[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 31, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53489-53490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18752]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-929 (Rescission)]


Certain Beverage Brewing Capsules, Components Thereof, and 
Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Determination To 
Institute a Rescission Proceeding; Rescission of a Limited Exclusion 
Order and Three Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the Rescission 
Proceeding

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined to institute a rescission proceeding and to 
rescind a limited exclusion order (``LEO'') three cease and desist 
orders (``CDOs'') issued in the underlying investigation. The 
rescission proceeding is terminated.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Needham, Office of the General 
Counsel, U.S. International Trade

[[Page 53490]]

Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-
5468. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with 
this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket 
(EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email 
[email protected]. General information concerning the Commission may 
also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.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: On September 9, 2014, the Commission 
instituted an investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 
1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (``section 337'') based a complaint 
filed by complainants Adrian Rivera and Adrian Rivera Maynez 
Enterprises, Inc. (together, ``ARM'') alleging a violation of section 
337 by reason of infringement of claims 5-8 and 18-20 of U.S. Patent 
No. 8,720,320 (``the '320 patent''). 79 FR 53445-46 (Sept. 9, 2014). 
The notice of institution of the investigation named the following 
entities as respondents: Solofill, Inc. (``Solofill''); DongGuan Hai 
Rui Precision Mould Co., Inc. (``DongGuan''); Eko Brands, Inc. (``Eko 
Brands''); Evermuch Technology Co., Ltd. (``Evermuch Technology''); 
Ever Much Company Ltd. (``Evermuch Company''); Melitta USA, Inc. 
(``Melitta''); Spark Innovators Corp. (``Spark''); LBP Manufacturing 
Inc. and LBP Packaging (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd. (together, ``LBP''); B. 
Marlboros International Ltd. (HK) (``B. Marlboros''); and Amazon.com, 
Inc. (``Amazon''). 79 FR 53445. The Office of Unfair Import 
Investigations was also named as a party to the investigation. Id.
    The Commission terminated the investigation with respect to 
Melitta, Spark, LBP, and B. Marlboros based on the entry of consent 
orders and terminated the investigation with respect to Amazon based on 
a settlement agreement. Order No. 10 (Nov. 19, 2014), unreviewed by 
Notice (Dec. 18, 2014); Order No. 12 (Dec. 16, 2014), unreviewed by 
Notice (Jan. 13, 2015); Order No. 14 (Feb. 26, 2015), unreviewed by 
Notice (Mar. 27, 2015); Order No. 16 (Mar. 18, 2015), unreviewed by 
Notice (Apr. 13, 2015). The Commission also found Eko Brands, Evermuch 
Technology, and Evermuch Company in default for failing to respond to 
the complaint and notice of investigation. Order No. 19 (Apr. 22, 
2015), unreviewed by Notice (May 18, 2015). ARM later withdrew its 
allegations with respect to claims 8 and 19 of the '320 patent. See 
Order No. 18 (Mar. 24, 2015), unreviewed by Notice (Apr. 21, 2015). 
Accordingly, the only allegations remaining against active respondents 
were that Solofill and DongGuan violated section 337 with respect to 
claims 5-7, 18, and 20 of the '320 patent.
    On March 17, 2016, the Commission issued a final determination of 
no violation by Solofill and DongGuan based on its finding that claims 
5-7, 18, and 20 of the '320 patent are invalid. 81 FR 15742-43 (Mar. 
24, 2016). The Commission, however, found that ARM satisfied the 
requirements of section 337(g)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)) with respect 
to Eko Brands, Evermuch Technology, and Evermuch Company regarding 
claims 8 and 19 of the '320 patent, and issued an LEO and three CDOs 
against those entities based on those patent claims. Id. Espresso 
Supply, Inc. purchased Eko Brands in November of 2015 and became 
subject to the orders against Eko Brands.
    On June 14, 2018, in litigation between Eko Brands and ARM, the 
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington entered an 
order finding that claims 5, 8, and 18-19 of the '320 patent are 
invalid as obvious. Eko Brands, LLC v. Adrian Rivera Maynez 
Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-00522-JPD, 2018 WL 2984691 (W.D. 
Was. Jun. 14, 2018). On July 30, 2018, the Commission temporarily 
rescinded the LEO and CDOs regarding claims 8 and 19 pending the 
resolution of any appeal of the district court decision. 83 FR 38178-79 
(Aug. 3, 2018). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 
affirmed the district court findings of invalidity of claims 5, 8, and 
18-19 of the '320 patent on January 13, 2020, and issued its mandate on 
February 19, 2020. Eko Brands, LLC v. Adrian Rivera Maynez Enterprises, 
Inc., 946 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2020).
    On July 26, 2022, Eko Brands and Espresso Supply, Inc. filed an 
unopposed petition pursuant to Commission Rule 210.76(a) (19 CFR 
210.76(a)) to permanently rescind the LEO and CDO issued against them. 
They state that, as claims 8 and 19 of the '320 patent have been found 
invalid by the Federal Circuit and the time for further appeal has 
passed, the Commission should permanently rescind the LEO and CDO. No 
party responded to the petition.
    Having reviewed the petition seeking to rescind the LEO and CDO 
based on a subsequent finding that claims 8 and 19 of the '320 patent 
are invalid, the Commission finds that the conditions which led to the 
issuance of the LEO and CDO no longer exist, and therefore, granting 
the petition to rescind is warranted under section 337(k) (19 U.S.C. 
1337(k)) and the requirements of Commission Rule 210.76(a) are 
satisfied. The Commission issued the orders under the presumption that 
those claims were valid (35 U.S.C. 282), which is a condition that no 
longer exists in light of the district court and Federal Circuit 
rulings. That changed condition also applies with respect to Evermuch 
Technology and Evermuch Company. Accordingly, the Commission has 
determined to institute a rescission proceeding, and to rescind the LEO 
and three CDOs issued against Eko Brands, Evermuch Technology, and 
Evermuch Company. The rescission proceeding is terminated.
    The Commission vote for this determination took place on August 25, 
2022.
    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: August 25, 2022.
Katherine Hiner,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2022-18752 Filed 8-30-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P