Certain Movable Barrier Operator Systems and Components Thereof; Notice of Institution, 48264-48265 [2020-17358]
Download as PDF
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
48264
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 154 / Monday, August 10, 2020 / Notices
are hereby named as parties upon which
this notice of investigation shall be
served:
(a) The complainants are:
Nokia Technologies Oy, Karakaari 7A,
FIN–02610, Espoo, Finland.
Nokia Corporation, Karakaari 7A, FIN–
02610, Espoo, Finland.
(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:
Lenovo (United States), Inc., 8001
Development Drive, Morrisville, NC
27560.
Lenovo Group Limited, Lincoln House,
23rd Floor, Taikoo Place, 979 King’s
Road, Quarry Bay, Hong Kong.
Lenovo (Beijing) Limited, 6 Chuangye
Rd., Shangdi Haidian District, 100085
Beijing, China.
Lenovo (Shanghai) Electronics
Technology Co. Ltd., No. 696 Songtao
Road, 200000 Shanghai, China.
Lenovo PC HK Limited, Lincoln House,
23rd Floor, Taikoo Place, 979 King’s
Road, Quarry Bay, Hong Kong.
Lenovo Information Products Shenzhen
Co. Ltd., No. 30 Tao Hua Road, Free
Trade Zone, FuTian District,
Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province,
518038 Shenzhen, China.
Lenovo Mobile Communication, No. 19,
Gaoxin 4th Road, East Lake New
Technology Development Zone,
Hubei, 430079 Wuhan, China.
Lenovo Corporation, No. 2088 Pangjin
Road, Wujiang City, Jiangsu, 215217
Wujiang, China.
Lenovo Centro Tecnologico S. de RL CV,
Blvd. Escobedo No. 316, Parque
Industrial Technology, 66600
Apodaca, Nuevo Leon, Mexico.
(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), as
amended in 85 FR 15798 (March 19,
2020), such responses will be
considered by the Commission if
received not later than 20 days after the
date of service by the complainants of
the complaint and the notice of
investigation. Extensions of time for
submitting responses to the complaint
and the notice of investigation will not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:31 Aug 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
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: August 4, 2020.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020–17360 Filed 8–7–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1209]
Certain Movable Barrier Operator
Systems and Components Thereof;
Notice of Institution
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 July
6, 2020, under section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of
Overhead Door Corporation of
Lewisville, Texas and GMI Holdings
Inc. of Mount Hope, Ohio. A
supplement to the complaint was filed
on July 22, 2020. 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 movable barrier operator systems
and components thereof by reason of
infringement of U.S. Patent No.
8,970,345 (‘‘the ’345 Patent’’); U.S.
Patent No. 9,483,935 (’’the ’935 Patent’’);
U.S. Patent No. 7,173,516 (‘‘the ’516
Patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 7,180,260 (‘‘the
’260 Patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 7,956,718
(‘‘the ’718 Patent’’); and U.S. Patent No.
8,410,895 (‘‘the ’895 Patent’’). The
complaint further alleges that an
industry in the United States exists as
required by the applicable Federal
Statute. The complainants request that
the Commission institute an
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00116
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
investigation and, after the
investigation, issue a limited exclusion
order and a cease and desist order.
ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for
any confidential information contained
therein, may be viewed on the
Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS)
at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help
accessing EDIS, please email
EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Katherine Hiner, Office of Docket
Services, U.S. International Trade
Commission, telephone (202) 205–1802.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 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 (2020).
SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION: Having
considered the complaint, the U.S.
International Trade Commission, on
August 4, 2020, 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 products
identified in paragraph (2) by reason of
infringement of one or more of claims 1,
2, 16, and 17 of the ’345 patent; claims
1, 4, 16, and 19 of the ’935 patent;
claims 10–12, 14–16, and 18 of the ’516
patent; claims 1–3, 7, and 8 of the ’260
patent; claims 18 and 24 of the ’718
patent; and claim 17 of the ’895 patent,
and whether an industry in the United
States exists as required by subsection
(a)(2) of section 337;
(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of
the Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the
plain language description of the
accused products or category of accused
products, which defines the scope of the
investigation, is ‘‘garage door systems
and components thereof, remote
controls, wireless transmitters, and
software for operating the garage door
systems’’;
E:\FR\FM\10AUN1.SGM
10AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 154 / Monday, August 10, 2020 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
(3) 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:
Overhead Door Corporation, 2501 South
State Highway 121, Bus., Suite 200,
Lewisville, TX 75067.
GMI Holdings Inc., One Door Drive,
Mount Hope, OH 44660.
(b) The respondent is the following
entity alleged to be in violation of
section 337, and is the party upon
which the complaint is to be served:
The Chamberlain Group, Inc., 300
Windsor Drive, Oak Brook, IL 60523.
(4) For the investigation so instituted,
the Chief Administrative Law Judge,
U.S. International Trade Commission,
shall designate the presiding
Administrative Law Judge.
The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations will not participate as a
party in this investigation.
Responses to the complaint and the
notice of investigation must be
submitted by the named respondent 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), as
amended in 85 FR 15798 (March 19,
2020), such responses will be
considered by the Commission if
received not later than 20 days after the
date of service by the complainant 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 the 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: August 4, 2020.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020–17358 Filed 8–7–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:31 Aug 07, 2020
Jkt 250001
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Tommy L. Louisville, M.D.; Decision
and Order
On June 28, 2019, the Assistant
Administrator, Diversion Control
Division, Drug Enforcement
Administration (hereinafter, DEA or
Government), issued an Order to Show
Cause (hereinafter, OSC) to Tommy L.
Louisville, M.D. (hereinafter, Registrant)
of Lakeland, Florida. OSC, at 1. The
OSC proposed the revocation of
Registrant’s Certificate of Registration
No. AL9587330. Id. It alleged that
Registrant does ‘‘not have authority to
handle controlled substances in Florida,
the state in which . . . [he is] registered
with the DEA.’’ Id. (citing 21 U.S.C.
823(f) and 824(a)(3)).
Specifically, the OSC alleged that,
‘‘effective May 31, 2019, the [State of
Florida] Board [of Medicine, (hereinafter
FBM)] issued its Final Order whereby
. . . [Registrant’s] license to practice
medicine (License No. ME0037525) was
suspended for a period of two years.’’
OSC, at 1–2. The OSC further alleged
that ‘‘[a]s of the date of this . . . [OSC],
the suspension of . . . [Registrant’s]
Florida medical license has not been
lifted’’ and ‘‘[a]s a result, . . . [he]
currently lack[s] authority to handle
controlled substances in Florida.’’ Id. at
2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 802(21), 823(f), and
824(a)(3)). The OSC concluded that
‘‘DEA must revoke . . . [Registrant’s
registration] based upon . . . [his] lack
of authority to handle controlled
substances in the State of Florida.’’ OSC,
at 2.
The OSC notified Registrant of the
right to request a hearing on the
allegations or to submit a written
statement, while waiving the right to a
hearing, the procedures for electing each
option, and the consequences for failing
to elect either option. Id. (citing 21 CFR
1301.43). The OSC also notified
Registrant of the opportunity to submit
a corrective action plan. OSC, at 3
(citing 21 U.S.C. 824(c)(2)(C)).
Adequacy of Service
In a sworn Declaration, dated August
13, 2019, a DEA Diversion Investigator
assigned to the Tampa District Office of
the Miami Division (hereinafter, TDDI)
stated that she attempted personal
service of the OSC on Registrant at the
request of a DI assigned to the Miami
Division (hereinafter, MDDI).
Government’s Submission Regarding
Service of Order to Show Cause Upon
Legal Counsel of Respondent and
Motion for Termination of Proceedings
PO 00000
Frm 00117
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48265
Based Upon Respondent’s Untimely
Hearing Request, dated Aug. 15, 2019,
filed In re Tommy L. Louisville, M.D.,
DEA Docket No. 2019–36 (hereinafter,
Government Submission), Attachment 3
(hereinafter, TDDI Declaration), at 2.
When Registrant was not at his
residence, she reached him by
telephone, explained that she had the
OSC to deliver to him, and learned that
he was in Miami. Id. at 3. When
Registrant asked if DEA could serve the
OSC on his attorney, TDDI responded
that ‘‘this was a permissible
arrangement if that was his preference.’’
Id. According to the TDDI Declaration,
Registrant ‘‘reiterated’’ that service on
his attorney was his preference. Id.
TDDI stated that she informed MDDI of
Registrant’s preference. Id.
In a sworn Declaration, dated August
13, 2019, MDDI stated that he left the
OSC with Registrant’s attorney on July
8, 2019. Government Submission,
Attachment 4 (hereinafter, MDDI
Declaration), at 2–3. MDDI stated that
later the same day, the attorney sent him
written confirmation of receipt of the
OSC and of the forwarding of the OSC
to Registrant. Id. at 3; see also
Government Submission, Attachment 2,
at 1 (attorney’s written confirmation).
I agree with Administrative Law Judge
Charles Wm. Dorman (hereinafter, ALJ)
that service of the OSC was proper.
Order Terminating Proceedings, dated
Sept. 10, 2019 (hereinafter, OTP), at 6.
Hearing Request
By letter, dated August 8, 2019, the
same attorney who accepted service of
the OSC for Registrant transmitted a
hearing request (hereinafter, Hearing
Request) to the Office of Administrative
Law Judges (hereinafter, OALJ).1 The
Hearing Request was emailed and
received on August 8, 2019. It was also
sent Federal Express and stamped
‘‘received’’ by OALJ on August 13, 2019.
Hearing Request, at 1.
According to the nine-page Hearing
Request, Registrant acknowledged the
suspension of his Florida medical
license, advised that he appealed it, and
stated that he ‘‘is in the process of filing
a Motion to Stay the . . . [FBM] Final
Order.’’ Id. ‘‘Accordingly,’’ the Hearing
Request concludes, ‘‘DEA acted
prematurely in issuing an Order to
Show Cause in this matter.’’ Id. ‘‘We
1 Among the nine pages comprising the Hearing
Request is Form DEA–12 signed by Registrant’s
attorney showing his receipt of the OSC ‘‘on behalf
of’’ Registrant on July 8, 2019. Hearing Request, at
7.
The Hearing Request states that ‘‘[a]ll notices to
be sent pursuant to the proceeding in this matter
should be addressed to’’ the attorney and, under
‘‘Contact Information for Proceeding,’’ provides a
physical address. Id. at 2.
E:\FR\FM\10AUN1.SGM
10AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 154 (Monday, August 10, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48264-48265]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17358]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1209]
Certain Movable Barrier Operator Systems and Components Thereof;
Notice of Institution
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 July 6, 2020, under section 337
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on behalf of Overhead Door
Corporation of Lewisville, Texas and GMI Holdings Inc. of Mount Hope,
Ohio. A supplement to the complaint was filed on July 22, 2020. 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 movable barrier operator
systems and components thereof by reason of infringement of U.S. Patent
No. 8,970,345 (``the '345 Patent''); U.S. Patent No. 9,483,935 (''the
'935 Patent''); U.S. Patent No. 7,173,516 (``the '516 Patent''); U.S.
Patent No. 7,180,260 (``the '260 Patent''); U.S. Patent No. 7,956,718
(``the '718 Patent''); and U.S. Patent No. 8,410,895 (``the '895
Patent''). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United
States exists as required by the applicable Federal Statute. The
complainants request that the Commission institute an investigation
and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and a
cease and desist order.
ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for any confidential information
contained therein, may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket
(EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email
[email protected]. 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Hiner, Office of Docket
Services, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202) 205-
1802.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 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 (2020).
SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION: Having considered the complaint, the U.S.
International Trade Commission, on August 4, 2020, 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 products
identified in paragraph (2) by reason of infringement of one or more of
claims 1, 2, 16, and 17 of the '345 patent; claims 1, 4, 16, and 19 of
the '935 patent; claims 10-12, 14-16, and 18 of the '516 patent; claims
1-3, 7, and 8 of the '260 patent; claims 18 and 24 of the '718 patent;
and claim 17 of the '895 patent, and whether an industry in the United
States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337;
(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the plain language
description of the accused products or category of accused products,
which defines the scope of the investigation, is ``garage door systems
and components thereof, remote controls, wireless transmitters, and
software for operating the garage door systems'';
[[Page 48265]]
(3) 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:
Overhead Door Corporation, 2501 South State Highway 121, Bus., Suite
200, Lewisville, TX 75067.
GMI Holdings Inc., One Door Drive, Mount Hope, OH 44660.
(b) The respondent is the following entity alleged to be in
violation of section 337, and is the party upon which the complaint is
to be served:
The Chamberlain Group, Inc., 300 Windsor Drive, Oak Brook, IL 60523.
(4) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative
Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the
presiding Administrative Law Judge.
The Office of Unfair Import Investigations will not participate as
a party in this investigation.
Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be
submitted by the named respondent 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), as amended in 85 FR 15798
(March 19, 2020), such responses will be considered by the Commission
if received not later than 20 days after the date of service by the
complainant 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 the 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: August 4, 2020.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020-17358 Filed 8-7-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P