Certain Video Processing Devices and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Decision To Review and, on Review, To Affirm With Modifications an Initial Determination Granting Summary Determination of Invalidity as to U.S. Patent 8,139,878 and to Take No Position as to U.S. Patent 7,769,238; Termination of Investigation, 52209-52210 [2023-16773]

Download as PDF ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 150 / Monday, August 7, 2023 / Notices Pub. No. 2843, Comm’n Op. at 7–10 (Dec. 1994). The statute requires the Commission to consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The public interest factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an exclusion order and 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. 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 action on the Commission’s determination. 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: Parties to the investigation, interested government agencies, and any other interested parties are encouraged to file written submissions on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Such submissions should address the recommended determination by the CALJ on remedy and bonding. In their initial submission, Complainants are also requested to identify the remedy sought and Complainants are requested to submit proposed remedial orders for the Commission’s consideration. Complainants are further requested to state the dates that the Asserted Patents expire, to provide the HTSUS subheadings under which the accused products are imported, and to supply the identification information for all known importers of the products at issue in this investigation. The initial written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later than close of business on August 15, 2023. Reply submissions must be filed no later than the close of business on August 22, 2023. No further submissions on these issues will be permitted unless otherwise ordered by the Commission. Opening submissions VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:58 Aug 04, 2023 Jkt 259001 are limited to 20 pages. Reply submissions are limited to 10 pages. 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–1304) 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. Any non-party wishing to submit comments containing confidential information must serve those comments on the parties to the investigation pursuant to the applicable Administrative Protective Order. A redacted non-confidential version of the document must also be filed with the Commission and served on any parties to the investigation within two business days of 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 August 1, 2023. The authority for the Commission’s determination is contained in section PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 52209 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: August 1, 2023. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2023–16741 Filed 8–4–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–1323] Certain Video Processing Devices and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Decision To Review and, on Review, To Affirm With Modifications an Initial Determination Granting Summary Determination of Invalidity as to U.S. Patent 8,139,878 and to Take No Position as to U.S. Patent 7,769,238; Termination of Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 47) of the presiding Administrative Law Judge (‘‘ALJ’’) granting summary determination of invalidity based on obviousness-type double patenting. On review, the Commission affirms with modifications the ID’s finding that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,139,878 (‘‘the ’878 patent’’) are invalid. The Commission takes no position as to the ID’s findings with respect to the ’238 patent, except to the extent those findings also support the ID’s invalidity findings with respect to the ’878 patent. Accordingly, the Commission terminates the investigation with a finding of no violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘section 337’’). The investigation is terminated. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Houda Morad, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708–4716. 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 SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM 07AUN1 ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 52210 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 150 / Monday, August 7, 2023 / Notices 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 August 8, 2022, the Commission instituted this investigation under section 337 based on a complaint filed by VideoLabs, Inc. of Palo Alto, California (‘‘Complainant’’ or ‘‘VideoLabs’’). See 87 FR 48198–99 (Aug. 8, 2022). The complaint, as supplemented, alleged a violation 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 video processing devices and products containing the same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patents Nos. 7,769,238 (‘‘the ’238 patent’’); 8,139,878 (‘‘the ’878 patent’’); 7,372,452 (‘‘the ’452 patent’’); and 8,208,542 (‘‘the ’542 patent’’). See id. The complaint also alleged the existence of a domestic industry. See id. The notice of investigation named as respondents: (1) Acer Inc. of New Taipei City, Taiwan, and Acer America Corporation of San Jose, California (collectively, ‘‘Acer’’); (2) ASUSTeK Computer Inc. of Taipei, Taiwan, and ASUS Computer International of Fremont, California (collectively, ‘‘ASUS’’); (3) Motorola Mobility LLC of Chicago, Illinois, Lenovo Group Limited of Quarry Bay, Hong Kong S.A.R. of China, and Lenovo (United States) Inc. of Morrisville, North Carolina (collectively, ‘‘Lenovo’’); and (4) Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. of New Taipei City, Taiwan, and MSI Computer Corp. of City of Industry, California (collectively, ‘‘MSI’’). See id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) is also named as a party in this investigation. See id. Subsequently, the investigation was terminated in part as to the Acer respondents based on settlement. See Order No. 18 (Oct. 24, 2022), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Nov. 10, 2023). Likewise, the investigation was terminated in part as to the Lenovo respondents based on settlement. See Order No. 37 (Jan. 27, 2023), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Feb. 28, 2023). Furthermore, the investigation was terminated in part as to the MSI respondents based on settlement. See Order No. 38 (Feb. 7, 2023), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Mar. 7, 2023). The ASUS respondents remain in the investigation. The Commission terminated the ’452 and ’542 patents based on the withdrawal of the complaint as to those VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:58 Aug 04, 2023 Jkt 259001 patents. See Order No. 13 (Sept. 7, 2022), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Sept. 26, 2022); Order No. 40 (Feb. 15, 2023), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Mar. 22, 2023). Claim 1 of the ’238 patent and claims 1–4 of the ’878 patent remain asserted in this investigation. On March 22, 2023, the ASUS respondents filed a corrected motion for summary determination of invalidity based on obviousness-type double patenting. On April 3, 2023, Complainant and OUII filed responses in opposition to the motion. On May 1, 2023, the ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 47) granting the motion for summary determination that the asserted claims are invalid based on obviousness-type double patenting, thereby terminating the investigation in its entirety. On May 11, 2023, Complainant filed a petition for Commission review of the subject ID. On May 18, 2023, the ASUS respondents and OUII filed responses to the petition. On May 23, 2023, Complainant filed a motion for leave to file a reply in support of its petition. On May 26 and 31, respectively, the ASUS respondents and OUII filed responses in opposition to Complainant’s motion for leave to file a reply. On July 10, 2023, Complainant filed a motion to terminate the investigation as to the ’238 patent and a motion to supplement the record. On July 13, 2023, the ASUS respondents filed a response to Complainant’s motion to supplement the record. No other responses were filed. Having examined the record of this investigation, including the ID and the parties’ submissions, the Commission has determined to review, and on review, to affirm the subject ID with modifications with respect to the ’878 patent and to take no position with respect to the ’238 patent. More specifically, as explained in the Commission Opinion issued concurrently herewith, the Commission has determined to affirm with modifications the ID’s finding that the asserted claims of the ’878 patent are invalid based on obviousness-type double patenting. The Commission takes no position as to the ID’s findings with respect to the ’238 patent, except to the extent those findings also support the ID’s invalidity findings with respect to the ’878 patent. The Commission adopts all findings in the ID that are not inconsistent with the Commission’s determination. The Commission has also determined to grant Complainant’s motion for leave to file a reply solely to the extent that the reply addresses the ASUS respondents’ and OUII’s positions that Complainant has waived certain PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 arguments made in its petition for review. The Commission has further determined to grant Complainant’s motion to terminate the investigation as to the ’238 patent and Complainant’s motion to supplement the record. Accordingly, the Commission terminates the investigation with a finding of no violation of section 337. The investigation is terminated. The Commission’s vote for this determination took place on August 1, 2023. 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: August 1, 2023. Lisa Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2023–16773 Filed 8–4–23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA–407] RIN 1117–AB40 and 1117–AB78 Practice of Telemedicine: Listening Sessions Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice. ACTION: Notice of meeting. AGENCY: The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is conducting public listening sessions to receive additional input concerning the practice of telemedicine with regards to controlled substances and potential safeguards that could effectively prevent and detect diversion of controlled substances prescribed via telemedicine. Specifically, DEA is inviting all interested persons, including medical practitioners, patients, pharmacy professionals, industry members, law enforcement, and other third parties to express their views at the listening sessions concerning the advisability of permitting telemedicine prescribing of certain controlled substances without any in-person medical evaluation at all, the availability and types of data that would be useful in detecting diversion of controlled substances via telemedicine that are either already reported or could be reported, and specific additional safeguards that could be placed around the prescribing of SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM 07AUN1

Agencies

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 150 (Monday, August 7, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52209-52210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-16773]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-1323]


Certain Video Processing Devices and Products Containing the 
Same; Notice of Commission Decision To Review and, on Review, To Affirm 
With Modifications an Initial Determination Granting Summary 
Determination of Invalidity as to U.S. Patent 8,139,878 and to Take No 
Position as to U.S. Patent 7,769,238; Termination of Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined to review an initial determination (``ID'') 
(Order No. 47) of the presiding Administrative Law Judge (``ALJ'') 
granting summary determination of invalidity based on obviousness-type 
double patenting. On review, the Commission affirms with modifications 
the ID's finding that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,139,878 
(``the '878 patent'') are invalid. The Commission takes no position as 
to the ID's findings with respect to the '238 patent, except to the 
extent those findings also support the ID's invalidity findings with 
respect to the '878 patent. Accordingly, the Commission terminates the 
investigation with a finding of no violation of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``section 337''). The investigation is 
terminated.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Houda Morad, Office of the General 
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-4716. 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

[[Page 52210]]

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 August 8, 2022, the Commission instituted 
this investigation under section 337 based on a complaint filed by 
VideoLabs, Inc. of Palo Alto, California (``Complainant'' or 
``VideoLabs''). See 87 FR 48198-99 (Aug. 8, 2022). The complaint, as 
supplemented, alleged a violation 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 video processing devices 
and products containing the same by reason of infringement of certain 
claims of U.S. Patents Nos. 7,769,238 (``the '238 patent''); 8,139,878 
(``the '878 patent''); 7,372,452 (``the '452 patent''); and 8,208,542 
(``the '542 patent''). See id. The complaint also alleged the existence 
of a domestic industry. See id. The notice of investigation named as 
respondents: (1) Acer Inc. of New Taipei City, Taiwan, and Acer America 
Corporation of San Jose, California (collectively, ``Acer''); (2) 
ASUSTeK Computer Inc. of Taipei, Taiwan, and ASUS Computer 
International of Fremont, California (collectively, ``ASUS''); (3) 
Motorola Mobility LLC of Chicago, Illinois, Lenovo Group Limited of 
Quarry Bay, Hong Kong S.A.R. of China, and Lenovo (United States) Inc. 
of Morrisville, North Carolina (collectively, ``Lenovo''); and (4) 
Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. of New Taipei City, Taiwan, and MSI 
Computer Corp. of City of Industry, California (collectively, ``MSI''). 
See id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (``OUII'') is also 
named as a party in this investigation. See id.
    Subsequently, the investigation was terminated in part as to the 
Acer respondents based on settlement. See Order No. 18 (Oct. 24, 2022), 
unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Nov. 10, 2023). Likewise, the 
investigation was terminated in part as to the Lenovo respondents based 
on settlement. See Order No. 37 (Jan. 27, 2023), unreviewed by Comm'n 
Notice (Feb. 28, 2023). Furthermore, the investigation was terminated 
in part as to the MSI respondents based on settlement. See Order No. 38 
(Feb. 7, 2023), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Mar. 7, 2023). The ASUS 
respondents remain in the investigation.
    The Commission terminated the '452 and '542 patents based on the 
withdrawal of the complaint as to those patents. See Order No. 13 
(Sept. 7, 2022), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Sept. 26, 2022); Order 
No. 40 (Feb. 15, 2023), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Mar. 22, 2023). 
Claim 1 of the '238 patent and claims 1-4 of the '878 patent remain 
asserted in this investigation.
    On March 22, 2023, the ASUS respondents filed a corrected motion 
for summary determination of invalidity based on obviousness-type 
double patenting. On April 3, 2023, Complainant and OUII filed 
responses in opposition to the motion.
    On May 1, 2023, the ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 47) 
granting the motion for summary determination that the asserted claims 
are invalid based on obviousness-type double patenting, thereby 
terminating the investigation in its entirety.
    On May 11, 2023, Complainant filed a petition for Commission review 
of the subject ID. On May 18, 2023, the ASUS respondents and OUII filed 
responses to the petition. On May 23, 2023, Complainant filed a motion 
for leave to file a reply in support of its petition. On May 26 and 31, 
respectively, the ASUS respondents and OUII filed responses in 
opposition to Complainant's motion for leave to file a reply.
    On July 10, 2023, Complainant filed a motion to terminate the 
investigation as to the '238 patent and a motion to supplement the 
record. On July 13, 2023, the ASUS respondents filed a response to 
Complainant's motion to supplement the record. No other responses were 
filed.
    Having examined the record of this investigation, including the ID 
and the parties' submissions, the Commission has determined to review, 
and on review, to affirm the subject ID with modifications with respect 
to the '878 patent and to take no position with respect to the '238 
patent. More specifically, as explained in the Commission Opinion 
issued concurrently herewith, the Commission has determined to affirm 
with modifications the ID's finding that the asserted claims of the 
'878 patent are invalid based on obviousness-type double patenting. The 
Commission takes no position as to the ID's findings with respect to 
the '238 patent, except to the extent those findings also support the 
ID's invalidity findings with respect to the '878 patent. The 
Commission adopts all findings in the ID that are not inconsistent with 
the Commission's determination. The Commission has also determined to 
grant Complainant's motion for leave to file a reply solely to the 
extent that the reply addresses the ASUS respondents' and OUII's 
positions that Complainant has waived certain arguments made in its 
petition for review. The Commission has further determined to grant 
Complainant's motion to terminate the investigation as to the '238 
patent and Complainant's motion to supplement the record.
    Accordingly, the Commission terminates the investigation with a 
finding of no violation of section 337. The investigation is 
terminated.
    The Commission's vote for this determination took place on August 
1, 2023.
    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: August 1, 2023.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2023-16773 Filed 8-4-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.