[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 198 (Thursday, October 14, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63201-63202]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25812]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-691]


In the Matter of Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies and Components 
Thereof; Notice of Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial 
Determination Terminating the Investigation as to Claims 7 and 10 of 
U.S. Patent No. 6,089,687 and Claims 2 and 3 of U.S. Patent No. 
6,264,301 and Finding a Violation of Section 337; Schedule for 
Submissions on Remedy, 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 not to review an initial determination 
(``ID'') (Order No. 18) issued by the presiding administrative law 
judge (``ALJ'') terminating the investigation as to claims 7 and 10 of 
U.S. Patent No. 6,089,687 and claims 2 and 3 of U.S. Patent No. 
6,264,301 and finding a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in this investigation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3042. 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 
(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 
29, 2009, based upon a complaint filed by Hewlett-Packard Company of 
Palo Alto, California (``HP'') on September 23, 2009, and supplemented 
on October 7, 2009. 74 FR 55856 (Oct. 29, 2009). The 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, and 
the sale within the United States after importation of certain inkjet 
ink supplies and components thereof that infringe certain claims of 
U.S. Patent Nos. 6,959,985 (``the '985 patent''); 7,104,630 (``the '630 
patent''); 6,089,687 (``the '687 patent''); and 6,264,301 (``the '301 
patent''). The complaint named as respondents Zhuhai Gree Magneto-
Electric Co. Ltd. of Guangdong, China (``Zhuhai''); InkPlusToner.com of 
Canoga Park, California (``InkPlusToner''); Mipo International Ltd. of 
Kowloon, Hong Kong (``Mipo International''); Mextec Group, Inc. d/b/a 
Mipo America Ltd. of Miami, Florida (``Mextec''); Shanghai Angel 
Printer Supplies Co. Ltd. of Shanghai, China (``Shanghai Angel''); 
SmartOne Services LLC d/b/a InkForSale.net of Hayward, California 
(``SmartOne''); Shenzhen Print Media Co., Ltd. of Shenzhen, China 
(``Shenzhen Print Media''); Comptree Ink d/b/a Meritline, ABCInk, EZ 
Label, and CDR DVDR Media of City of Industry, California 
(``Comptree''); Zhuhai National Resources & Jingjie Imaging Products 
Co., Ltd. of Guangdong, China (``Zhuhai National''); Tatrix 
International of Guangdong, China (``Tatrix''); and Ourway Image Co., 
of Guangdong China (``Ourway'').
    On February 17, 2010, the Commission determined not to review an ID 
(Order No. 9) finding seven respondents, Mipo International, Mextec, 
Shanghai Angel, Shenzhen Print Media, Zhuhai National, Tatrix, and 
Ourway in default pursuant to Commission Rule 210.16. On March 19, 
2010, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 11) 
terminating the investigation as to respondent Comptree based upon a 
settlement agreement. Also on March 19, 2010, the Commission determined 
not to review an ID (Order No. 12) terminating the investigation as to 
respondent Zhuhai based upon a consent order. On March 31, 2010, the

[[Page 63202]]

Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 13) terminating 
the investigation as to respondent InkPlusToner based upon a settlement 
agreement. On June 7, 2010, the Commission determined not to review an 
ID (Order No. 14) terminating the investigation as to respondent 
SmartOne based upon a settlement agreement.
    On June 3, 2010, the Commission determined not to review an ID 
(Order No. 17) terminating the investigation as to the '985 patent and 
the '630 patent.
    On June 17, 2010, HP filed an unopposed motion pursuant to 
Commission Rule 210.21(a) to withdraw all allegations related to claims 
7 and 10 of the '687 patent and claims 2 and 3 of the '301 patent from 
the complaint, and to terminate the investigation with respect to those 
claims.
    On May 7, 2010, HP moved for summary determination on the issues of 
domestic industry, importation, and violation of section 337. Pursuant 
to Commission Rule 210.16(c)(2), 19 CFR 216(c)(2), HP also stated that 
it was seeking a general exclusion order and a cease and desist order 
against Mextec. On June 2, 2010, the Commission investigative attorney 
submitted a response in support of a finding that a domestic industry 
exists and that the defaulting respondents, Mipo International, Mextec, 
Shanghai Angel, Shenzhen Print Media, Zhuhai National, Tatrix, and 
Ourway have violated section 337 by infringing claims 6 and 9 of the 
'687 patent and claims 1, 5, and 6 of the '301 patent.
    On August 30, 2010, the presiding administrative law judge issued 
the subject ID, Order No. 18, granting: (1) HP's motion to terminate 
the investigation as to claims 7 and 10 of the '687 patent and claims 2 
and 3 of the '301 patent, and (2) HP's motion for summary determination 
of violation of section 337 with respect to the defaulting respondents. 
He also recommended a general exclusion order, a cease and desist order 
directed to domestic respondent Mextec, and a 100 percent bond to 
permit importation during the period of Presidential review.
    No petitions for review were filed. The Commission has determined 
not to review the subject ID.
    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 the 
respondent(s) 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 
(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 U.S. Trade 
Representative, as delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve 
or disapprove the Commission's action. See Presidential Memorandum of 
July 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period, the 
subject articles would be entitled to enter the United States under 
bond, in an amount determined by the Commission. The Commission is 
therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of 
the bond that should be imposed if a remedy is ordered.
    Written Submissions: The 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. Complainants and the IA 
are also requested to submit proposed remedial orders for the 
Commission's consideration. Complainants are also requested to state 
the dates that the patents expire and the HTSUS numbers under which the 
accused products are imported. The written submissions and proposed 
remedial orders must be filed no later than close of business on 
Thursday, October 28, 2010. Reply submissions must be filed no later 
than the close of business on Thursday, November 4, 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 
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 19 CFR 210.6. 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 and 210.50 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42-46 and 210.50).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: October 7, 2010.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-25812 Filed 10-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P