[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 1, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19319-19320]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10818]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-371]
Certain Memory Devices With Increased Capacitance and Products
Containing Same; Notice of Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial
Determination Terminating the Investigation on the Basis of a Finding
of No Violation of Section 337
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 19320]]
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Commission has determined not
to review the initial determination (ID) issued by the presiding
administrative law judge (ALJ) on March 21, 1996, terminating the
above-captioned investigation on the basis of a finding of no violation
of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark D. Kelly, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone 202-
205-3106.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 30, 1995, the Commission ordered
that an investigation be instituted to determine whether there are
violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, in the
importation, sale for importation, or sale within the United States
after importation of certain memory devices with increased capacitance
and products containing same by reason of infringement of certain
claims of U.S. Letters Patent 5,166,904 (the '904 patent), owned by
complainants Emanuel Hazani and Patent Enforcement Fund, Inc., and
whether there exists an industry in the United States as required by
subsection (a)(2) of section 337.
The Commission instituted an investigation of the complaint and
published a notice of investigation in the Federal Register on February
6, 1995. 60 FR 7068. The following thirteen firms were named as
respondents: Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Tokyo, Japan; Mitsubishi
Electronics America, Inc., Cypress, CA; NEC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan;
NEC Electronics, Inc., Mountain View, CA; OKI Electronic Industry Co.,
Ltd., Tokyo, Japan; OKI America, Inc., Hackensack, NJ; Hitachi, Ltd.,
Tokyo, Japan; Hitachi America, Ltd., Tarrytown, NY; Samsung Electronics
Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea; Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Ridgefield
Park, NJ; Samsung Semiconductors, Inc., San Jose, CA; Hyundai
Electronics Industries Co., Ltd, Seoul, Korea; and Hyundai Electronics
America, Inc., San Jose, CA. The complaint alleged that the respondents
manufactured and imported 16- and 64-Mbit dynamic random-access
memories (DRAMs) that infringe certain claims of the '904 patent.
On October 13, 1995, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 63) granting a
motion filed by the NEC respondents for summary determination of the
invalidity of claims 1-2, 4-13, 15-17, 22 and 25 based on anticipation
by U.S. Letters Patent 4,758,986 to Kuo (the ``Kuo patent''). On
October 20, 1995, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 64) granting a motion
filed by the Samsung respondents for summary determination of the
invalidity of claims 18-20 and 26-28 also based on anticipation by the
Kuo patent and terminating the investigation as to claim 21. On October
30, 1995, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 65) granting a motion filed
by the Mitsubishi respondents for summary determination of non-
infringement as to claim 14.
On December 14, 1995, the Commission determined not to review
Orders Nos. 63 and 65, but determined to review in part and remand the
ID (Order No. 64) issued by the ALJ on October 20, 1995.
On March 21, 1996, after further briefing from the parties, the ALJ
issued an ID (Order No. 71) granting a motion filed by the Samsung
respondents for summary determination of invalidity of claims 18-20 and
26-28 based on anticipation by the Kuo patent. Complainants filed a
petition for review of the ID on March 28, 1996. The Samsung
respondents and the Commission investigative attorney filed oppositions
to the petition for review on April 12, 1996.
This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. Sec. 1337, and Commission rule 210.42, 19
C.F.R. Sec. 210.42. Copies of the public versions of the ALJ's ID and
all other public 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 S.W., Washington, D.C.
20436, telephone 202-205-2000. Hearing-impaired persons are advised
that information on the matter can be obtained by contacting the
Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810.
Issued: April 22, 1996.
By order of the Commission.
Donna R. Koehnke,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-10818 Filed 4-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P