[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53198-53199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-22895]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337-TA-406 (Advisory Opinion Proceedings II)]


In the Matter of Certain Lens-Fitted Film Packages; Notice of 
Commission Determination To Institute Advisory Opinion Proceedings and 
To Deny a Request for Institution of Enforcement Proceedings

AGENCY: International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined to institute advisory opinion proceedings in 
the above-captioned investigation, and to deny a request for 
institution of enforcement proceedings.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clara Kuehn, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone 202-
205-3012. Copies of the request for an advisory opinion, and all other 
nonconfidential documents filed in connection with the request, 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 (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 
persons are advised that information on the matter can be obtained by 
contacting the Commission's TDD terminal at 202-205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation 
on March 25, 1998, based on a complaint by Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd. 
(``Fuji'') of Tokyo, Japan, alleging unfair acts in violation of 
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, by several 
respondents in the importation and sale of certain lens-fitted film 
packages (i.e., disposable cameras) (LFFPs) that infringed one or more 
claims of 15 U.S. patents held by

[[Page 53199]]

complainant Fuji. On June 2, 1999, the Commission terminated the 
investigation, finding a violation of section 337 by 26 respondents by 
reason of importation or sales after importation of LFFPs that were 
found to infringe one or more claims of the patents in issue. 64 FR 
30,541 (June 8, 1999). The Commission issued a general exclusion order, 
prohibiting the importation of LFFPs that infringe any of the claims at 
issue, including claim 1 of U.S. Patent 4,954,857 (``the '857 
patent''); claim 1 of U.S. Patent 4,972,649 (``the '649 patent''); 
claim 25 of U.S. Patent 5,381,200 (``the '200 patent''); and claim 1 of 
U.S. Patent Re 34,168 (``the '168 reissue patent''). CS Industries Inc. 
(``CSI'') was not a party to the original investigation.
    On July 31, 2001, the Commission instituted formal enforcement and 
advisory opinion proceedings at Fuji's request. 66 FR 40,721 (Aug. 3, 
2001). CSI was named as a party respondent to the enforcement 
proceeding, and was also named as a party to the advisory opinion 
proceedings. 66 FR 40,721 (Aug. 3, 2001). On May 2, 2002, the presiding 
administrative law judge (``ALJ'') issued his enforcement initial 
determination (``EID'') and his initial advisory opinion (``IAO''). The 
Commission reviewed the EID and the IAO in part and remanded the issue 
of infringement of claim 9 of the '649 patent under the doctrine of 
equivalents to the ALJ in light of Supreme Court precedent handed down 
after the EID and the IAO were issued. 67 FR 52,741 (Aug. 13, 2002). 
The Commission also directed interested parties to file comments on the 
recommended remedy determinations made by the ALJ in the EID. 67 FR 
52,741 (Aug. 13, 2002). On May 15, 2003, the Commission determined not 
to review the ALJ's supplemental IAO and EID, which issued on October 
24, 2002. 68 FR 28,254 (May 23, 2003). The Commission also issued cease 
and desist orders against several respondents, including CSI, that were 
found to have violated the general exclusion order issued in the 
original investigation. 68 FR 28,254 (May 23, 2003).
    On June 19, 2003, CSI filed a request pursuant to Commission rule 
210.79 for an advisory opinion. On June 30, 2003, complainant Fuji and 
the Commission investigative attorney (``IA'') filed responses. Fuji's 
response included a request for initiation of an enforcement proceeding 
pursuant to Commission rule 210.75. On July 8, 2003, the IA filed a 
motion for leave to respond to Fuji's request for an enforcement 
proceeding with attached response. On July 9, 2003, CSI filed a motion 
for leave to reply to the responses of Fuji and the IA with attached 
reply, and a response to Fuji's request for an enforcement proceeding. 
The Commission granted both motions for leave.
    The Commission examined CSI's request for an advisory opinion, and 
the responses and reply thereto, and determined that the request 
complies with the requirements for institution of an advisory opinion 
proceeding under Commission rule 210.79(a). The Commission examined 
Fuji's request for an enforcement proceeding and the responses thereto, 
and determined to deny the request. Accordingly, the Commission 
determined to institute an advisory opinion proceeding and referred 
CSI's request to the presiding ALJ for issuance of an initial advisory 
opinion.
    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and Commission rules 210.75(a) and 
210.79(a), 19 CFR 210.75(a), 210.79(a).

    Issued: September 3, 2003.

    By order of the Commission.

Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 03-22895 Filed 9-8-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P