[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 198 (Thursday, October 14, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63198-63200]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25801]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-587]


In the Matter of Certain Connecting Devices (``Quick Clamps'') 
for Use With Modular Compressed Air Conditioning Units, Including 
Filters, Regulators, and Lubricators (``Frl's'') That Are Part of 
Larger Pneumatic Systems and the FRL Units They Connect; Notice of 
Commission Decision To Review a Final Initial Determination; Schedule 
for Filing Written Submissions on the Issue Under Review and on Remedy, 
the Public Interest, and Bonding

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined to review the final initial determination 
(``ID'') on remand issued by the presiding administrative law judge 
(``ALJ'') and denied motions to file reply and sur-reply briefs in 
connection with the petitions for review.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark B. Rees, Office of the General 
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3116. 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

[[Page 63199]]

contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation 
on November 13, 2006, based on a complaint filed by Norgren, Inc. 
(``Norgren'') of Littleton, Colorado. 71 FR 66193 (Nov. 13, 2006). An 
amended complaint was filed on October 25, 2006. A supplement to the 
complaint was filed on November 1, 2006. The amended complaint 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, or 
the sale within the United States after importation of certain devices 
for modular compressed air conditioning units and the FRL units they 
connect by reason of infringement of claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 
5,372,392 (``the '392 patent''). The amended complaint also alleged 
that a domestic industry exists with regard to the '392 patent under 
subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The amended complaint named SMC Corp. 
of Japan; SMC Corporation of America of Indianapolis, Indiana 
(collectively, ``SMC''); AIRTAC of China; and MFD Pneumatics (``MFD'') 
of Chicago, Illinois as the respondents and requested a limited 
exclusion order and a cease and desist order. On July 13, 2007, the 
Commission determined not to review an ID terminating the investigation 
with respect to MFD and AIRTAC on the basis of a consent order 
stipulation and consent order.
    On February 13, 2008, the ALJ issued his final ID finding no 
violation of section 337. Specifically, the ALJ found that there had 
been an importation of SMC's accused products and that none of the 
accused products infringe the asserted claims of the '392 patent. He 
also found that the asserted claims are not invalid due to obviousness. 
He further found that Norgren satisfies the domestic industry 
requirement with respect to the '392 patent. On February 25, 2008, the 
ALJ issued a recommended determination on remedy and bonding in the 
event the Commission reversed his finding of no violation of section 
337.
    On April 18, 2008, the Commission determined not to review the ID 
and terminated the investigation based on the finding of no violation 
of section 337. 73 FR 21157 (Apr. 18, 2008). Norgren appealed to the 
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (``the Court'').
    On May 26, 2009, the Court issued its judgment, reversing-in-part 
the Commission's claim construction, reversing the Commission's 
determination of noninfringement, and vacating the Commission's 
determination of nonobviousness. Norgren Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 
No. 2008-1415 (Fed.Cir. May 26, 2009). The Court remanded the 
investigation with instructions for the Commission to evaluate 
obviousness in the first instance based upon the Court's construction 
of the claim term ``generally rectangular ported flange.''
    Following receipt of the Court's September 9, 2009, mandate, the 
Commission ordered the investigation remanded to the Chief ALJ for 
designation of a presiding ALJ to conduct proceedings in accordance 
with the Court's judgment. The Chief Judge reassigned the investigation 
to the ALJ who presided over the original investigation. The ALJ held 
an evidentiary hearing on April 21, 2010, at which all parties were 
represented. The parties also fully briefed the merits.
    On August 5, 2010, the ALJ issued the final ID on remand in which 
he determined that the asserted claims are not invalid for obviousness. 
SMC and the Commission investigative attorney (``IA'') have petitioned 
for review of the ID. Norgren has filed a response in opposition to the 
petitions. The IA and Norgren have also moved to file reply and sur-
reply briefs, respectively, in connection with the petitions for 
review.
    Having examined the record of this investigation, including the 
final ID on remand, the petitions for review, the response in 
opposition to the petitions, and the motions for leave to file a reply 
to the response and a sur-reply to the reply to the response, the 
Commission has determined to review the ID on the issue of obviousness 
and has determined to deny the motions for additional briefing.
    On review, the Commission requests written submissions on the issue 
under review, particularly the sub-issues of (a) whether the SMC old-
style clamp is generally rectangular and (b) whether adding a hinge to 
one side of a generally rectangular clamp would have been obvious to 
one skilled in the art in 1993. The Commission also requests that the 
parties include in their submissions responses to the following 
queries, with supporting citations to the evidentiary record:
    1. Is the ID's finding that the SMC old-style clamp is not 
``generally rectangular'' contrary to the Court's holding in Norgren 
Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, No. 2008-1415 (Fed.Cir. May 26, 2009) (Slip 
Op. at 6-7) that the SMC and Norgren FRL flanges, which seem to have 
``intervening sloped sides'' and ``octagonal'' and other appearances, 
are ``generally rectangular''?
    2. How, if at all, does the addition of a hinge to swing open and 
closed one side of a generally rectangular clamp affect the clamp's 
ability to seal as claimed in the '392 patent?
    3. Applying a flexible standard, please identify the teaching(s), 
motivation(s), or suggestion(s), if any, that existed pre-invention 
that would have made it obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the 
art in 1993 to combine a hinge with a generally rectangular clamp used 
in a pressure air system.
    In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the 
Commission may (1) issue an order that could result in the exclusion of 
the subject articles from entry into the United States and/or (2) issue 
one or more cease and desist orders that could result in respondents 
being required to cease and desist from engaging in unfair acts 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 
either are adversely affecting it or are 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 
(Dec. 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 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

[[Page 63200]]

amount of the bond that should be imposed.
    Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation are requested 
to file written submissions on the issue under review as set forth 
above. The submissions should be concise and thoroughly referenced to 
the record in this investigation. Parties to the investigation, 
interested government agencies, and any other interested parties are 
encouraged to file written submissions on the issues of remedy, the 
public interest, and bonding. Such submissions should address the 
recommended determination by the ALJ on remedy and bonding. Complainant 
and the IA are also requested to submit proposed remedial orders for 
the Commission's consideration. Complainant is further requested to 
provide the expiration date of the '392 patent and state the HTSUS 
number under which the accused articles are imported. The written 
submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later than 
the close of business on October 21, 2010. Reply submissions must be 
filed no later than the close of business on November 1, 2010. No 
further submissions on these issues will be permitted unless otherwise 
ordered by the Commission.
    Persons filing written submissions must file the original document 
and 12 true copies thereof on or before the deadlines stated above with 
the Office of the Secretary. 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-.46 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure (19 CFR 210.42-.46).

    Issued: October 7, 2010.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-25801 Filed 10-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P