Certain Toner Cartridges, Components Thereof, and Systems Containing Same Issuance of a General Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of Investigation, 76599-76601 [2020-26277]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Notices the conveyance and may sustain, vacate, or modify this realty action. In the absence of any adverse comments, the decision will become final. The lands will not be offered for conveyance until the BLM has signed a Decision Record for the completed Environmental Assessment. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment, including your personal identifying information, may be made available to the public at any time. While you can ask in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Authority: 43 CFR 2640 and FAA 14 CFR part 153. Kimber Liebhauser, Wyoming Acting State Director. [FR Doc. 2020–26324 Filed 11–27–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–22–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–1174] Certain Toner Cartridges, Components Thereof, and Systems Containing Same Issuance of a General Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has affirmed a summary determination of violation of section 337 and has determined to issue (1) a general exclusion order (‘‘GEO’’) denying entry of certain toner cartridges, components thereof, and systems containing same; and (2) cease and desist orders (‘‘CDOs’’) against 20 respondents (listed below). The investigation is terminated. 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) 205–3179. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. General information concerning the Commission TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:03 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal, telephone (202) 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 23, 2019, the Commission instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed by Brother Industries, Ltd. of Nagoya Japan; Brother International Corp. (U.S.A.) of Bridgewater, New Jersey; and Brother Industries (U.S.A.), Inc. of Bartlett, Tennessee (collectively, ‘‘Brother’’). 84 FR 49762–63 (Sept. 23, 2019). The complaint alleged violations of section 337 based on the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain toner cartridges, components thereof, and systems containing same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,568,856 (‘‘the ’856 patent’’); 9,575,460 (‘‘the ’460 patent’’); 9,632,456 (‘‘the ’456 patent’’); 9,785,093 (‘‘the ’093 patent’’); and 9,846,387 (‘‘the ’387 patent’’) (collectively, ‘‘the Asserted Patents’’). Id. The Commission’s notice of investigation named the following 32 respondents: AMI Brothers, Inc. of San Bruno, California (‘‘AMI’’); An An Beauty Limited of Kowloon, Hong Kong (‘‘An An Beauty’’); Aster Graphics, Inc. of Riverside, California (‘‘Aster’’); Aztech Enterprises Limited of Kowloon, Hong Kong (‘‘Aztech’’); Billiontree Technology USA Inc. of City of Industry, California (‘‘Billiontree’’); Carlos Imaging Supplies, Inc. of Hacienda Heights, California (‘‘Carlos’’); Cartridge Evolution, Inc. of Brooklyn, New York (‘‘Cartridge Evolution’’); Do it Wiser, LLC of Wilmington, Delaware (‘‘Do it Wiser’’); Eco Imaging Inc. of Irvine, California (‘‘Eco Imaging’’); Ecoolsmart Co. of Rowland Heights, California (‘‘Ecoolsmart’’); EPrinter Solution LLC of Pomona, California (‘‘EPS’’); E-Z Ink Inc. of Brooklyn, New York (‘‘E-Z Ink’’); Globest Trading Inc. of Ontario, California (‘‘Globest’’); Greencycle Tech, Inc. of South El Monte, California (‘‘Greencycle’’); Hongkong Boze Co., Ltd. of Kowloon, Hong Kong (‘‘Hongkong Boze’’); I8 International, Inc. of City of Industry, California (‘‘I8’’); IFree E-Commerce Co. of Kowloon, Hong Kong (‘‘IFree’’); Ikong E-Commerce of Walnut, California (‘‘Ikong’’); Intercon International Corp. of Brea, California (‘‘Intercon’’); IPrint Enterprise Limited of Kowloon, Hong Kong (‘‘IPrint’’); LD Products, Inc. of Long Beach, California (‘‘LD Products’’); PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76599 Linkyo Corp. of La Puente, California (‘‘Linkyo’’); Mangoket LLC of Alhambra, California (‘‘Mangoket’’); New Era Image LLC of Corona, California (‘‘New Era’’); OW Supplies Corp. of Corona, California (‘‘OW Supplies’’); Solong ECommerce Co., LLC of Wan Chai, Hong Kong (‘‘Solong’’); Smartjet E-Commerce Co., LLC of Wan Chai, Hong Kong (‘‘Smartjet’’); Super Warehouse Inc. of Blaine, Washington (‘‘Super Warehouse’’); Theresa Meng of Brooklyn, New York (‘‘Ms. Meng’’); Triple Best LLC of San Diego, California (‘‘Triple Best’’); V4ink, Inc. of Diamond Bar, California (‘‘V4ink’’); and Zhuhai Xiaohui E-Commerce Co., Ltd. of Zhuhai, China (‘‘Xiaohui’’). Id. at 49762–63. The notice of investigation also named the Office of Unfair Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) as a party. Id. at 49763. Of the 32 respondents, only one, Aster, is participating at this stage. Aster, however, did not oppose the summary determination motion of violation as to the accused products, even though Aster’s products are subject to the motion. See Joint Stipulation of Brother and Aster for Resolution as to Aster in the Investigation (Mar. 4, 2020). EPS and IFree were terminated from the investigation based upon withdrawal of the complaint against them. See Order No. 32 (Jan. 28, 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Feb. 25, 2020). Cartridge Evolution, E-Z Ink, Linkyo, New Era, OW Supplies, Ms. Meng, Triple Best, and V4ink were terminated from the investigation based upon entry of consent orders. See Order No. 36 (Mar. 12, 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Mar. 31, 2020); Order No. 38 (Mar. 12, 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Mar. 31, 2020); Order No. 37 (Mar. 12, 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Mar. 31, 2020); Order No. 10 (Oct. 18, 2019), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Nov. 6, 2019); Order No. 17 (Nov. 21, 2019), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Dec. 18, 2019); Order No. 28 (Dec. 30, 2019), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Jan. 29, 2020); Order No. 18 (Nov. 27, 2019), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Dec. 18, 2019); Order No. 33 (Fe. 3, 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Mar. 4, 2020). The following 21 respondents defaulted: AMI, Globest, An An Beauty, Aztech, Xiaohui, Ecoolmart, Greencycle, Intercon, Do it Wiser, I8, Solong, Billiontree, Carlos Imaging, Eco Imaging, Hongkong Boze, Ikong, IPrint, Mangoket, Smartjet, Super Warehouse, and LD Products (collectively, ‘‘Defaulting Respondents’’). See Order No. 35 (Mar. 5, 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Mar. 19, 2020); Order No. 31 (Jan. 22, E:\FR\FM\30NON1.SGM 30NON1 TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with NOTICES 76600 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Notices 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Feb. 21, 2020); Order No. 26 (Dec. 20, 2019), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Jan 16, 2020); Order No. 25 (Dec. 18, 2019), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Jan. 16, 2020); Order No. 24 (Dec. 18, 2019), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Jan. 16, 2020); Order No. 8 (Oct. 15, 2019), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Nov. 7, 2019). On March 12, 2020, Brother filed a motion for summary determination of violation of section 337 by Aster and the Defaulting Respondents and for a recommendation that the Commission issue a GEO and CDOs. See Complainants’ Motion for Summary Determination of Violation and for Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding. On March 23, 2020, OUII filled a response in support of Brother’s motion. See Commission Investigative Staff’s Response to Brother’s Motion for Summary Determination of Violation. No respondent filed a response to Brother’s motion. Id. On July 23, 2020, the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) issued an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 40) granting Brother’s motion for summary determination on violation of section 337 and issued a recommended determination (‘‘RD’’) on remedy and bonding. The ID found that the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction over the investigation. ID at 34. The ID further found that none of the respondents contest the Commission’s personal jurisdiction over them or in rem jurisdiction as to the accused products. ID at 34–35. The ID found that Brother: (1) Established the importation requirement as to Aster and Defaulting Respondents, ID at 36–79; (2) demonstrated that the accused products infringe the asserted claims, id. at 118– 133; and (3) demonstrated that the domestic industry (‘‘DI’’) products practice at least one claim of each Asserted Patent and that a DI exists in the United States, id. at 84–118. The RD recommended issuance of a general exclusion order (‘‘GEO’’) (or, in the alternative, a limited exclusion order directed to Aster and each of the Defaulting Respondents). RD at 134–44. The RD further recommended issuance of cease and desist orders (‘‘CDOs’’) directed to Aster and each defaulting respondent that has domestic operations. Id. at 144–46. The RD also recommended setting different bond rates for entry of the different products covered by the GEO during the period of Presidential review. Id. at 146–48 (recommended bond rate table at 147). No one petitioned for review of the ID. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:03 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 On August 24, 2020, Aster filed a public interest statement in response to the Commission’s notice soliciting public interest comments pursuant to 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4)(i). In its submission, Aster argued that any Commission remedial orders issued in this investigation should not cover its new products pursuant to its stipulation with Brother. See Respondent Aster Graphics, Inc.’s Statement of Public Interest. On August 26, 2020, Brother filed a response. See Complainants’ Motion to Strike Aster Graphics, Inc.’s Statement on the Public Interest for Failure to Comply with Commission Rule 210.15 Or, in the Alternative, for Leave to Respond. On September 8, 2020, the Commission determined not to review the ID and requested written submissions on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. 85 FR 56628–31 (Sept. 14, 2020). The Commission rejected Aster’s August 24, 2020 public interest submission as improper under 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4)(i). Id. at 56630. The Commission noted that while 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4)(i) provides that parties may file information with the Commission relating to the public interest, Aster’s submission concerned the scope of the remedy and thus did not fall within the ambit of the public interest submissions provided for under 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4)(i). Id. The Commission stated that ‘‘Aster will have an opportunity to raise its arguments regarding the scope of any remedial orders in a remedy submission before the Commission in response to the instant notice, which invites parties to file submissions addressing remedy, bonding and the public interest as noted below.’’ Id. On September 22, 2020, Brother, Aster, and OUII filed initial submissions in response to the Commission’s request. See Complainants’ Submission on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding; Respondent Aster Graphics, Inc.’s Submission on Remedy, the Public Interest and Bonding; Response of the Office of Unfair Import Investigations to the Commission’s Request for Written Submissions Regarding Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding. On September 29, 2020, the parties filed reply submissions. See Complainants’ Reply Submission on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding; 1 Respondent Aster Graphics, Inc.’s Reply to the Submission of the Office of Unfair Import Investigations 1 The Chair granted Brother’s motion for leave to file one day late. Brother filed on time but inadvertently omitted to include the certificate of service. Brother corrected the omission the next day. PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 and Complainants on Remedy, the Public Interest and Bonding; Reply of the Office of Unfair Import Investigations to the Private Parties’ Written Submissions Regarding Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding. As noted above, the Commission affirmed the ID’s finding that there is a violation of section 337 with respect to Aster and Defaulting Respondents. The Commission also finds that the statutory requirements for issuance of a GEO under section 337(d)(2) are met. See 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(2). The Commission further finds that issuance of CDOs against Aster and 19 of the defaulting respondents (noted below) is appropriate under section 337(f)(1). See 19 U.S.C. 1337(f)(1). In addition, the Commission finds that the public interest factors do not preclude issuance of the requested relief. See 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1), (f)(1). The Commission therefore has determined that the appropriate remedy in this investigation is: (1) A GEO prohibiting the unlicensed importation of certain toner cartridges, components thereof, and systems containing same that infringe one or more of claims 1– 5, 10, and 12–15 of the ’093 patent; claims 1, 7–11, 15, and 16 of the ’460 patent; claims 1–7, and 9 of the ’856 patent; claims 1, 4, 5, and 9 of the ’456 patent; and claims 1, 3, 5, 7–12, and 18 of the ’387 patent; and (2) CDOs directed to Aster, AMI, Billiontree, Carlos Imaging, Do It Wiser, Eco Imaging, Ecoolmart, Globest, Greencycle, Hongkong Boze, I8, Ikong, Intercon, IPrint, LD Products, Mangoket, Smartjet, Solong, Super Warehouse, and Xiaohui. The Commission has also determined that the bond during the period of Presidential review shall be in the amount of the following percentages of the entered value for respondents AMI, Aster, and Globest: Infringing products Accused 221/225 Products ............ Accused 223/227 Products ............ Accused 420/450 Products ............ Accused 630/660 Products ............ Accused 730/760/ 770 Products .... AMI (%) Aster (%) Globest (%) 568 1463 900 274 336 372 .......... 623 682 575 886 635 589 354 369 The bond for all other infringing articles shall be in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of the entered value. The Commission’s orders were delivered to the President and to the E:\FR\FM\30NON1.SGM 30NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 230 / Monday, November 30, 2020 / Notices United States Trade Representative on the day of their issuance. The investigation is terminated. While temporary remote operating procedures are in place in response to COVID–19, the Office of the Secretary is not able to serve parties that have not retained counsel or otherwise provided a point of contact for electronic service. Accordingly, pursuant to Commission Rules 201.16(a) and 210.7(a)(1) (19 CFR 201.16(a), 210.7(a)(1)), the Commission orders that the Complainant complete service for any party without a method of electronic service noted on the attached Certificate of Service and shall file proof of service on the Electronic Document Information System (EDIS). The Commission vote for this determination took place on November 23, 2020. 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: November 23, 2020. William Bishop, Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer. [FR Doc. 2020–26277 Filed 11–27–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–1225] Notice of a Commission Determination Not to Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation in Its Entirety Based on Withdrawal of the Complaint; Termination of the Investigation; Certain Active Matrix OLED Display Devices and Components Thereof International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 7) of the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) terminating the investigation based on withdrawal of the complaint. 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 TKELLEY on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:03 Nov 27, 2020 Jkt 253001 documents filed in connection with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal, telephone 202–205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation on October 28, 2020, based on a complaint filed by Solas OLED Ltd. (‘‘Solas’’) of Dublin, Ireland. 85 FR 68368–69 (Oct. 28, 2020). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain active matrix OLED display devices and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,139,007; 7,573,068; and 7,868,880. The complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The Commission’s notice of investigation named the following as respondents: Apple Inc. of Cupertino, California; Sony Electronics Inc. of San Diego, California; Samsung Electronics America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey; Samsung Display Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., both of Gyeonggi-do, South Korea; Dell Technologies Inc. of Round Rock, Texas; Motorola Mobility LLC of Chicago, Illinois; LG Electronics Inc. and LG Display Co., Ltd., both of Seoul, South Korea; LG Display America, Inc. of San Jose, California; and LG Electronics USA, Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is participating in the investigation. On November 6, 2020, Solas moved to terminate the investigation in its entirety based on withdrawal of the complaint. No party opposed the motion. On November 12, 2020, the ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 7), granting the unopposed motion to terminate the investigation in its entirety based on withdrawal of the complaint. The ID finds that the motion for termination satisfies Commission Rule 210.21(a)(1) (19 CFR 210.21(a)(1)) and that termination of the investigation is not contrary to the public interest. The ID also finds that no extraordinary PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76601 circumstances exist that would prevent the requested termination. No party petitioned for review. The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID. The investigation is terminated. The Commission vote for this determination took place on November 24, 2020. 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: November 24, 2020. William Bishop, Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer. [FR Doc. 2020–26357 Filed 11–27–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 731–TA–1546–1549 (Preliminary)] Thermal Paper From Germany, Japan, Korea, and Spain Determination 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 industries in the United States are materially injured by reason of imports of thermal paper from Germany, Japan, Korea, and Spain, provided for in subheadings 4811.80.80 and 4811.80.90 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’’).2 Commencement of Final Phase Investigation 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 U.S. Department of Commerce (‘‘Commerce’’) of affirmative preliminary determinations in the 1 The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). 2 85 FR 65073 (October 14, 2020). E:\FR\FM\30NON1.SGM 30NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 230 (Monday, November 30, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76599-76601]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-26277]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-1174]


Certain Toner Cartridges, Components Thereof, and Systems 
Containing Same Issuance of a General Exclusion Order and Cease and 
Desist Orders; Termination of Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has affirmed a summary determination of violation of section 
337 and has determined to issue (1) a general exclusion order (``GEO'') 
denying entry of certain toner cartridges, components thereof, and 
systems containing same; and (2) cease and desist orders (``CDOs'') 
against 20 respondents (listed below). The investigation is terminated.

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) 205-3179. Copies of non-
confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may 
be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email 
[email protected]. General information concerning the Commission may 
also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on 
this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD 
terminal, telephone (202) 205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 23, 2019, the Commission 
instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed by Brother 
Industries, Ltd. of Nagoya Japan; Brother International Corp. (U.S.A.) 
of Bridgewater, New Jersey; and Brother Industries (U.S.A.), Inc. of 
Bartlett, Tennessee (collectively, ``Brother''). 84 FR 49762-63 (Sept. 
23, 2019). The complaint alleged violations of section 337 based on the 
importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the 
sale within the United States after importation of certain toner 
cartridges, components thereof, and systems containing same by reason 
of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,568,856 (``the 
'856 patent''); 9,575,460 (``the '460 patent''); 9,632,456 (``the '456 
patent''); 9,785,093 (``the '093 patent''); and 9,846,387 (``the '387 
patent'') (collectively, ``the Asserted Patents''). Id. The 
Commission's notice of investigation named the following 32 
respondents: AMI Brothers, Inc. of San Bruno, California (``AMI''); An 
An Beauty Limited of Kowloon, Hong Kong (``An An Beauty''); Aster 
Graphics, Inc. of Riverside, California (``Aster''); Aztech Enterprises 
Limited of Kowloon, Hong Kong (``Aztech''); Billiontree Technology USA 
Inc. of City of Industry, California (``Billiontree''); Carlos Imaging 
Supplies, Inc. of Hacienda Heights, California (``Carlos''); Cartridge 
Evolution, Inc. of Brooklyn, New York (``Cartridge Evolution''); Do it 
Wiser, LLC of Wilmington, Delaware (``Do it Wiser''); Eco Imaging Inc. 
of Irvine, California (``Eco Imaging''); Ecoolsmart Co. of Rowland 
Heights, California (``Ecoolsmart''); EPrinter Solution LLC of Pomona, 
California (``EPS''); E-Z Ink Inc. of Brooklyn, New York (``E-Z Ink''); 
Globest Trading Inc. of Ontario, California (``Globest''); Greencycle 
Tech, Inc. of South El Monte, California (``Greencycle''); Hongkong 
Boze Co., Ltd. of Kowloon, Hong Kong (``Hongkong Boze''); I8 
International, Inc. of City of Industry, California (``I8''); IFree E-
Commerce Co. of Kowloon, Hong Kong (``IFree''); Ikong E-Commerce of 
Walnut, California (``Ikong''); Intercon International Corp. of Brea, 
California (``Intercon''); IPrint Enterprise Limited of Kowloon, Hong 
Kong (``IPrint''); LD Products, Inc. of Long Beach, California (``LD 
Products''); Linkyo Corp. of La Puente, California (``Linkyo''); 
Mangoket LLC of Alhambra, California (``Mangoket''); New Era Image LLC 
of Corona, California (``New Era''); OW Supplies Corp. of Corona, 
California (``OW Supplies''); Solong E-Commerce Co., LLC of Wan Chai, 
Hong Kong (``Solong''); Smartjet E-Commerce Co., LLC of Wan Chai, Hong 
Kong (``Smartjet''); Super Warehouse Inc. of Blaine, Washington 
(``Super Warehouse''); Theresa Meng of Brooklyn, New York (``Ms. 
Meng''); Triple Best LLC of San Diego, California (``Triple Best''); 
V4ink, Inc. of Diamond Bar, California (``V4ink''); and Zhuhai Xiaohui 
E-Commerce Co., Ltd. of Zhuhai, China (``Xiaohui''). Id. at 49762-63. 
The notice of investigation also named the Office of Unfair Import 
Investigations (``OUII'') as a party. Id. at 49763.
    Of the 32 respondents, only one, Aster, is participating at this 
stage. Aster, however, did not oppose the summary determination motion 
of violation as to the accused products, even though Aster's products 
are subject to the motion. See Joint Stipulation of Brother and Aster 
for Resolution as to Aster in the Investigation (Mar. 4, 2020). EPS and 
IFree were terminated from the investigation based upon withdrawal of 
the complaint against them. See Order No. 32 (Jan. 28, 2020), 
unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Feb. 25, 2020). Cartridge Evolution, E-Z 
Ink, Linkyo, New Era, OW Supplies, Ms. Meng, Triple Best, and V4ink 
were terminated from the investigation based upon entry of consent 
orders. See Order No. 36 (Mar. 12, 2020), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice 
(Mar. 31, 2020); Order No. 38 (Mar. 12, 2020), unreviewed by Comm'n 
Notice (Mar. 31, 2020); Order No. 37 (Mar. 12, 2020), unreviewed by 
Comm'n Notice (Mar. 31, 2020); Order No. 10 (Oct. 18, 2019), unreviewed 
by Comm'n Notice (Nov. 6, 2019); Order No. 17 (Nov. 21, 2019), 
unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Dec. 18, 2019); Order No. 28 (Dec. 30, 
2019), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Jan. 29, 2020); Order No. 18 (Nov. 
27, 2019), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Dec. 18, 2019); Order No. 33 
(Fe. 3, 2020), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Mar. 4, 2020). The 
following 21 respondents defaulted: AMI, Globest, An An Beauty, Aztech, 
Xiaohui, Ecoolmart, Greencycle, Intercon, Do it Wiser, I8, Solong, 
Billiontree, Carlos Imaging, Eco Imaging, Hongkong Boze, Ikong, IPrint, 
Mangoket, Smartjet, Super Warehouse, and LD Products (collectively, 
``Defaulting Respondents''). See Order No. 35 (Mar. 5, 2020), 
unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Mar. 19, 2020); Order No. 31 (Jan. 22,

[[Page 76600]]

2020), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Feb. 21, 2020); Order No. 26 (Dec. 
20, 2019), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Jan 16, 2020); Order No. 25 
(Dec. 18, 2019), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Jan. 16, 2020); Order No. 
24 (Dec. 18, 2019), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Jan. 16, 2020); Order 
No. 8 (Oct. 15, 2019), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Nov. 7, 2019).
    On March 12, 2020, Brother filed a motion for summary determination 
of violation of section 337 by Aster and the Defaulting Respondents and 
for a recommendation that the Commission issue a GEO and CDOs. See 
Complainants' Motion for Summary Determination of Violation and for 
Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bonding. On March 23, 2020, 
OUII filled a response in support of Brother's motion. See Commission 
Investigative Staff's Response to Brother's Motion for Summary 
Determination of Violation. No respondent filed a response to Brother's 
motion. Id.
    On July 23, 2020, the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') 
issued an initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 40) granting 
Brother's motion for summary determination on violation of section 337 
and issued a recommended determination (``RD'') on remedy and bonding. 
The ID found that the Commission has subject matter jurisdiction over 
the investigation. ID at 34. The ID further found that none of the 
respondents contest the Commission's personal jurisdiction over them or 
in rem jurisdiction as to the accused products. ID at 34-35. The ID 
found that Brother: (1) Established the importation requirement as to 
Aster and Defaulting Respondents, ID at 36-79; (2) demonstrated that 
the accused products infringe the asserted claims, id. at 118-133; and 
(3) demonstrated that the domestic industry (``DI'') products practice 
at least one claim of each Asserted Patent and that a DI exists in the 
United States, id. at 84-118. The RD recommended issuance of a general 
exclusion order (``GEO'') (or, in the alternative, a limited exclusion 
order directed to Aster and each of the Defaulting Respondents). RD at 
134-44. The RD further recommended issuance of cease and desist orders 
(``CDOs'') directed to Aster and each defaulting respondent that has 
domestic operations. Id. at 144-46. The RD also recommended setting 
different bond rates for entry of the different products covered by the 
GEO during the period of Presidential review. Id. at 146-48 
(recommended bond rate table at 147). No one petitioned for review of 
the ID.
    On August 24, 2020, Aster filed a public interest statement in 
response to the Commission's notice soliciting public interest comments 
pursuant to 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4)(i). In its submission, Aster argued 
that any Commission remedial orders issued in this investigation should 
not cover its new products pursuant to its stipulation with Brother. 
See Respondent Aster Graphics, Inc.'s Statement of Public Interest. On 
August 26, 2020, Brother filed a response. See Complainants' Motion to 
Strike Aster Graphics, Inc.'s Statement on the Public Interest for 
Failure to Comply with Commission Rule 210.15 Or, in the Alternative, 
for Leave to Respond.
    On September 8, 2020, the Commission determined not to review the 
ID and requested written submissions on remedy, the public interest, 
and bonding. 85 FR 56628-31 (Sept. 14, 2020). The Commission rejected 
Aster's August 24, 2020 public interest submission as improper under 19 
CFR 210.50(a)(4)(i). Id. at 56630. The Commission noted that while 19 
CFR 210.50(a)(4)(i) provides that parties may file information with the 
Commission relating to the public interest, Aster's submission 
concerned the scope of the remedy and thus did not fall within the 
ambit of the public interest submissions provided for under 19 CFR 
210.50(a)(4)(i). Id. The Commission stated that ``Aster will have an 
opportunity to raise its arguments regarding the scope of any remedial 
orders in a remedy submission before the Commission in response to the 
instant notice, which invites parties to file submissions addressing 
remedy, bonding and the public interest as noted below.'' Id.
    On September 22, 2020, Brother, Aster, and OUII filed initial 
submissions in response to the Commission's request. See Complainants' 
Submission on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding; Respondent 
Aster Graphics, Inc.'s Submission on Remedy, the Public Interest and 
Bonding; Response of the Office of Unfair Import Investigations to the 
Commission's Request for Written Submissions Regarding Remedy, the 
Public Interest, and Bonding. On September 29, 2020, the parties filed 
reply submissions. See Complainants' Reply Submission on Remedy, the 
Public Interest, and Bonding; \1\ Respondent Aster Graphics, Inc.'s 
Reply to the Submission of the Office of Unfair Import Investigations 
and Complainants on Remedy, the Public Interest and Bonding; Reply of 
the Office of Unfair Import Investigations to the Private Parties' 
Written Submissions Regarding Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Chair granted Brother's motion for leave to file one day 
late. Brother filed on time but inadvertently omitted to include the 
certificate of service. Brother corrected the omission the next day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted above, the Commission affirmed the ID's finding that there 
is a violation of section 337 with respect to Aster and Defaulting 
Respondents. The Commission also finds that the statutory requirements 
for issuance of a GEO under section 337(d)(2) are met. See 19 U.S.C. 
1337(d)(2). The Commission further finds that issuance of CDOs against 
Aster and 19 of the defaulting respondents (noted below) is appropriate 
under section 337(f)(1). See 19 U.S.C. 1337(f)(1). In addition, the 
Commission finds that the public interest factors do not preclude 
issuance of the requested relief. See 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1), (f)(1).
    The Commission therefore has determined that the appropriate remedy 
in this investigation is: (1) A GEO prohibiting the unlicensed 
importation of certain toner cartridges, components thereof, and 
systems containing same that infringe one or more of claims 1-5, 10, 
and 12-15 of the '093 patent; claims 1, 7-11, 15, and 16 of the '460 
patent; claims 1-7, and 9 of the '856 patent; claims 1, 4, 5, and 9 of 
the '456 patent; and claims 1, 3, 5, 7-12, and 18 of the '387 patent; 
and (2) CDOs directed to Aster, AMI, Billiontree, Carlos Imaging, Do It 
Wiser, Eco Imaging, Ecoolmart, Globest, Greencycle, Hongkong Boze, I8, 
Ikong, Intercon, IPrint, LD Products, Mangoket, Smartjet, Solong, Super 
Warehouse, and Xiaohui. The Commission has also determined that the 
bond during the period of Presidential review shall be in the amount of 
the following percentages of the entered value for respondents AMI, 
Aster, and Globest:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   AMI    Aster  Globest
              Infringing products                  (%)     (%)     (%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accused 221/225 Products.......................     568    1463      900
Accused 223/227 Products.......................     274     336      372
Accused 420/450 Products.......................  ......     623      682
Accused 630/660 Products.......................     575     886      635
Accused 730/760/770 Products...................     589     354      369
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The bond for all other infringing articles shall be in the amount 
of one hundred percent (100%) of the entered value.
    The Commission's orders were delivered to the President and to the

[[Page 76601]]

United States Trade Representative on the day of their issuance. The 
investigation is terminated.
    While temporary remote operating procedures are in place in 
response to COVID-19, the Office of the Secretary is not able to serve 
parties that have not retained counsel or otherwise provided a point of 
contact for electronic service. Accordingly, pursuant to Commission 
Rules 201.16(a) and 210.7(a)(1) (19 CFR 201.16(a), 210.7(a)(1)), the 
Commission orders that the Complainant complete service for any party 
without a method of electronic service noted on the attached 
Certificate of Service and shall file proof of service on the 
Electronic Document Information System (EDIS).
    The Commission vote for this determination took place on November 
23, 2020.
    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: November 23, 2020.
William Bishop,
Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2020-26277 Filed 11-27-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.