[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 96 (Wednesday, May 18, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 31257]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11670]



[[Page 31257]]

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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-943]


Certain Wireless Headsets; Commission Determination To Affirm 
With Modification an Initial Determination, Granting Respondents' 
Motion for Summary Determination of Patent Invalidity Due to 
Indefiniteness; 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 to affirm with certain modifications an 
initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 17), granting respondents' 
motion for summary determination of patent invalidity due to 
indefiniteness. The Commission finds no violation of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (``section 337''). The 
investigation is terminated.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan M. Valentine, Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-708-2301. 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: The Commission instituted this investigation 
on January 13, 2015, based on a complaint filed by One-E-Way, Inc. of 
Pasadena, California (``One-E-Way''). 80 FR 1663 (Jan. 13, 2015). The 
complaint alleges violations of section 337, in the importation into 
the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the 
United States after importation of certain wireless headsets by reason 
of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,865,258 (``the 
'258 patent'') and 8,131,391 (``the '391 patent''). Id. The notice of 
investigation named several respondents, including Sony Corporation of 
Tokyo, Japan; Sony Corporation of America of New York, New York; and 
Sony Electronics, Inc. of San Diego, California (collectively, 
``Sony''); Beats Electronics, LLC of Culver City, California and Beats 
Electronics International Ltd. of Dublin, Ireland (collectively, 
``Beats''); Sennheiser Electronic GmbH & Co. KG of Wedemark, Germany 
and Sennheiser Electronic Corporation of Old Lyme, Connecticut 
(collectively, ``Sennheiser''); BlueAnt Wireless Pty, Ltd. of Richmond, 
Australia and BlueAnt Wireless, Inc. of Chicago, Illinois 
(collectively, ``BlueAnt''); Creative Technology Ltd. of Singapore and 
Creative Labs, Inc. of Milpitas, California (collectively, ``Creative 
Labs''); GN Netcom A/S d/b/a Jabra of Ballerup, Denmark (``GN 
Netcom''); and Jawbone, Inc. of San Francisco, California. Id. The 
Office of Unfair Import Investigations was also named as a party to the 
investigation. Id. The Commission previously terminated the 
investigation with respect to Beats and Sennheiser. See Notice (Apr. 
29, 2015); Notice (June 11, 2015). The Commission also previously 
terminated the investigation with respect to certain claims of the '258 
and '391 patents. See Notice (May 26, 2015); Notice (Aug. 26, 2015). On 
February 16, 2016, the Commission amended the Notice of investigation 
to correct the name of respondent Jawbone, Inc. to AliphCom d/b/a 
Jawbone, and also terminated the investigation as to AliphCom. Notice 
(Feb. 16, 2016).
    On August 10, 2015, respondents Sony, BlueAnt, Creative Labs, and 
GN Netcom (collectively, ``Respondents'') filed a motion for summary 
determination that asserted claim 8 of the '258 patent and asserted 
claims 1, 3-6, and 10 of the'391 patent are invalid as indefinite under 
35 U.S.C. 112, ] 2. On August 20, 2015, the Commission investigative 
attorney (``IA'') filed a response in support of the motion. Also on 
August 20, 2015, One-E-Way filed an opposition to the motion. On August 
27, 2015, Respondents moved for leave to file a reply to One-E-Way's 
opposition, which the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') 
granted that same day. See Order No. 16 (Aug. 27, 2015).
    On September 21, 2015, the ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 
17), granting Respondents' motion for summary determination that all of 
the asserted claims of the '258 and '391 patents are invalid as 
indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112, ] 2 and finding no violation of section 
337. On October 2, 2015, One-E-Way filed a petition for review of the 
subject ID. On October 9, 2015, Respondents and the IA each filed 
responses to the petition.
    On December 1, 2015, the Commission determined to review Order No. 
17 and posed several questions to the parties. 80 FR 76038-40 (Dec. 7, 
2015). The parties filed initial submissions on December 11, 2015, and 
filed response submissions on December 18, 2015.
    Having examined the record of this investigation, including the 
subject ID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto, and 
the parties' submissions in response to the Commission's request for 
additional briefing, the Commission has determined to affirm Order No. 
17 with modification. In particular, the Commission corrects the 
statement on pages 7, 61, and 65-66 of the subject ID that the 
limitations ``free from interference'' and ``virtually free from 
interference'' coexist in the asserted claims. The asserted claims 
recite the limitation ``virtually free from interference'' only. The 
Commission also clarifies that the ALJ's statement on page 85 of 
subject ID that the intrinsic evidence fails to explain how the 
invention both ``transmits'' and ``reproduces'' audio ``virtually free 
from interference'' should be made with reference to claims 1 and 5 of 
the '391 patent, not to claims 1 and 3 of the '391 patent.
    The Commission finds no violation of section 337. The investigation 
is terminated.
    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 Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 
part 210).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: May 12, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016-11670 Filed 5-17-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7020-02-P