government Information
Services
[NARA–2019–023]
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
Advisory Committee Meeting
Office of Government
Information Services (OGIS), National
Archives and Records Administration
(NARA).
ACTION: Notice of Federal Advisory
Committee meeting.
AGENCY:
We are announcing an
upcoming Freedom of Information Act
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 101 (Friday, May 24, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24182-24183]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10848]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1106]
Certain Toner Cartridges and Components Thereof; Notice of a
Commission Determination To Affirm an Initial Determination Granting
Respondents' Motions for Summary Determination of Non-Infringement;
Finding of 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 affirm the initial determination (``ID'')
(Order No. 40) of the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'')
granting certain respondents' respective motions for summary
determination of non-infringement. Accordingly, the Commission has
determined to find no violation of section 337. The investigation is
terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clint Gerdine, Esq., 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 March 29, 2018, based on a complaint filed on behalf of Canon Inc.
of Tokyo, Japan; Canon U.S.A. Inc. of Melville, New York; and Canon
Virginia, Inc. of Newport News, Virginia (collectively, ``Canon''). 83
FR 13516-17. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (``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
toner cartridges and components thereof by reason of infringement of
certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,746,826; 9,836,026; 9,841,727
(``the '727 patent''); 9,841,728 (``the '728 patent''); 9,841,729;
9,857,764; 9,857,765; 9,869,960; and 9,874,846. The Commission's notice
of investigation named numerous respondents, including: Ninestar
Corporation and Ninestar Image Tech Limited, both of Guangdong, China;
Ninestar Technology Company, Ltd. of City of Industry, California; and
Static Control Components, Inc. of Stanford, North Carolina
(collectively, ``Ninestar''); Print-Rite N.A., Inc. of La Vergne,
Tennessee; Union Technology International (M.C.O.) Co. Ltd. of
Rodrigues, Macau; Print-Rite Unicorn Image Products Co. Ltd. of Zhuhai,
China; The Supplies Guys, Inc. of Lancaster, Pennsylvania; and LD
Products, Inc. of Long Beach, California (collectively, ``Print-
Rite''); and Aster Graphics, Inc. of Placentia, California; Aster
Graphics Co., Ltd. of Guangdong, China; and Jiangxi Yibo E-tech Co.,
Ltd. of Jiangxi, China (collectively, ``Aster''; all collectively,
``the active respondents''). The Office of Unfair Import Investigations
(``OUII'') is also a party to the investigation. The '727 and '728
patents have been terminated from the investigation. See Order No. 18
(June 28, 2018), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (July 23, 2018).
All other respondents have been found in default or terminated from
the investigation based on withdrawal of Canon's allegations as to
those respondents. See, e.g., Order No. 11 (May 2, 2018) (ID finding
eleven respondents in default); unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (May 23,
2018); Order No. 30 (Oct. 22, 2018) (ID terminating the investigation
as to a single respondent); unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Nov. 19,
2018). Specifically, the following thirty-five respondents have been
found in default: Arlington Industries, Inc. of Waukegan, Illinois;
Ourway US Inc. of City of Industry, California; Print After Print, Inc.
d/b/a OutOfToner.com of Phoenix, Arizona; GPC Trading Co. Limited d/b/a
GPC Image of Kowloon, Hong Kong; ACM Technologies, Inc. of Corona,
California; Ourway Image Tech. Co., Ltd., Ourway Image Co., Ltd., and
Zhuhai Aowei Electronics Co., Ltd., all of Zhuhai, China; Acecom,
Inc.--San Antonio d/b/a InkSell.com of San Antonio, Texas; Bluedog
Distribution Inc. of Hollywood, Florida; i8 International, Inc. d/b/a
Ink4Work.com of City of Industry, California; Ink Technologies Printer
Supplies, LLC of Dayton, Ohio; Linkyo Corp. d/b/a SuperMediaStore.com
of La Puente, California; CLT Computers, Inc. d/b/a Multiwave and MWave
of Walnut, California; Imaging Supplies Investors, LLC d/b/a
SuppliesOutlet.com, SuppliesWholesalers.com, and OnlineTechStores.com
of Reno, Nevada; Online Tech Stores, LLC d/b/a SuppliesOutlet.com,
SuppliesWholesalers.com, and OnlineTechStores.com of Grand Rapids,
Michigan; Fairland, LLC d/b/a ProPrint of Anaheim Hills, California;
9010-8077 Quebec Inc. d/b/a Zeetoner of Quebec, Canada; World Class Ink
Supply, Inc. of Woodbury, New Jersey; EIS Office Solutions, Inc. and
Zinyaw LLC d/b/a TonerPirate.com, both of Houston, Texas;
eReplacements, LLC of Grapevine, Texas; Garvey's Office Products, Inc.
of Niles, Illinois; Master Print Supplies, Inc. d/b/a HQ Products of
Burlingame, California; Reliable Imaging Computer Products, Inc. of
Northridge, California; Frontier Imaging Inc. of Compton, California;
Hong Kong BoZe Company Limited d/b/a Greensky of New Kowloon, Hong
Kong; Apex Excel Limited d/b/a ShopAt247 of Rowland Heights,
California; Billiontree Technology USA Inc. d/b/a Toner Kingdom of City
of Industry, California; Kuhlmann Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Precision
Roller of Phoenix, Arizona; FTrade Inc. d/b/a ValueToner of Staten
Island, New York; V4INK, Inc. of Ontario, California; Do It Wiser LLC
d/b/a Image Toner of Alpharetta, Georgia; Global Cartridges of
Burlingame, California; and Kingway Image Co., Ltd. d/b/a Zhu Hai
Kingway Image Co., Ltd. of Zhuhai, China.
On November 28, 2018, Print-Rite and Aster each moved for summary
determination that their respective
[[Page 24183]]
accused products do not infringe the asserted patents. On the same
date, Ninestar filed an unopposed motion for leave to file a motion for
summary determination that its accused products do not infringe the
asserted patents. All of the active respondents' motions were
contingent on the ALJ construing the asserted claims to require a
pivotable coupling member. Also, on the same date, Canon moved for
summary determination of infringement with respect to all of the
respondents' accused products, both active and defaulting. Canon's
motion was contingent on the ALJ construing the asserted claims to
require a coupling member that does not need to pivot or incline. On
December 10, 2018, Canon stated in its response to the two pending
summary determination motions that it would not oppose the motions if
the ALJ construed the asserted claims to require a pivotable coupling
member. On the same date, OUII filed a response supporting all of the
motions for summary determination of non-infringement, including
Ninestar's motion for leave to file its motion for summary
determination of non-infringement.
On February 28, 2019, the ALJ issued her Markman Order (Order No.
38) construing the asserted claims to require a pivotable coupling
member. On March 6, 2019, Ninestar moved, based on the Markman Order's
claim construction, for summary determination of non-infringement. On
March 8, 2019, Canon stated in its response to Ninestar's motion that
it would not oppose the motion based on the Markman Order.
On March 13, 2019, the ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 40)
granting each motion for summary determination of non-infringement. In
the subject ID, the ALJ also denied Canon's motion for summary
determination of infringement as moot. On March 25, 2019, Canon and the
Active Respondents each petitioned for review of the subject ID. On
April 1, 2019, Canon and the Active Respondents each filed a response
in opposition to the other party's petition for review. On the same
date, OUII filed a response in opposition to each petition for review.
On May 6, 2019, the Commission determined to review the ID and the
underlying Markman Order in their entirety and requested the parties to
respond to certain questions concerning the issues under review. On May
14, 2019, Canon filed its written submission in response to the
Commission questions. Canon stated that it does not seek relief against
the defaulting respondents unless the Markman Order's construction
requiring a pivotable coupling member is modified.
Having reviewed the record of the investigation, including Order
No. 40 and the Markman Order, the parties' briefing, and Canon's
response, the Commission has determined to affirm the subject ID.
Accordingly, the Commission finds no violation of section 337. The
investigation is terminated.
The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and
in Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR
part 210.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: May 20, 2019.
Katherine Hiner,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2019-10848 Filed 5-23-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P