[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 228 (Monday, November 29, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 73126-73128]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29911]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-687]
Certain Video Displays, Components Thereof, and Products
Containing Same; Notice of Commission Determination to Review a Final
Initial Determination in Part and Set a Schedule for Filing Written
Submissions on the Issues Under Review and 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 the final initial
determination (``ID'') issued by the presiding administrative law judge
(``ALJ'') on September 17, 2010, in the above-captioned investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Liberman, Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street,
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3116. Copies of non-
confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are
or will be available for inspection during official business hours
(8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC
20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the
Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at
http://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be
viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at http://edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired
[[Page 73127]]
persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by
contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This investigation was instituted on
September 16, 2009, based on a complaint filed by LG Electronics, Inc.
(``LG''), alleging a violation of section 337 in the importation, sale
for importation, and sale within the United States after importation of
certain video displays, components thereof, or products containing same
that infringe one or more of claims 24 and 25 of U.S. Patent No.
5,790,096; claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 5,537,612; claim 1 of U.S.
Patent No. 5,459,522; claims 1-5 and 7-16 of U.S. Patent No. 7,154,564.
74 FR 47616 (2009) Complainant named Funai Electric Company, Ltd. of
Osaka, Japan, Funai Corporation, Inc. of Rutherford, New Jersey, P&F
USA, Inc. of Alpharetta, Georgia (collectively, ``Funai''), and Vizio,
Inc. of Irvine, California (``Vizio'') as respondents. On January 8,
2010, the presiding ALJ issued an ID granting Complainant's motion for
leave to file a second amended complaint and amend the Notice of
Investigation to, inter alia, add AmTran Technology Co. Ltd. and AmTran
Logistics, Inc. as respondents to the investigation. Order No. 12
(unreviewed by the Commission). Subsequently, respondents Funai
Electric Company, Ltd., Funai Corporation, Inc., and P&F USA, Inc. were
terminated from the investigation based on a settlement agreement.
The evidentiary hearing on violation of Section 337 was held from
June 9, 2010 through June 21, 2010. On September 17, 2010, the ALJ
issued his final ID finding a violation of section 337. All the parties
to the investigation, including the Commission investigative attorney
(IA), filed timely petitions for review of various portions of the
final ID, as well as timely responses to the petitions.
Having examined the record in this investigation, including the
ALJ's final ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto,
the Commission has determined to review the ID in part. In particular,
the Commission has determined to review: (1) The ID's finding that
dependent claims 4, 6, and 7 of the `612 patent are not invalid as
anticipated or obvious; (2) the ID's findings and conclusions with
respect to independent claim 5 of the `564 patent. The Commission has
determined not to review the remainder of the final ID.
On review, the Commission requests briefing on the above-listed
issues based on the evidentiary record. The Commission is particularly
interested in responses to the following questions:
(1) With respect to the `612 patent:
(a) Does the record evidence show, clearly and convincingly, that
claim 4 is anticipated by: (i) The CableData HTU device (RPX-4); (ii)
U.S. Patent No. 4,896,354 (``the `354 patent''); and (iii) U.S. Patent
No. 4,930,160 (``the `160 patent'')?
(b) Does the record evidence show, clearly and convincingly, that
claim 4 is obvious in view of any of the above prior art references
alleged to anticipate claim 4?
(c) Does the record evidence show, clearly and convincingly, that
claim 6 is anticipated by: (i) the `160 patent; (ii) U.S. Patent No.
4,510,623 (``the `623 patent''); (iii) U.S. Patent No. 5,033,085 (``the
`085 patent''); and (iv) the `354 patent?
(d) Does the record evidence show, clearly and convincingly, that
claim 6 is obvious in view of any of the above prior art references
alleged to anticipate claim 6?
(e) Does the record evidence show, clearly and convincingly, that
claim 7 is anticipated by: (i) The `160 patent; (ii) the `623 patent;
(iii) the `085 patent; and (iv) the `354 patent?
(f) Does the record evidence show, clearly and convincingly, that
claim 7 is obvious in view of any of the above prior art references
alleged to anticipate claim 7?
(2) With respect to the `564 patent:
(a) Does the record evidence show that claim 5 is infringed?
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 one or more cease and desist orders 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 are likely to do so. For
background, see In the Matter of Certain Devices for Connecting
Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337-TA-360, USITC Pub. No. 2843
(Dec. 1994) (Commission Opinion).
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 cease and desist orders 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
or disapprove 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. The Commission is
therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of
the bond that should be imposed.
Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation are requested
to file written submissions on the issues under review. The submissions
should be concise and thoroughly referenced to the record in this
investigation. 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 ALJ on remedy and bonding. Complainant and the Commission
investigative attorney are also requested to submit proposed remedial
orders for the Commission's consideration. Complainant is further
requested to provide the expiration date of the involved patents and
state the HTSUS numbers under which the accused articles are imported.
The written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no
later than the close of business on December 3, 2010. Reply submissions
must be filed no later than the close of business on December 10, 2010.
No further submissions on these issues will be permitted unless
otherwise ordered by the Commission.
Persons filing written submissions must file the original document
and 12 true copies thereof on or before the deadlines stated above with
the Office of the Secretary. Any person desiring to submit a document
(or portion thereof) to the Commission in confidence must
[[Page 73128]]
request confidential treatment unless the information has already been
granted such treatment during the proceedings. All such requests should
be directed to the Secretary of the Commission and must include a full
statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such
treatment. See section 201.6 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by
the Commission is sought will be treated accordingly. All
nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public
inspection at the Office of the Secretary.
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 sections 210.42-.46 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure (19 CFR 210.42-.46).
Issued: November 19, 2010.
By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-29911 Filed 11-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P