[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 240 (Monday, December 15, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69719-69720]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-30832]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337-TA-481]


In the Matter of Certain Display Controllers With Upscaling 
Functionality and Products Containing Same; Notice of Commission 
Decision to Review in Part A Final Initial Determination Finding No 
Violation of Section 337; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on 
the Issues Under Review and 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 October 20, 2003, finding no violation of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the above-captioned 
investigation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3115. Copies of the 
ALJ's 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. Hearing-impaired 
persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by 
contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810. 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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation 
on October 18, 2002, based on a complaint filed by Genesis Microchip 
(Delaware) Inc. (``Genesis'') of Alviso, California, against Media 
Reality Technologies, Inc. of Sunnyvale, California; Trumpion 
Microelectronics, Inc. of Taipei, Taiwan; and SmartASIC, Inc. 
(``SmartASIC'') of San Jose, California. 67 FR 64411 (October 18, 
2002). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff 
Act of 1930 in the importation and sale of certain display controllers 
with upscaling functionality and products containing same by reason of 
infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 5,738,867 (`` `867 
patent'').
    On January 14, 2003, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 6) terminating 
respondent SmartASIC from the investigation on the basis of a 
settlement agreement. On February 12, 2003, the Commission issued a 
notice of its decision not to review that ID (Order No. 6).
    The evidentiary hearing in this investigation was held from July 
14, 2003, through July 25, 2003. On October 20, 2003, the ALJ issued 
his final ID in which he found that there was no violation of section 
337. All the parties to the investigation, including the Commission 
investigative attorneys filed timely petitions for review of various 
portions of the final ID, and all of them filed 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:
    (1) The ALJ's construction of the claim term ``pixel data'';
    (2) The ALJ's construction of the ``wherein'' clause;
    (3) The ALJ's construction of the claim limitation ``receiving 
means'';
    (4) All of the ALJ's non-infringement findings;
    (5) The ALJ's finding that complainant Genesis does not practice 
any claims of the `867 patent;
    (6) The ALJ's finding that the Spartan reference does not 
anticipate (i.e., invalidate) the asserted claims of the `867 patent; 
and
    (7) The ALJ's finding that the ACUITY Application Note does not 
anticipate the asserted claims of the `867 patent.
    The Commission has determined not to review the remainder of the 
final ID.
    On review, the Commission requests briefing, based on the 
evidentiary record, on the issues under review, and is particularly 
interested in receiving answers to the following questions:
    1. What intrinsic and, to the extent it is applicable, extrinsic 
evidence supports your position on the issue of whether ``the time to 
provide said plurality of destination pixel data'' in the ``wherein'' 
clause includes the time to provide inactive pixels in a destination 
image frame?
    2. What intrinsic and, to the extent it is applicable, extrinsic 
evidence supports your position on the issue of whether ``a period to 
receive said source pixel data'' in the ``wherein'' clause

[[Page 69720]]

includes a period to receive inactive pixels in a source image frame?
    3. What intrinsic and, to the extent it is applicable, extrinsic 
evidence supports your position on the issue of whether the analog-to-
digital converter depicted in Figure 13 is a structure that corresponds 
to the ``receiving means'' in claim 12?
    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) one 
or more 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 
that 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 are requested 
to file written submissions on the issues under review. The submission 
should be concise and thoroughly referenced to the record in this 
investigation. Parties to the investigation, interested government 
agencies, and any other interested persons are encouraged to file 
written submissions on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and 
bonding. Such submissions should address the October 20, 2003, 
recommended determination by the ALJ on remedy and bonding. Complainant 
and the Commission investigative attorneys 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 December 19, 2003. Reply submissions must be 
filed no later than the close of business on December 26, 2003. 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.
    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 210.42-210.45 of the Commission's rules of practice and 
procedure (19 CFR 210.42-210.45).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: December 9, 2003.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 03-30832 Filed 12-12-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P