Certain Variable Speed Wind Turbine Generators and Components Thereof; Commission Determination To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337 as to One Patent and No Violation as to Another Patent; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding, 64525-64527 [2021-25134]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 220 / Thursday, November 18, 2021 / Notices
• A lessee must file form ONRR–
4109, Gas Processing Allowance Report,
when its processing allowance includes
costs incurred under non-arm’s-length
or no-contract processing situations.
ONRR and Tribal audit personnel use
the information collected on this form to
verify that the lessee correctly reported
its processing allowance within
regulatory allowance limitations and
reported and paid the correct amount of
royalties.
• A lessee must file form ONRR–
4295, Gas Transportation Allowance
Report, when its gas transportation
allowance includes costs incurred under
non-arm’s-length or no-contract
transportation situations. ONRR and
Tribal audit personnel use the
information collected on this form to
verify that a lessee correctly reported its
transportation allowance within
regulatory allowance limitations and
reported and paid the correct amount of
royalties.
• A lessee must file form ONRR–
4410, Accounting for Comparison [Dual
Accounting], to certify for an Indian oil
and gas lease when dual accounting is
not required (part A) or to make an
election for actual dual accounting as
defined in 30 CFR 1206.176 or
alternative dual accounting as defined
in 30 CFR 1206.173 when dual
accounting is required (part B).
• A lessee uses form ONRR–4411,
Safety Net Report, when it sells gas
production from an Indian oil or gas
lease in an ONRR-designated index zone
beyond the first index pricing point.
The safety net calculation establishes
the minimum value, for royalty
purposes, of natural gas production
from Indian oil and gas leases. This
reporting requirement helps ensure that
Indian lessors receive all royalties due
and aids ONRR compliance efforts.
(3) Indian Oil and Gas: Regulations at
30 CFR 1206.56(b)(2) and 1206.177(c)(2)
and (c)(3) allow a lessee to submit form
ONRR–4393, Request to Exceed
Regulatory Allowance Limitation, to
request to exceed the 50-percent-ofroyalty-value-transportation-allowance
limitation for Indian oil and gas leases.
This form and other documentation
required by the regulations provide
ONRR with data necessary to approve or
deny the request.
The requirement to report is
mandatory for form ONRR–4410,
Accounting for Comparison [Dual
Accounting], and for form ONRR–4411,
Safety Net Report, when applicable. A
lessee uses ONRR forms 4109, 4110,
4295, and 4393 in order to obtain the
benefit of a transportation or processing
allowance.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:11 Nov 17, 2021
Jkt 256001
Title of Collection: Indian Oil and Gas
Valuation, 30 CFR parts 1202, 1206, and
1207.
OMB Control Number: 1012–0002.
Bureau Form Numbers: Forms ONRR–
4109, ONRR–4110, ONRR–4295, ONRR–
4393, ONRR–4410, and ONRR–4411.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents/Affected Public:
Businesses.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Respondents: 146 Indian lessees.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 146.
Estimated Completion Time per
Response: 8.85 hours.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 1,299 hours.
Respondent’s Obligation: Required to
obtain or retain a benefit.
Frequency of Collection: Annual and
on occasion.
Total Estimated Annual Non-Hour
Burden Cost: ONRR identified no ‘‘nonhour cost’’ burden associated with this
collection of information.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
The authority for this action is the
PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.).
Kimbra G. Davis,
Director, Office of Natural Resources
Revenue.
[FR Doc. 2021–24341 Filed 11–17–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4335–30–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1218]
Certain Variable Speed Wind Turbine
Generators and Components Thereof;
Commission Determination To Review
in Part a Final Initial Determination
Finding a Violation of Section 337 as
to One Patent and No Violation as to
Another Patent; Schedule for Filing
Written Submissions on Remedy, the
Public Interest, and Bonding
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to review
in part a final initial determination
(‘‘Final ID’’) issued by the presiding
administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’)
finding a violation of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930. The Commission
requests briefing from the parties,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64525
interested government agencies, and
interested persons on the issues of
remedy, the public interest, and
bonding based on the schedule set forth
below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Needham, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
708–5468. 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 (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
September 8, 2020, the Commission
instituted this investigation based on a
complaint filed on behalf of General
Electric Company of Boston,
Massachusetts (‘‘GE’’). 85 FR 55492–93
(Sept. 8, 2020). The complaint alleged
violations of section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as supplemented and
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 variable speed
wind turbine generators and
components thereof by reason of
infringement of one or more of claims 1,
3, 6, 7, 12, 15–16, 21–24, 29, 30, and 33–
38 of U.S. Patent No. 6,921,985 (‘‘the
’985 patent’’) and claims 1 and 2 of the
U.S. Patent No. 7,629,705 (‘‘the ’705
patent’’). Id. at 55493; Order No. 10
(Dec. 2, 2020), unreviewed by Comm’n
Notice (Dec. 22, 2020). Id. The
Commission’s notice of investigation
named as respondents Siemens Gamesa
Renewable Energy Inc. of Orlando,
Florida; Siemens Gamesa Renewable
Energy A/S of Brande, Denmark; and
Gamesa Electric, S.A.U. of Zamudio,
Spain (collectively, ‘‘SGRE’’). Id. at
26493; 85 FR 55493. The Office of
Unfair Import Investigations is not a
party to the investigation. Id.
The Commission subsequently
terminated the investigation with
respect to claims 3, 7, 15, 16, 21–24, 36,
and 38 of the ’985 patent and claim 2
of the ’705 patent based on GE’s partial
withdrawal of the complaint. Order No.
20 (Mar. 30, 2021), unreviewed by
Comm’n Notice (Apr. 15, 2021)
(terminating the investigation with
E:\FR\FM\18NON1.SGM
18NON1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
64526
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 220 / Thursday, November 18, 2021 / Notices
respect to claims 3, 7, 36, and 38 of the
’985 patent and claim 2 of the ’705
patent); Order No. 24 (Apr. 26, 2021),
unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (May 17,
2021) (terminating the investigation
with respect to claims 15, 16, and 21–
24 of the ’985 patent). Accordingly, at
the time of the Final ID, the remaining
asserted claims were claims 1, 6, 12, 29,
30, 33–35, and 37 of the ’985 patent and
claim 1 of the ’705 patent.
The Commission also issued a
summary determination that GE
satisfied the economic prong of the
domestic industry requirement with
respect to both asserted patents. Order
No. 23 (Apr. 26, 2021), unreviewed by
Comm’n Notice (May 26, 2021).
On September 10, 2021, the ALJ
issued the Final ID finding a violation
of section 337 with respect to claims 1,
6, 12, 29, 30, 33–35, and 37 of the ’985
patent and finding no violation with
respect to claim 1 of the ’705 patent.
Final ID at 147. The Final ID found that
GE showed that SGRE induced
infringement of claims 1, 6, 12, 29, 30,
33–35, and 37 of the ’985 patent and
claim 1 of the ’705 patent, and that GE
showed that it satisfied the technical
prong of the domestic industry
requirement with respect to both
patents. The Final ID also found that
SGRE showed that claim 1 of the ’705
patent is directed to ineligible subject
matter but failed to show that any
asserted claim of the ’985 patent is
invalid or ineligible.
On September 22, 2021, GE filed a
petition for review of several issues,
including the Final ID’s finding that
claim 1 of the ’705 patent is directed to
ineligible subject matter and is not
infringed by SGRE’s full-converter
turbines, as well as the Final ID’s
finding that GE failed to demonstrate
contributory infringement. On
September 24, 2021, SGRE filed a
petition for review of several issues,
including the Final ID’s findings that
SGRE’s products satisfied several
limitations of claims 1, 6, and 12 of the
’985 patent, its findings that all of
SGRE’s accused products satisfied
claims 29, 30, 33–35, and 37 of the ’985
patent, its reliance on licensed activity,
and its refusal to adjudicate
infringement by products named in the
complaint but for which no
infringement evidence was presented.
SGRE also contingently petitioned for
review of the Final ID’s finding that
SGRE’s products practice a limitation of
claim 1 of the ’705 patent and that claim
1 is not invalid as anticipated. SGRE did
not petition for review any issue
regarding the Final ID’s finding that
SGRE violated section 337 via its fullconverter turbines with earlier software
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:11 Nov 17, 2021
Jkt 256001
with respect to claims 29, 30, 33–35,
and 37 of the ’985 patent. GE and SGRE
opposed each other’s petitions on
September 30, 2021, and October 4,
2021, respectively.
Having examined the record of this
investigation, including the ALJ’s final
ID, the petition for review, and the
responses thereto, the Commission has
determined to review the Final ID in
part. Specifically, the Commission has
determined to review the following
issues: (1) The Final ID’s finding that
the accused products satisfy the
limitation ‘‘a second mode of operation
comprising the low voltage event’’ of
claims 1, 6, and 12 of the ’985 patent;
(2) the Final ID’s finding that the
accused turbines having a doubly-fed
induction generator (‘‘DFIG’’) satisfy the
limitation ‘‘turbine controller causes the
blade pitch control system to vary the
pitch of the one or more blades’’ of
claims 1, 6, and 12 of the ’985 patent;
(3) the Final ID’s finding that certain
full-converter turbines with later
software and DFIG Products infringe
claims 29, 30, 33–35, and 37 of the ’985
patent; and (4) the Final ID’s finding
that the accused products satisfy the
limitation ‘‘during the entire duration of
and subsequent to a zero voltage fault
that lasts for an undetermined period of
time’’ of claim 1 of the ’705 patent. The
Commission declines to review the
remainder of the ID, including the Final
ID’s finding that SGRE violated section
337 via its full-converter turbines with
earlier software with respect to claims
29, 30, 33–35, and 37 of the ’985 patent,
its findings that GE satisfied the
technical prong of the domestic industry
requirement with respect to both
asserted patents, and its finding that
claim 1 of the ’705 patent is directed to
ineligible matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
The Commission has determined to take
no position on whether GE showed that
the accused products satisfy the
limitation ‘‘during the entire duration of
and subsequent to a zero voltage fault
that lasts for an undetermined period of
time,’’ and therefore affirms the Final
ID’s finding of no violation as to claim
1 of the ’705 patent based on 35 U.S.C.
101.
In connection with the final
disposition of this investigation, the
Commission may (1) issue an order that
could result in the exclusion of the
subject articles from entry into the
United States, and/or (2) issue a cease
and desist order that could result in the
respondent being required to cease and
desist from engaging in unfair acts in
the importation and sale of such
articles. Accordingly, the Commission is
interested in receiving written
submissions that address the form of
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
remedy, if any, that should be ordered.
If a party seeks exclusion of an article
from entry into the United States for
purposes other than entry for
consumption, the party should so
indicate and provide information
establishing that activities involving
other types of entry either are adversely
affecting it or likely to do so. For
background, see Certain Devices for
Connecting Computers via Telephone
Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, USITC
Pub. No. 2843, Comm’n Op. at 7–10
(December 1994).
If the Commission contemplates some
form of remedy, it must consider the
effects of that remedy upon the public
interest. The factors the Commission
will consider include the effect that an
exclusion order and/or a cease and
desist order would have on (1) the
public health and welfare, (2)
competitive conditions in the U.S.
economy, (3) U.S. production of articles
that are like or directly competitive with
those that are subject to investigation,
and (4) U.S. consumers. The
Commission is therefore interested in
receiving written submissions that
address the aforementioned public
interest factors in the context of this
investigation.
The Commission requests full briefing
on remedy and the public interest,
including in particular briefing on the
following remedy and public interest
issues:
1. If the Commission were to issue a
remedy only with respect to articles that
infringe claims 29, 30, 33–35, and 37 of the
’985 patent, please provide the identity and
volume of the products that would be
impacted. Please address the extent to which
the software version and licensed activity
affect which products are covered by the
remedy. Please discuss whether and to what
extent remedial order(s) directed to the
affected products you have identified in
response to this question would affect each
of the four public interest considerations.
Please also address whether and to what
extent SGRE’s requested remedy exemptions
would be necessary or appropriate in order
to mitigate the identified adverse impacts on
each public interest consideration.
2. Please explain the feasibility, including
in terms of costs and time commitments or
delays, of developing alternative contracts for
the supply of wind turbine generators in the
United States if SGRE is unable to fulfill its
existing contract volumes due to remedial
orders issued in this investigation.
3. Please describe whether and to what
extent it is possible to switch providers for
components and service. Please elaborate on
the extent to which non-accused or noninfringing components can be used to build
or service existing SGRE wind towers.
4. Please describe what, if any, additional
costs a wind turbine operator would incur if
the proposed remedy requires switching
providers for wind turbine components and
E:\FR\FM\18NON1.SGM
18NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 220 / Thursday, November 18, 2021 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
service. Please address the extent to which
wind turbine operators have already paid for
components potentially covered by a remedy,
and related service, through warranty and
other contractual provisions. Please also
address whether switching providers would
cause delays or compatibility issues. Please
explain how such additional costs, if any,
would affect one or more of the four public
interest considerations.
5. Please explain what products, if any, are
still subject to the license agreement between
the parties or whether SGRE otherwise
retains the right under patent exhaustion
principles to import components for the
purpose of repairing products sold under the
license. Please explain how the Commission
or Customs and Border Protection could
ascertain whether imported products are
covered by the license or are otherwise
authorized.
6. Please address whether SGRE’s proven
domestic inventories of products and
components that are accused of infringing (a)
claims 1, 6, and 12 of the ’985 patent and (b)
claims 29, 30, 33–35, and 37 of the ’985
patent are commercially significant within an
appropriate context and whether SGRE has
other significant business operations in the
United States. Please address the various
product categories separately: Full-converter
turbines using the earlier software, fullconverter turbines using the later software,
and DFIG turbines.
If the Commission orders some form
of remedy, the U.S. Trade
Representative, as delegated by the
President, has 60 days to approve,
disapprove, or take no position on the
Commission’s action. See Presidential
Memorandum of July 21, 2005, 70 FR
43251 (July 26, 2005). During this
period, the subject articles would be
entitled to enter the United States under
bond, in an amount determined by the
Commission and prescribed by the
Secretary of the Treasury. The
Commission is therefore interested in
receiving submissions concerning the
amount of the bond that should be
imposed if a remedy is ordered.
Written Submissions: The
Commission requests that the parties to
the investigation file written
submissions on the remedy and public
interest issues identified in this notice.
The Commission encourages parties to
the investigation, interested government
agencies, and any other interested
parties to file written submissions on
the issues of remedy, the public interest,
and bonding. Such submissions should
address the recommended
determination by the ALJ on remedy
and bonding, which issued on
September 10, 2021. The Commission
further requests that GE submit
proposed remedial orders, state the date
when the ’985 patent expires, provide
the HTSUS subheadings under which
the subject articles are imported, and
supply a list of known importers of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:11 Nov 17, 2021
Jkt 256001
subject article. The written submissions,
exclusive of any exhibits, must not
exceed 40 pages, and must be filed no
later than close of business on December
7, 2021. Reply submissions must not
exceed 20 pages, and must be filed no
later than the close of business on
December 14, 2021. No further
submissions on these issues will be
permitted unless otherwise ordered by
the Commission.
Persons filing written submissions
must file the original document
electronically on or before the deadlines
stated above. The Commission’s paper
filing requirements in 19 CFR 210.4(f)
are currently waived. 85 FR 15798
(March 19, 2020). Submissions should
refer to the investigation number (Inv.
No. 337–TA–1218) in a prominent place
on the cover page and/or the first page.
(See Handbook for Electronic Filing
Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/
documents/handbook_on_filing_
procedures.pdf). Persons with questions
regarding filing should contact the
Secretary, (202) 205–2000.
Any person desiring to submit a
document to the Commission in
confidence must request confidential
treatment by marking each document
with a header indicating that the
document contains confidential
information. This marking will be
deemed to satisfy the request procedure
set forth in Rules 201.6(b) and
210.5(e)(2) (19 CFR 201.6(b) &
210.5(e)(2)). Documents for which
confidential treatment by the
Commission is properly sought will be
treated accordingly. A redacted nonconfidential version of the document
must also be filed simultaneously with
any confidential filing. All information,
including confidential business
information and documents for which
confidential treatment is properly
sought, submitted to the Commission for
purposes of this investigation may be
disclosed to and used: (i) By the
Commission, its employees and Offices,
and contract personnel (a) for
developing or maintaining the records
of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in
internal investigations, audits, reviews,
and evaluations relating to the
programs, personnel, and operations of
the Commission including under 5
U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S.
government employees and contract
personnel, solely for cybersecurity
purposes. All contract personnel will
sign appropriate nondisclosure
agreements. All nonconfidential written
submissions will be available for public
inspection on EDIS.
The Commission vote for this
determination took place on November
12, 2021.
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64527
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 12, 2021.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021–25134 Filed 11–17–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 731–TA–1070B (Third
Review)]
Certain Tissue Paper Products 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 certain
tissue paper products 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 29289)
and determined on September 7, 2021
that it would conduct an expedited
review (86 FR 54238, September 30,
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 4, 2021. The
views of the Commission are contained
in USITC Publication 5236 (November
2021), entitled Certain Tissue Paper
Products from China: Investigation No.
731–TA–1070B (Third Review).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: November 18, 2021.
Katherine Hiner,
Supervisory Attorney.
[FR Doc. 2021–25196 Filed 11–17–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
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\18NON1.SGM
18NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 220 (Thursday, November 18, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64525-64527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25134]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1218]
Certain Variable Speed Wind Turbine Generators and Components
Thereof; Commission Determination To Review in Part a Final Initial
Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337 as to One Patent and
No Violation as to Another Patent; Schedule for Filing Written
Submissions on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to review in part a final initial
determination (``Final ID'') issued by the presiding administrative law
judge (``ALJ'') finding a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930. The Commission requests briefing from the parties, interested
government agencies, and interested persons on the issues of remedy,
the public interest, and bonding based on the schedule set forth below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Needham, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-5468. 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 (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 September 8, 2020, the Commission
instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed on behalf of
General Electric Company of Boston, Massachusetts (``GE''). 85 FR
55492-93 (Sept. 8, 2020). The complaint alleged violations of section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as supplemented and 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 variable speed wind turbine generators and components thereof
by reason of infringement of one or more of claims 1, 3, 6, 7, 12, 15-
16, 21-24, 29, 30, and 33-38 of U.S. Patent No. 6,921,985 (``the '985
patent'') and claims 1 and 2 of the U.S. Patent No. 7,629,705 (``the
'705 patent''). Id. at 55493; Order No. 10 (Dec. 2, 2020), unreviewed
by Comm'n Notice (Dec. 22, 2020). Id. The Commission's notice of
investigation named as respondents Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy Inc.
of Orlando, Florida; Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy A/S of Brande,
Denmark; and Gamesa Electric, S.A.U. of Zamudio, Spain (collectively,
``SGRE''). Id. at 26493; 85 FR 55493. The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations is not a party to the investigation. Id.
The Commission subsequently terminated the investigation with
respect to claims 3, 7, 15, 16, 21-24, 36, and 38 of the '985 patent
and claim 2 of the '705 patent based on GE's partial withdrawal of the
complaint. Order No. 20 (Mar. 30, 2021), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice
(Apr. 15, 2021) (terminating the investigation with
[[Page 64526]]
respect to claims 3, 7, 36, and 38 of the '985 patent and claim 2 of
the '705 patent); Order No. 24 (Apr. 26, 2021), unreviewed by Comm'n
Notice (May 17, 2021) (terminating the investigation with respect to
claims 15, 16, and 21-24 of the '985 patent). Accordingly, at the time
of the Final ID, the remaining asserted claims were claims 1, 6, 12,
29, 30, 33-35, and 37 of the '985 patent and claim 1 of the '705
patent.
The Commission also issued a summary determination that GE
satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement with
respect to both asserted patents. Order No. 23 (Apr. 26, 2021),
unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (May 26, 2021).
On September 10, 2021, the ALJ issued the Final ID finding a
violation of section 337 with respect to claims 1, 6, 12, 29, 30, 33-
35, and 37 of the '985 patent and finding no violation with respect to
claim 1 of the '705 patent. Final ID at 147. The Final ID found that GE
showed that SGRE induced infringement of claims 1, 6, 12, 29, 30, 33-
35, and 37 of the '985 patent and claim 1 of the '705 patent, and that
GE showed that it satisfied the technical prong of the domestic
industry requirement with respect to both patents. The Final ID also
found that SGRE showed that claim 1 of the '705 patent is directed to
ineligible subject matter but failed to show that any asserted claim of
the '985 patent is invalid or ineligible.
On September 22, 2021, GE filed a petition for review of several
issues, including the Final ID's finding that claim 1 of the '705
patent is directed to ineligible subject matter and is not infringed by
SGRE's full-converter turbines, as well as the Final ID's finding that
GE failed to demonstrate contributory infringement. On September 24,
2021, SGRE filed a petition for review of several issues, including the
Final ID's findings that SGRE's products satisfied several limitations
of claims 1, 6, and 12 of the '985 patent, its findings that all of
SGRE's accused products satisfied claims 29, 30, 33-35, and 37 of the
'985 patent, its reliance on licensed activity, and its refusal to
adjudicate infringement by products named in the complaint but for
which no infringement evidence was presented. SGRE also contingently
petitioned for review of the Final ID's finding that SGRE's products
practice a limitation of claim 1 of the '705 patent and that claim 1 is
not invalid as anticipated. SGRE did not petition for review any issue
regarding the Final ID's finding that SGRE violated section 337 via its
full-converter turbines with earlier software with respect to claims
29, 30, 33-35, and 37 of the '985 patent. GE and SGRE opposed each
other's petitions on September 30, 2021, and October 4, 2021,
respectively.
Having examined the record of this investigation, including the
ALJ's final ID, the petition for review, and the responses thereto, the
Commission has determined to review the Final ID in part. Specifically,
the Commission has determined to review the following issues: (1) The
Final ID's finding that the accused products satisfy the limitation ``a
second mode of operation comprising the low voltage event'' of claims
1, 6, and 12 of the '985 patent; (2) the Final ID's finding that the
accused turbines having a doubly-fed induction generator (``DFIG'')
satisfy the limitation ``turbine controller causes the blade pitch
control system to vary the pitch of the one or more blades'' of claims
1, 6, and 12 of the '985 patent; (3) the Final ID's finding that
certain full-converter turbines with later software and DFIG Products
infringe claims 29, 30, 33-35, and 37 of the '985 patent; and (4) the
Final ID's finding that the accused products satisfy the limitation
``during the entire duration of and subsequent to a zero voltage fault
that lasts for an undetermined period of time'' of claim 1 of the '705
patent. The Commission declines to review the remainder of the ID,
including the Final ID's finding that SGRE violated section 337 via its
full-converter turbines with earlier software with respect to claims
29, 30, 33-35, and 37 of the '985 patent, its findings that GE
satisfied the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement with
respect to both asserted patents, and its finding that claim 1 of the
'705 patent is directed to ineligible matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. The
Commission has determined to take no position on whether GE showed that
the accused products satisfy the limitation ``during the entire
duration of and subsequent to a zero voltage fault that lasts for an
undetermined period of time,'' and therefore affirms the Final ID's
finding of no violation as to claim 1 of the '705 patent based on 35
U.S.C. 101.
In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the
Commission may (1) issue an order that could result in the exclusion of
the subject articles from entry into the United States, and/or (2)
issue a cease and desist order that could result in the respondent
being required to cease and desist from engaging in unfair acts in the
importation and sale of such articles. Accordingly, the Commission is
interested in receiving written submissions that address the form of
remedy, if any, that should be ordered. If a party seeks exclusion of
an article from entry into the United States for purposes other than
entry for consumption, the party should so indicate and provide
information establishing that activities involving other types of entry
either are adversely affecting it or likely to do so. For background,
see Certain Devices for Connecting Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv.
No. 337-TA-360, USITC Pub. No. 2843, Comm'n Op. at 7-10 (December
1994).
If the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must
consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The
factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an
exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order would have on (1) the
public health and welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S.
economy, (3) U.S. production of articles that are like or directly
competitive with those that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S.
consumers. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving written
submissions that address the aforementioned public interest factors in
the context of this investigation.
The Commission requests full briefing on remedy and the public
interest, including in particular briefing on the following remedy and
public interest issues:
1. If the Commission were to issue a remedy only with respect to
articles that infringe claims 29, 30, 33-35, and 37 of the '985
patent, please provide the identity and volume of the products that
would be impacted. Please address the extent to which the software
version and licensed activity affect which products are covered by
the remedy. Please discuss whether and to what extent remedial
order(s) directed to the affected products you have identified in
response to this question would affect each of the four public
interest considerations. Please also address whether and to what
extent SGRE's requested remedy exemptions would be necessary or
appropriate in order to mitigate the identified adverse impacts on
each public interest consideration.
2. Please explain the feasibility, including in terms of costs
and time commitments or delays, of developing alternative contracts
for the supply of wind turbine generators in the United States if
SGRE is unable to fulfill its existing contract volumes due to
remedial orders issued in this investigation.
3. Please describe whether and to what extent it is possible to
switch providers for components and service. Please elaborate on the
extent to which non-accused or non-infringing components can be used
to build or service existing SGRE wind towers.
4. Please describe what, if any, additional costs a wind turbine
operator would incur if the proposed remedy requires switching
providers for wind turbine components and
[[Page 64527]]
service. Please address the extent to which wind turbine operators
have already paid for components potentially covered by a remedy,
and related service, through warranty and other contractual
provisions. Please also address whether switching providers would
cause delays or compatibility issues. Please explain how such
additional costs, if any, would affect one or more of the four
public interest considerations.
5. Please explain what products, if any, are still subject to
the license agreement between the parties or whether SGRE otherwise
retains the right under patent exhaustion principles to import
components for the purpose of repairing products sold under the
license. Please explain how the Commission or Customs and Border
Protection could ascertain whether imported products are covered by
the license or are otherwise authorized.
6. Please address whether SGRE's proven domestic inventories of
products and components that are accused of infringing (a) claims 1,
6, and 12 of the '985 patent and (b) claims 29, 30, 33-35, and 37 of
the '985 patent are commercially significant within an appropriate
context and whether SGRE has other significant business operations
in the United States. Please address the various product categories
separately: Full-converter turbines using the earlier software,
full-converter turbines using the later software, and DFIG turbines.
If the Commission orders some form of remedy, the U.S. Trade
Representative, as delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve,
disapprove, or take no position on the Commission's action. See
Presidential Memorandum of July 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005).
During this period, the subject articles would be entitled to enter the
United States under bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and
prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is
therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of
the bond that should be imposed if a remedy is ordered.
Written Submissions: The Commission requests that the parties to
the investigation file written submissions on the remedy and public
interest issues identified in this notice. The Commission encourages
parties to the investigation, interested government agencies, and any
other interested parties to file written submissions on the issues of
remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Such submissions should
address the recommended determination by the ALJ on remedy and bonding,
which issued on September 10, 2021. The Commission further requests
that GE submit proposed remedial orders, state the date when the '985
patent expires, provide the HTSUS subheadings under which the subject
articles are imported, and supply a list of known importers of the
subject article. The written submissions, exclusive of any exhibits,
must not exceed 40 pages, and must be filed no later than close of
business on December 7, 2021. Reply submissions must not exceed 20
pages, and must be filed no later than the close of business on
December 14, 2021. No further submissions on these issues will be
permitted unless otherwise ordered by the Commission.
Persons filing written submissions must file the original document
electronically on or before the deadlines stated above. The
Commission's paper filing requirements in 19 CFR 210.4(f) are currently
waived. 85 FR 15798 (March 19, 2020). Submissions should refer to the
investigation number (Inv. No. 337-TA-1218) in a prominent place on the
cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing
Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf). Persons with questions regarding
filing should contact the Secretary, (202) 205-2000.
Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in
confidence must request confidential treatment by marking each document
with a header indicating that the document contains confidential
information. This marking will be deemed to satisfy the request
procedure set forth in Rules 201.6(b) and 210.5(e)(2) (19 CFR 201.6(b)
& 210.5(e)(2)). Documents for which confidential treatment by the
Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. A redacted
non-confidential version of the document must also be filed
simultaneously with any confidential filing. All information, including
confidential business information and documents for which confidential
treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes
of this investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the
Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for
developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding,
or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations
relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission
including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government
employees and contract personnel, solely for cybersecurity purposes.
All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements.
All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public
inspection on EDIS.
The Commission vote for this determination took place on November
12, 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 12, 2021.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021-25134 Filed 11-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
