Certain IP Camera Systems Including Video Doorbells and Components Thereof; Notice of a Commission Determination To Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation in Its Entirety Due to the Invalidity of the Asserted Patents and on Review To Affirm; Termination of Investigation, 64230 [2021-25061]

Download as PDF 64230 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 219 / Wednesday, November 17, 2021 / Notices INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–1242] Certain IP Camera Systems Including Video Doorbells and Components Thereof; Notice of a Commission Determination To Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation in Its Entirety Due to the Invalidity of the Asserted Patents and on Review To Affirm; Termination of Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (‘‘Commission’’) has determined to review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 16) of the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’), terminating the investigation in its entirety due to the invalidity of the asserted patents, and on review to affirm the ID. This investigation is hereby terminated. SUMMARY: Ron Traud, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–3427. 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 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 on (202) 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 28, 2021, the Commission instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed by SkyBell Technologies, Inc. of Irvine, California; SB IP Holdings, LLC of Irvine, California; and Eyetalk365, LLC of Cornelius, North Carolina (collectively, ‘‘Complainants’’). 86 FR 7412 (Jan. 28, 2021). The complaint, as supplemented, alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, due to the importation into the United States, sale for importation, or sale in the United States after importation of certain IP camera systems including video doorbells and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:11 Nov 16, 2021 Jkt 256001 Patent Nos. 9,432,638; 9,485,478; 10,097,796; 10,097,797; 10,200,660; 10,523,906; and 10,674,120. Id. The complaint also alleged the existence of a domestic industry. Id. The notice of investigation named as respondents Vivint Smart Home, Inc. of Provo, Utah; SimpliSafe, Inc. of Boston, Massachusetts, and Arlo Technologies Inc. of San Jose, California (collectively, ‘‘Respondents’’). Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was not named as a party. Id. On May 21, 2021, Respondents filed a motion for summary determination that all patent claims asserted in this investigation are invalid as anticipated. On June 3, 2021, Complainants filed a brief in opposition to the motion. On September 15, 2021, the presiding ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 16) granting the motion. The ID found that there was no genuine issue of material fact as to whether the asserted patents are invalid and that Respondents were entitled to a finding of invalidity as a matter of law. On September 27, 2021, Complainants filed a petition for review. On October 4, 2021, Respondents filed a response thereto. The Commission has determined to review the subject ID. The Commission notes that the ID applied the current version of 35 U.S.C. 111, as amended by the America Invents Act (‘‘AIA’’). Because the claims of United States Patent Application No. 14/338,525 (‘‘the ’525 application’’) have an effective filing date before March 16, 2013, the pre-AIA statutory provision should have been applied, but that error is harmless and does not change the outcome. On review, the Commission affirms the ID’s findings under the pre-AIA version of 35 U.S.C. 111. The Commission also notes that the relevant provision of 35 U.S.C. 120 did not change with the AIA. Vice Chair Stayin joins the Commission’s determination to affirm the ID, based on his view that the ’525 application was abandoned no later than the expiration of the deadline to request an extension under 37 CFR 1.136(a), i.e., March 4, 2015. The investigation is hereby terminated in its entirety. The Commission vote for this determination took place on November 10, 2021. 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. PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Issued: November 10, 2021. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2021–25061 Filed 11–16–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731–TA–1071 (Third Review)] Alloy Magnesium From China Determination On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject five-year review, the United States International Trade Commission (‘‘Commission’’) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’), that revocation of the antidumping duty order on alloy magnesium from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. Background The Commission instituted this review on June 1, 2021 (86 FR 29280) and determined on September 7, 2021 that it would conduct an expedited review (86 FR 55636, October 6, 2021). The Commission made this determination pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It completed and filed its determination in this review on November 10, 2021. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 5238 (November 2021), entitled Alloy Magnesium from China: Investigation No. 731–TA–1071 (Third Review). By order of the Commission. Issued: November 10, 2021. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2021–25063 Filed 11–16–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employment and Training Administration Investigations Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance In accordance with the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2271, et seq.) (‘‘Act’’), as amended, the Department of Labor herein presents notice of investigations 1 The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM 17NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 17, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 64230]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25061]



[[Page 64230]]

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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-1242]


Certain IP Camera Systems Including Video Doorbells and 
Components Thereof; Notice of a Commission Determination To Review an 
Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation in Its Entirety Due 
to the Invalidity of the Asserted Patents and on Review To Affirm; 
Termination of Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission (``Commission'') has determined to review an initial 
determination (``ID'') (Order No. 16) of the presiding administrative 
law judge (``ALJ''), terminating the investigation in its entirety due 
to the invalidity of the asserted patents, and on review to affirm the 
ID. This investigation is hereby terminated.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron Traud, Office of the General 
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3427. 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 
on (202) 205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 28, 2021, the Commission 
instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed by SkyBell 
Technologies, Inc. of Irvine, California; SB IP Holdings, LLC of 
Irvine, California; and Eyetalk365, LLC of Cornelius, North Carolina 
(collectively, ``Complainants''). 86 FR 7412 (Jan. 28, 2021). The 
complaint, as supplemented, alleged violations of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, due to the importation 
into the United States, sale for importation, or sale in the United 
States after importation of certain IP camera systems including video 
doorbells and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain 
claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,432,638; 9,485,478; 10,097,796; 
10,097,797; 10,200,660; 10,523,906; and 10,674,120. Id. The complaint 
also alleged the existence of a domestic industry. Id. The notice of 
investigation named as respondents Vivint Smart Home, Inc. of Provo, 
Utah; SimpliSafe, Inc. of Boston, Massachusetts, and Arlo Technologies 
Inc. of San Jose, California (collectively, ``Respondents''). Id. The 
Office of Unfair Import Investigations was not named as a party. Id.
    On May 21, 2021, Respondents filed a motion for summary 
determination that all patent claims asserted in this investigation are 
invalid as anticipated. On June 3, 2021, Complainants filed a brief in 
opposition to the motion.
    On September 15, 2021, the presiding ALJ issued the subject ID 
(Order No. 16) granting the motion. The ID found that there was no 
genuine issue of material fact as to whether the asserted patents are 
invalid and that Respondents were entitled to a finding of invalidity 
as a matter of law.
    On September 27, 2021, Complainants filed a petition for review. On 
October 4, 2021, Respondents filed a response thereto.
    The Commission has determined to review the subject ID. The 
Commission notes that the ID applied the current version of 35 U.S.C. 
111, as amended by the America Invents Act (``AIA''). Because the 
claims of United States Patent Application No. 14/338,525 (``the '525 
application'') have an effective filing date before March 16, 2013, the 
pre-AIA statutory provision should have been applied, but that error is 
harmless and does not change the outcome. On review, the Commission 
affirms the ID's findings under the pre-AIA version of 35 U.S.C. 111. 
The Commission also notes that the relevant provision of 35 U.S.C. 120 
did not change with the AIA. Vice Chair Stayin joins the Commission's 
determination to affirm the ID, based on his view that the '525 
application was abandoned no later than the expiration of the deadline 
to request an extension under 37 CFR 1.136(a), i.e., March 4, 2015. The 
investigation is hereby terminated in its entirety.
    The Commission vote for this determination took place on November 
10, 2021.
    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 10, 2021.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021-25061 Filed 11-16-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.