Certain Integrated Circuits, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Determination To Grant in Part a Joint Motion To Terminate the Investigation Due to Settlement; Denial of Request To Take No Position With Respect to Unreviewed Issues Addressed in Initial Determination; Termination of Investigation, 65670-65671 [2024-17841]
Download as PDF
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
65670
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 155 / Monday, August 12, 2024 / Notices
capabilities and components thereof by
way of infringement of certain claims of
U.S. Patent Nos. 8,416,862 (‘‘the ’862
patent’’); RE 48,629 (‘‘the ’629 patent’’);
and 7,564,914 (‘‘the ’914 patent’’). Id. at
48493. The complaint also alleged a
domestic industry exists. Id. The
Commission’s notice of investigation
named eight (8) respondents: NXP
Semiconductors, N.V. of Eindhoven,
Netherlands; NXP USA, Inc. of Austin,
Texas (collectively, ‘‘NXP’’); Laird
Connectivity, LLC (‘‘Laird’’) of Akron,
Ohio; Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
(‘‘Qualcomm’’) of San Diego, California;
MediaTek Inc. of Taipei, Taiwan;
MediaTek USA Inc. of San Jose,
California; ASUSTek Computer Inc. of
Taipei, Taiwan; and ASUS Computer
International of Fremont, California. Id.
at 48494. The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) is also
participating in this investigation. Id.
The investigation was terminated as
to Qualcomm, Laird, and NXP and as to
the ’914 and ’862 patents based on
withdrawal of the complaint. See Order
No. 12 (Sept. 1, 2023), unreviewed by
Comm’n Notice (Sept. 22, 2023); Order
No. 33 (Jan. 30, 2024), unreviewed by
Comm’n Notice (Feb. 29, 2024); Order
No. 37 (Feb. 27, 2024), unreviewed by
Comm’n Notice (Mar. 25, 2024); Order
No. 52 (May 1, 2024), unreviewed by
Comm’n Notice (May 22, 2024).
Respondents MediaTek Inc. and
MediaTek USA Inc. were terminated
from the investigation based on
settlement. See Order No. 53 (May 30,
2024), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice
(Jun. 26, 2024).
On July 9, 2024, Complainant moved
to terminate the investigation as to
ASUS based on settlement. Complainant
provided both confidential and public
versions of the settlement and license
agreement with its motion. OUII filed a
response supporting the motion. No
other party filed a response.
On July 16, 2024, the ALJ issued the
subject ID (Order No. 54) granting the
motion to terminate ASUS. The ID
found the motion complies with the
Commission Rules. ID at 1–2. The ID
also observed that termination of this
investigation as to ASUS based on
settlement will not adversely affect the
public interest. Id. at 2–3. No party filed
a petition for review of the subject ID.
The Commission has determined not
to review the subject ID. The last
remaining respondents, ASUSTek
Computer Inc. and ASUS Computer
International, are terminated from the
investigation based on settlement. The
investigation is terminated in its
entirety.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Aug 09, 2024
Jkt 262001
The Commission vote for this
determination took place on August 6,
2024.
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 6, 2024.
Sharon Bellamy,
Supervisory Hearings and Information
Officer.
[FR Doc. 2024–17836 Filed 8–9–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1350]
Certain Integrated Circuits,
Components Thereof, and Products
Containing the Same; Notice of
Commission Determination To Grant in
Part a Joint Motion To Terminate the
Investigation Due to Settlement; Denial
of Request To Take No Position With
Respect to Unreviewed Issues
Addressed in Initial Determination;
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 grant in part a joint
motion to terminate this investigation in
view of a settlement agreement.
Specifically, the Commission has
determined to grant the motion to
terminate but denies the request to
reconsider its previous determination
not to review and take no position with
respect to the unreviewed issues
addressed in the final initial
determination (‘‘FID’’). This
investigation is hereby terminated in its
entirety.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl
P. Bretscher, Esq., Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–2382. 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
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 24, 2023, the Commission
instituted the above-captioned
investigation based on a complaint, as
supplemented, filed by Realtek
Semiconductor Corporation of Hsinchu,
Taiwan (‘‘Realtek’’). 88 FR 4205–06 (Jan.
24, 2023). The complaint, as
supplemented, alleges that respondent
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. of Santa
Clara, California (‘‘AMD’’) violated
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C 1337, by importing
into the United States, selling for
importation, or selling within the
United States after importation certain
integrated circuits, components thereof,
and products containing the same that
infringe one or more asserted claims of
U.S. Patent Nos. 7,936,245 (‘‘the ’245
patent’’); 8,006,218 (‘‘the ’218 patent’’);
or 9,590,582 (‘‘the ’582 patent’’). The
complaint alleges that a domestic
industry exists. The Office of Unfair
Import Investigations is not
participating in this investigation.
The presiding administrative law
judge (‘‘ALJ’’) held a claim construction
(Markman) hearing on June 5, 2023. The
ALJ issued the claim construction order
on July 25, 2023. Order No. 21 (July 25,
2023).
On June 20, 2023, AMD moved to
preclude Mr. Steve Baik, Realtek’s
outside counsel, from testifying as a fact
witness in the evidentiary hearing. On
July 7, 2023, the ALJ issued Order No.
19, ordering AMD to show cause why
Winston & Strawn (‘‘Winston’’), AMD’s
counsel, should not be disqualified due
to an alleged conflict of interest. Order
No. 19 at 2 (July 7, 2023).
On August 4, 2023, the ALJ held a
teleconference with the parties
regarding Mr. Baik and Winston. On
August 17, 2023, the ALJ issued Order
No. 23, which granted AMD’s motion to
preclude Mr. Baik from testifying on
behalf of Realtek but did not disqualify
Winston. Order No. 23 at 1 (Aug. 17,
2023). On August 24, 2023, the ALJ
denied Realtek’s motions for
reconsideration and for interlocutory
review of Order No. 23. Order No. 24
(Aug. 24, 2023). On September 6, 2023,
Realtek filed a petition in the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
(‘‘Federal Circuit’’) seeking a writ of
mandamus to order the ALJ to vacate
the ruling striking Mr. Baik. The Federal
Circuit denied the petition on
September 25, 2023. In re Realtek
E:\FR\FM\12AUN1.SGM
12AUN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 155 / Monday, August 12, 2024 / Notices
Semiconductor Corp., Appeal No. 2023–
147, On Petition and Motion (Sept. 25,
2023).
On October 16, 2023, the ALJ issued
an order regarding AMD’s motion to
sanction Realtek for failing to accurately
answer certain interrogatories and
produce relevant documents regarding
Realtek’s earlier litigations against
Avago Technologies General IP
(Singapore) Pte., Ltd and Broadcom
Corp. in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Delaware. Order No. 39 (Oct.
16, 2023). Order No. 39 determined
Realtek had engaged in sanctionable
acts during discovery, but deferred
ruling on AMD’s sanctions motion until
after the hearing. The ALJ ultimately
sanctioned Realtek for discovery
misconduct.
The ALJ held an evidentiary hearing
from October 16–20, 2023.
On November 14, 2023, the
Commission terminated the
investigation as to claim 9 of the ’582
patent and claim 14 of the ’218 patent,
based on Realtek’s withdrawal of those
claims. Order No. 40 (Oct. 20, 2023),
unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Nov. 14,
2023).
On January 19, 2024, the presiding
ALJ issued a combined FID and
Recommended Determination on
Remedy and Bond (‘‘RD’’). The FID
finds no violation of section 337 for any
of the three patents at issue because: (i)
asserted claims 1, 2, and 8 of the ’245
patent are infringed but invalid as
anticipated; (ii) asserted claims 12, 13,
and 15–18 of the ’218 patent are
infringed but invalid as obvious; (iii)
asserted claims 1–4 of the ’582 patent
are not infringed, while claims 1–3 (but
not claim 4) are also invalid as obvious;
and (iv) Realtek failed to satisfy the
economic prong of the domestic
industry requirement for any of the
three asserted patents. FID at 252. The
FID also finds that Realtek satisfied the
technical prong of the domestic industry
requirement for each patent. Id.
On February 2, 2024, Realtek and
AMD each filed petitions for review of
certain adverse findings in the FID.
Realtek, however, did not petition for
review of the FID’s finding that the
asserted claims of the ’245 patent are
invalid. On February 12, 2024, Realtek
and AMD filed their respective
responses to the opposing petitions for
review.
On June 11, 2024, the Commission
determined to review the FID in part. 89
FR 51366–70 (June 17, 2024) (‘‘WTR
Notice’’). In particular, the Commission
determined to review the FID’s findings
on claim construction, infringement,
and anticipation or obviousness of the
asserted claims of the ’218 patent and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:30 Aug 09, 2024
Jkt 262001
’582 patent, the economic prong of the
domestic industry requirement, and the
sanction against Realtek. The
Commission did not review, and thus
adopted, the FID’s findings that the
asserted claims of the ’245 patent are
invalid, that the claims of the ’218
patent are not invalid for lack of written
description or enablement, that the
claims of the ’518 patent are not invalid
for lack of written description, that Mr.
Baik was properly precluded from
testifying as a fact witness at the
evidentiary hearing, and that Winston
should not be disqualified from
representing AMD. The Commission
included a briefing schedule for the
issues under review and remedy, bond,
and the public interest.
On June 19, 2024, the parties filed a
joint motion to terminate the
investigation due to a settlement
agreement and to suspend the
Commission’s briefing schedule. The
parties also requested that the
Commission reconsider its previous
determination not to review certain
findings in the FID and, on review, take
no position on any findings.
On June 27, 2024, the Commission
determined to suspend briefing on the
issues under review and on remedy,
bond, and the public interest, pending
resolution of the parties’ motion to
terminate. See Comm’n Notice (June 27,
2024).
On July 26, 2024, the parties corrected
their joint motion by replacing the
original, overly redacted public version
of their term sheet with a version that
was properly redacted in compliance
with Commission Rules 201.6(a),
210.21(b), 19 CFR 201.6(a), 210.21(b).
Upon review of the parties’
submissions, the Commission has
determined to terminate the
investigation due to the settlement
agreement, in accordance with
Commission Rule 210.21(b), 19 CFR
210.21(b). The Commission finds that
the parties have represented that their
settlement agreement resolves all issues
in this and other litigations, and that
there are no other agreements, written or
oral, express or implied, between the
parties concerning the subject matter of
this investigation, in satisfaction of
Commission Rule 210.21(b), 19 CFR
210.21(b). The Commission denies the
request to reconsider its previous
determinations not to review certain
findings in the FID, as set forth in the
Commission’s WTR Notice, and on
review to take no position with respect
to the unreviewed issues addressed in
the FID. Pursuant to Commission Rule
210.42(h), 19 CFR 210.42(h),
unreviewed initial determinations
become the final determinations of the
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65671
Commission. While the Commission
may reconsider its prior determination
on whether to review an initial
determination under Rule 210.47, 19
CFR 210.47, the parties have presented
no good cause or other justification for
doing so here. See Corrected Joint Mot.
at 2–4.
This investigation is hereby
terminated in its entirety.
The Commission vote for this
determination took place on August 6,
2024.
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 6, 2024.
Sharon Bellamy,
Supervisory Hearings and Information
Officer.
[FR Doc. 2024–17841 Filed 8–9–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 701–TA–712–715 and
731–TA–1679–1682 (Final)]
Ferrosilicon From Brazil, Kazakhstan,
Malaysia, and Russia; Revised
Schedule for the Subject
Investigations
United States International
Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
DATES:
August 6, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Keysha Martinez (202–205–2136), Office
of Investigations, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain
information on this matter by contacting
the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202–
205–1810. Persons with mobility
impairments who will need special
assistance in gaining access to the
Commission should contact the Office
of the Secretary at 202–205–2000.
General information concerning the
Commission may also be obtained by
accessing its internet server (https://
www.usitc.gov). The public record for
this proceeding may be viewed on the
Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS)
at https://edis.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Effective
June 28, 2024, the Commission
established a schedule for the conduct
of the final phase of the subject
E:\FR\FM\12AUN1.SGM
12AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 155 (Monday, August 12, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65670-65671]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-17841]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1350]
Certain Integrated Circuits, Components Thereof, and Products
Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Determination To Grant in
Part a Joint Motion To Terminate the Investigation Due to Settlement;
Denial of Request To Take No Position With Respect to Unreviewed Issues
Addressed in Initial Determination; 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 grant in part a joint
motion to terminate this investigation in view of a settlement
agreement. Specifically, the Commission has determined to grant the
motion to terminate but denies the request to reconsider its previous
determination not to review and take no position with respect to the
unreviewed issues addressed in the final initial determination
(``FID''). This investigation is hereby terminated in its entirety.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl P. Bretscher, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2382. 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 24, 2023, the Commission
instituted the above-captioned investigation based on a complaint, as
supplemented, filed by Realtek Semiconductor Corporation of Hsinchu,
Taiwan (``Realtek''). 88 FR 4205-06 (Jan. 24, 2023). The complaint, as
supplemented, alleges that respondent Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. of
Santa Clara, California (``AMD'') violated section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C 1337, by importing into the United
States, selling for importation, or selling within the United States
after importation certain integrated circuits, components thereof, and
products containing the same that infringe one or more asserted claims
of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,936,245 (``the '245 patent''); 8,006,218 (``the
'218 patent''); or 9,590,582 (``the '582 patent''). The complaint
alleges that a domestic industry exists. The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations is not participating in this investigation.
The presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') held a claim
construction (Markman) hearing on June 5, 2023. The ALJ issued the
claim construction order on July 25, 2023. Order No. 21 (July 25,
2023).
On June 20, 2023, AMD moved to preclude Mr. Steve Baik, Realtek's
outside counsel, from testifying as a fact witness in the evidentiary
hearing. On July 7, 2023, the ALJ issued Order No. 19, ordering AMD to
show cause why Winston & Strawn (``Winston''), AMD's counsel, should
not be disqualified due to an alleged conflict of interest. Order No.
19 at 2 (July 7, 2023).
On August 4, 2023, the ALJ held a teleconference with the parties
regarding Mr. Baik and Winston. On August 17, 2023, the ALJ issued
Order No. 23, which granted AMD's motion to preclude Mr. Baik from
testifying on behalf of Realtek but did not disqualify Winston. Order
No. 23 at 1 (Aug. 17, 2023). On August 24, 2023, the ALJ denied
Realtek's motions for reconsideration and for interlocutory review of
Order No. 23. Order No. 24 (Aug. 24, 2023). On September 6, 2023,
Realtek filed a petition in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit (``Federal Circuit'') seeking a writ of mandamus to order the
ALJ to vacate the ruling striking Mr. Baik. The Federal Circuit denied
the petition on September 25, 2023. In re Realtek
[[Page 65671]]
Semiconductor Corp., Appeal No. 2023-147, On Petition and Motion (Sept.
25, 2023).
On October 16, 2023, the ALJ issued an order regarding AMD's motion
to sanction Realtek for failing to accurately answer certain
interrogatories and produce relevant documents regarding Realtek's
earlier litigations against Avago Technologies General IP (Singapore)
Pte., Ltd and Broadcom Corp. in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Delaware. Order No. 39 (Oct. 16, 2023). Order No. 39
determined Realtek had engaged in sanctionable acts during discovery,
but deferred ruling on AMD's sanctions motion until after the hearing.
The ALJ ultimately sanctioned Realtek for discovery misconduct.
The ALJ held an evidentiary hearing from October 16-20, 2023.
On November 14, 2023, the Commission terminated the investigation
as to claim 9 of the '582 patent and claim 14 of the '218 patent, based
on Realtek's withdrawal of those claims. Order No. 40 (Oct. 20, 2023),
unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Nov. 14, 2023).
On January 19, 2024, the presiding ALJ issued a combined FID and
Recommended Determination on Remedy and Bond (``RD''). The FID finds no
violation of section 337 for any of the three patents at issue because:
(i) asserted claims 1, 2, and 8 of the '245 patent are infringed but
invalid as anticipated; (ii) asserted claims 12, 13, and 15-18 of the
'218 patent are infringed but invalid as obvious; (iii) asserted claims
1-4 of the '582 patent are not infringed, while claims 1-3 (but not
claim 4) are also invalid as obvious; and (iv) Realtek failed to
satisfy the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement for any
of the three asserted patents. FID at 252. The FID also finds that
Realtek satisfied the technical prong of the domestic industry
requirement for each patent. Id.
On February 2, 2024, Realtek and AMD each filed petitions for
review of certain adverse findings in the FID. Realtek, however, did
not petition for review of the FID's finding that the asserted claims
of the '245 patent are invalid. On February 12, 2024, Realtek and AMD
filed their respective responses to the opposing petitions for review.
On June 11, 2024, the Commission determined to review the FID in
part. 89 FR 51366-70 (June 17, 2024) (``WTR Notice''). In particular,
the Commission determined to review the FID's findings on claim
construction, infringement, and anticipation or obviousness of the
asserted claims of the '218 patent and '582 patent, the economic prong
of the domestic industry requirement, and the sanction against Realtek.
The Commission did not review, and thus adopted, the FID's findings
that the asserted claims of the '245 patent are invalid, that the
claims of the '218 patent are not invalid for lack of written
description or enablement, that the claims of the '518 patent are not
invalid for lack of written description, that Mr. Baik was properly
precluded from testifying as a fact witness at the evidentiary hearing,
and that Winston should not be disqualified from representing AMD. The
Commission included a briefing schedule for the issues under review and
remedy, bond, and the public interest.
On June 19, 2024, the parties filed a joint motion to terminate the
investigation due to a settlement agreement and to suspend the
Commission's briefing schedule. The parties also requested that the
Commission reconsider its previous determination not to review certain
findings in the FID and, on review, take no position on any findings.
On June 27, 2024, the Commission determined to suspend briefing on
the issues under review and on remedy, bond, and the public interest,
pending resolution of the parties' motion to terminate. See Comm'n
Notice (June 27, 2024).
On July 26, 2024, the parties corrected their joint motion by
replacing the original, overly redacted public version of their term
sheet with a version that was properly redacted in compliance with
Commission Rules 201.6(a), 210.21(b), 19 CFR 201.6(a), 210.21(b).
Upon review of the parties' submissions, the Commission has
determined to terminate the investigation due to the settlement
agreement, in accordance with Commission Rule 210.21(b), 19 CFR
210.21(b). The Commission finds that the parties have represented that
their settlement agreement resolves all issues in this and other
litigations, and that there are no other agreements, written or oral,
express or implied, between the parties concerning the subject matter
of this investigation, in satisfaction of Commission Rule 210.21(b), 19
CFR 210.21(b). The Commission denies the request to reconsider its
previous determinations not to review certain findings in the FID, as
set forth in the Commission's WTR Notice, and on review to take no
position with respect to the unreviewed issues addressed in the FID.
Pursuant to Commission Rule 210.42(h), 19 CFR 210.42(h), unreviewed
initial determinations become the final determinations of the
Commission. While the Commission may reconsider its prior determination
on whether to review an initial determination under Rule 210.47, 19 CFR
210.47, the parties have presented no good cause or other justification
for doing so here. See Corrected Joint Mot. at 2-4.
This investigation is hereby terminated in its entirety.
The Commission vote for this determination took place on August 6,
2024.
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 6, 2024.
Sharon Bellamy,
Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2024-17841 Filed 8-9-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P