[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 122 (Monday, June 26, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36358-36359]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-9972]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337-TA-538]


In the Matter of Certain Audio Processing Integrated Circuits and 
Products Containing Same; Notice of Commission Decision To Remand a 
Portion of an Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337, 
and To Extend the Target Date for Completion of the Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined to remand a portion of the investigation to 
the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ''). The Commission has 
also determined to extend the target date for completion of the 
investigation until September 15, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven W. Crabb, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-5432. Copies of the 
public version of the ALJ's initial determination (``ID'') and all 
other nonproprietary 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 (http://www.usitc.gov). The public 
record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's 
electronic docket (EDIS-ON-LINE) 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: The Commission instituted this investigation 
on April 18, 2005, based on a complaint filed on behalf of SigmaTel, 
Inc. (``complainant'') of Austin, Texas. 70 FR 20172. The complaint 
alleged violations of section 337 in the importation into the United 
States, sale for importation, and sale within the United States after 
importation of certain audio processing integrated circuits and 
products containing same by reason of infringement of claim 10 of U.S. 
Patent No. 6,137,279 (``the '279 patent''), which was subsequently 
terminated pursuant to complainant's motion, and claim 13 of U.S. 
Patent No. 6,633,187 (``the '187 patent''). Id. The notice of 
investigation named Actions Semiconductor Co. of Guangdong, China 
(``Actions'') as the only respondent.
    On June 9, 2005, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 5) granting 
complainant's motion to amend the complaint and notice of investigation 
to add allegations of infringement of the previously asserted patents 
and to add an allegation of a violation of section 337 by reason of 
infringement of claims 1, 6, 9, and 13 of U.S. Patent No. 6,366,522 
(``the '522 patent''). That ID was not reviewed by the Commission.
    On October 13, 2005, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 9) granting 
complainant's motion to terminate the investigation as to the '279 
patent. On October 31, 2005, the Commission determined not to review 
the ID.
    On October 31, 2005, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 14) granting 
complainant's motion for summary determination that the importation 
requirement of section 337 has been satisfied. On November 1, 2005, the 
ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 15) granting complainant's motion for 
summary determination that complainant has satisfied the economic prong 
of the domestic industry requirement of section 337 for the patents in 
issue. Those IDs were not reviewed by the Commission.
    On March 20, 2006, the ALJ issued his final ID and recommended 
determination on remedy and bonding. The ALJ concluded that there was a 
violation of section 337. Specifically, he found that claim 13 of the 
'187 patent was valid and infringed by Actions' accused product 
families 207X, 208X, and 209X. The ALJ also determined that claims 1, 
6, 9, and 13 of the '522 patent were valid and infringed by Actions' 
accused product families 208X and 209X.
    On April 3, 2006, respondent Actions petitioned for review of 
portions of the final ID. On April 10, 2006, complainant SigmaTel and 
the Commission investigative attorney (``IA'') filed responses in 
opposition to the petition for review.
    On April 17, 2006, respondent Actions filed a motion for leave to 
file a reply to complainant SigmaTel's response to Actions' petition 
for review. On April 19, 2006, complainant SigmaTel filed a motion in 
opposition to Actions' motion. The Commission determined to deny 
Actions' motion for leave to file a reply.
    On May 5, 2006, the Commission determined to review the ALJ's 
construction of a claim limitation of the '522 patent, infringement of 
the '522 patent, and whether SigmaTel met the technical prong of the 
domestic industry requirement in regard to the '522 patent. 71 FR 27512 
(May 11, 2006). The Commission also determined to review the ALJ's 
claim construction of the term ``memory'' in claim 13 of the '187 
patent. Id. The Commission declined to review the remainder of the ID. 
Id.
    On May 15, 2006, the IA filed its brief on the issues under review 
and on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. On May 16, 2006, both 
SigmaTel and Actions filed briefs on the

[[Page 36359]]

issues under review and on remedy, the public interest, and bonding.
    On May 17, 2006, SigmaTel filed a motion to strike portions of 
Actions' initial brief concerning the issues under review or in the 
alternative for an extension of two days to respond. On May 19, 2006, 
Actions filed an opposition to SigmaTel's motion to strike. Also on May 
19, 2006, the Chairman of the Commission granted the motion for the 
two-day extension, thus rendering the motion to strike moot.
    On May 24, 2006, all parties filed responses to the initial briefs 
concerning the issues under review and on remedy, the public interest, 
and bonding.
    Having examined the record of this investigation, including the 
ALJ's final ID and the submissions of the parties, the Commission has 
(1) determined to reverse the ALJ's construction of the claim phrase 
``produce the system clock control signal and power supply control 
signal based on a processing transfer characteristic of the computation 
engine'' and provide as its own construction that both the system clock 
control signal and the power supply control signal are required to be 
produced during operation of the integrated circuit such that the 
voltage and the frequency of the integrated circuit are adjusted based 
on a processing transfer characteristic, but that the processing 
transfer characteristic is not determined in any particular manner; (2) 
determined to remand this investigation in part to the ALJ for the 
purpose of determining whether the accused products utilizing the 
version 952436 firmware infringe the '522 patent under the Commission's 
claim construction; (3) determined with respect to the accused products 
that do not use the version 952436 firmware, that the ALJ made 
sufficient findings to find infringement of the asserted claims of the 
'522 patent under our claim construction, and to adopt his findings 
with respect to those products; (4) determined that SigmaTel's 35XX 
products satisfy the technical prong of the domestic industry 
requirement with regard to the '522 patent under the Commission's claim 
construction; (5) determined to delete the term ``firmware'' from the 
ALJ's construction of the claim term ``memory'' in claim 13 of the '187 
patent; (6) determined to defer addressing issues relating to remedy, 
public interest, and bonding, for both the '187 patent and the '522 
patent until after the ALJ issues his initial determination on remand 
regarding the '522 patent; and (7) determined to extend the target date 
in the investigation until September 15, 2006.
    Further, the Commission has determined not to consider Actions' 
discussion in its submissions on the issues under review with respect 
to the '187 patent because this discussion is outside the scope of the 
Commission's review.
    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in sections 210.45 
and 210.51 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 
210.45, 210.51).

    Issued: June 19, 2006.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
 [FR Doc. E6-9972 Filed 6-23-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P