[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 75 (Wednesday, April 19, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20130-20131]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-5887]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-551]


 In the Matter of Certain Laser Bar Code Scanners and Scan 
Engines, Components Thereof and Products Containing Same; Notice of 
Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting 
Complainant's Motion To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined not to review an initial determination 
(``ID'') (Order No. 9) issued by the presiding administrative law judge 
(``ALJ'') granting complainant's motion to amend the complaint and 
notice of investigation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Walters, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-5468. 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 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 October 
26, 2005, based on a complaint filed by Symbol Technologies Inc. 
(``Symbol'') of Holtsville, New York. The complaint alleges violations 
of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in the 
importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the 
sale within the United States after importation of certain laser bar 
code scanners or scan engines, components thereof, or products 
containing the same by reason of infringement of various claims of 
United States Patent Nos. 5,457,308 (``the '308 patent''), 5,545,889 
(``the `889 patent''), 6,220,514 (``the '514 patent''), 5,262,627, and 
5,917,173. 70 FR 61841 (Oct. 26, 2006). The complaint named two 
respondents: Metro Technologies Co., Ltd. of Suzhou, China, and 
Metrologic Instruments, Inc. of Blackwood, New Jersey (collectively, 
``Metrologic'').
    On March 9, 2006, Symbol filed a motion for leave to amend the 
complaint and notice of investigation to add claims 10 and 11 of the 
'308 patent, claims 8 and 11 of the '889 patent, and claims 3, 7, 9, 
and 10 of the '514 patent. Metrologic filed an opposition to Symbol's 
motion, asserting that Symbol failed to show good cause for its 
amendment and that Metrologic would be unduly prejudiced by an 
amendment to the complaint just one month before the close of 
discovery. The Commission investigative attorney supported Symbol's 
motion.
    On March 22, 2006, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 9) granting 
Symbol's motion to amend the complaint and notice of investigation. The 
ALJ found that, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.14(b)(1) (19 CFR 
210.14(b)(1)), there was good cause to add claims 10 and 11 of the '308 
patent, claims 8 and 11 of the '889 patent, and claims 3, 7, 9, and 10 
of the '514 patent to the complaint and notice of investigation. The 
ALJ found that Symbol had obtained new

[[Page 20131]]

information, justifying the addition of the newly-asserted claims of 
the `308 patent. The ALJ also found that adding the newly-asserted 
claims of the `889 patent and the '514 patent to the complaint did not 
prejudice the parties, because they had been notified that these claims 
were at issue early on in the investigation. Moreover, the ALJ noted 
that he had extended the target date by one month in order to alleviate 
any concerns regarding the amount of time remaining for discovery. No 
petitions for review of the ID were filed. Having examined the record 
of this investigation, the Commission has determined not to review the 
ALJ's ID.
    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 Sec.  210.42 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 
CFR 210.42).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: April 14, 2006.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E6-5887 Filed 4-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P