[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 79 (Monday, April 26, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20324-20325]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-10519]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337-TA-406]


Certain Lens-Fitted Film Packages; Notice of Commission 
Determination to Review-in-Part a Final Initial Determination Finding a 
Violation of Section 337; Schedule for Written Submissions on Remedy, 
the Public Interest, and Bonding

AGENCY: 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 February 24, 1999, finding a violation of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. Sec. 1337, in the above-captioned 
investigation. Specifically, the Commission has determined to review 
the standard for the burden of proof applied in the ID for establishing 
repair versus reconstruction of a patented product and the ID's 
determination of no infringement of the design patents asserted in this 
investigation. The Commission has also determined to review the 
infringement issues insofar as necessary to correct certain clerical 
errors brought to the Commission's attention by the Office of Unfair 
Import Investigations.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean Jackson, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone 202-
205-3104. General information concerning the Commission may also be 
obtained by accessing its Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). 
Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on the matter can 
be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-
1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This investigation was instituted on March 
25, 1998, based on a complaint by Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd. (Fuji) of 
Tokyo, Japan. 63 FR 14474. Fuji's complaint alleged unfair acts in 
violation of section 337 in the importation and sale of certain lens-
fitted film packages (i.e., disposable cameras). The complaint alleged 
that 27 respondents had infringed one or more claims of 15 patents held 
by complainant Fuji. On October 23, 1998, the Commission determined not 
to review two IDs finding a total of eight respondents, viz., Boshi 
Technology Ltd., Fast Shot, Haichi International, Innovative Trading 
Company, Labelle Time, Inc., Linfa Photographic Ind. Co. Ltd., 
Forcecam, Inc. and Rino Trading Co. Ltd., in default for failure to 
respond to the complaint and notice of investigation. An evidentiary 
hearing was held November 2-13, 1998. Eight respondents participated in 
the hearing, Achiever Industries Limited, Argus Industries, China Film 
Equipment, Dynatec International Inc., Jazz Photo Corp., Opticolor 
Camera, P.S.I. Industries, and Sakar International, Inc. On December 4, 
1998, the Commission determined not to review an ID granting 
complainant's oral motion to withdraw

[[Page 20325]]

a single claim of one patent from the investigation. 63 FR 67918 
(December 9, 1998). Ten respondents that had filed responses to the 
complaint and notice of investigation failed to appear at the hearing, 
viz., Ad-Tek Specialties Inc., AmerImage, Inc. d/b/a/ Rainbow Products, 
Boecks Camera LLC, BPS Marketing, E.T. Trading d/b/a Klikit, Penmax, 
Inc., PhilmEx Photographic Film, T.D.A. Trading Corp., Vantage Sales, 
Inc. and Vivitar Corp.
    On February 24, 1999, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a 
violation of section 337 by 26 of 27 named respondents. (Complainant 
Fuji admitted at closing argument that one named respondent, Opticam 
Inc, was not violating section 337). He found that Fuji had not carried 
its burden of proof in showing infringement of three design patents. 
The ALJ also issued his recommendations on remedy and bonding. The ALJ 
recommended that the Commission issue a general exclusion order 
directing that disposable cameras that infringe the claims of the 12 
utility patents at issue be excluded from entry into the United States. 
He also recommended that cease and desist orders be issued to the 21 
domestic respondents found in violation. Finally, he recommended a 100 
percent bond during the period of Presidential review.
    On March 8, 1999, the eight respondents that appeared at the 
hearing, complainant Fuji, and the Commission investigative attorney 
(IA) filed petitions for review of the ID. On March 15, 1999, the 
private parties filed responses. The IA filed his response to the 
petitions on March 17, 1999.
    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: (1) the standard for the 
burden of proof applied in the ID for establishing repair versus 
reconstruction of a patented product, and (2) the ID's determination 
that the design patents asserted in this investigation were not 
infringed. The Commission has also determined to review the 
infringement issues insofar as necessary to correct certain clerical 
errors brought to the Commission's attention by the Office of Unfair 
Import Investigations. The Commission requires no further briefing on 
these issues.
    In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the 
Commission may issue (1) an order that could result in the exclusion of 
the subject articles from entry into the United States, and/or (2) 
cease and desist orders that could result in respondents being required 
to cease and desist from engaging in unfair action 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 In the 
Matter of Certain Devices for Connecting Computers via Telephone Lines, 
Inv. No. 337-TA-360, USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 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 President has 60 
days to approve or disapprove the Commission's action. During this 
period, the subject articles would be entitled to enter the United 
States under a 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.

Written Submissions

    The parties to the investigation, interested government agencies, 
and any other interested parties are encouraged to file written 
submissions on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Such 
submissions should address the February 24, 1999, 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. The written 
submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later than 
close of business on April 29, 1999. Reply submissions must be filed no 
later than the close of business on May 6, 1999. No further submissions 
on these issues will be permitted unless otherwise ordered by the 
Commission.
    Persons filing written submissions must file with the Office of the 
Secretary the original document and 14 true copies thereof on or before 
the deadlines stated above. Any person desiring to submit a document 
(or portion thereof) to the Commission in confidence must 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.
    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and sections 210.45-210.51 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.45-210.51.
    Copies of the public version of the ID, and all other 
nonconfidential 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.

    Issued: April 19, 1999.

    By order of the Commission.
Donna R. Koehnke,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 99-10519 Filed 4-23-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P