[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 4, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11679-11680]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-4073]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-578]


In the Matter of Certain Mobile Telephone Handsets, Wireless 
Communication Devices, and Components Thereof; Notice of Commission 
Decision Not To Review an Initial Determination of the Administrative 
Law Judge Finding No Violation of Section *337; Termination 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'') issued by the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') 
determining that there is no violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act 
of 1930.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Frahm, Office of the General 
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3107. 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: The Commission instituted this section 337 
investigation on July 12, 2006, based on a complaint filed by QUALCOMM

[[Page 11680]]

Incorporated of San Diego, California (``Qualcomm''). 71 FR 39362 (July 
12, 2006). The complaint, as amended, alleged 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 mobile telephone handsets, 
wireless communications devices, and components thereof by reason of 
infringement of certain claims of six U.S. patents. The complaint and 
notice of investigation named Nokia Corporation of Finland and Nokia 
Inc. of Irving, Texas (collectively, ``Nokia''), as respondents. The 
complaint, as amended, further alleged that an industry in the United 
States exists as required by subsection 337(a)(2). Only claims 1 and 3 
of U.S. Patent No. 5,452,473 (``the '473 patent''), claim 1 of U.S. 
Patent No. 5,590,408 (``the '408 patent''), and claim 2 of U.S. Patent 
No. 5,655,220 (``the '220 patent'') remain in the investigation.
    On December 12, 2007, the ALJ issued his final ID finding no 
violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. *1337). 
Specifically, the ALJ determined that there had been an importation of 
Nokia's accused products, and that none of Nokia's accused products 
infringe the asserted claims of the '473, '408, or '220 patents. With 
regard to claims 1 and 3 of the '473 patent, the ALJ determined these 
asserted claims were not proven to be invalid under the best mode 
requirement of 35 U.S.C. *112 or anticipated under 35 U.S.C. *102. The 
ALJ also determined that claims 1 and 3 of the '473 patent were proven 
to be invalid as obvious under 35 U.S.C. *103. With regard to claim 1 
of the '408 patent and claim 2 of the '220 patent, the ALJ determined 
that these asserted claims were not proven to be invalid. The ALJ 
determined that a domestic industry exists that practices the '473, 
'408, and '220 patents. Finally, the ALJ made a recommendation that if 
the Commission finds a violation under section 337, a limited exclusion 
and cease and desist orders should issue with a bond set in the amount 
of 100 percent of entered value during the 60 day period of 
Presidential review.
    On January 9, 2008, Qualcomm and Nokia each filed petitions for 
review. The Commission Investigative Attorney (``IA'') did not file a 
petition for review.
    On January 23, 2008, Qualcomm and Nokia filed responses to each 
other's petitions for review. The IA filed his response to both 
petitions on January 24, 2008.
    On February 5, 2008, Qualcomm filed a letter requesting that the 
Commission consider the recent Federal Circuit decision in Oatey Co. v. 
IPS, Corp., Case No. 07-1214, slip op. (Fed. Cir. Jan. 30, 2008). Nokia 
filed a responsive letter on February 6, 2008.
    Having examined the record of this investigation, including the 
ALJ's final ID and the submissions of the parties, the Commission has 
determined not to review the ALJ's determination.
    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 section 210.42-45 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure (19 CFR 210.42-45).

    Issued: February 27, 2008.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E8-4073 Filed 3-3-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P