Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 62 / Thursday, March 31, 2011 / Notices 17965 

Dated: March 14, 2011. 

Alvin Foster, 

Acting Chief Information Officer—Indian 

Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7586 Filed 3–30–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–4M–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Advisory Board for Exceptional 

Children 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of meeting. 

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Indian 

Education (BIE) is announcing that the 

Advisory Board for Exceptional 

Children (Advisory Board) will hold its 

next meeting in Riverside, California. 

The purpose of the meeting is to meet 

the mandates of the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act of 2004 

(IDEA) for Indian children with 

disabilities. 

DATES: The Advisory Board will meet on 

Thursday, May 5, 2011, from 8 a.m. to 

4 p.m. and Friday, May 6, 2011, from 8 

a.m. to 4 p.m. Pacific Standard Time. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at 

the Sherman Indian High School, 9010 

Magnolia Avenue, Riverside, California 

92503; telephone number (951) 276– 

6325. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sue 

Bement, Designated Federal Official, 

Bureau of Indian Education, 

Albuquerque Service Center, Division of 

Performance and Accountability, 1011 

Indian School Road, NW., Suite 332, 

Albuquerque, NM 87104; telephone 

number (505) 563–5274. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with the Federal Advisory 

Committee Act, the BIE is announcing 

that the Advisory Board will hold its 

next meeting in Riverside, California. 

The Advisory Board was established 

under the IDEA (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.) 

to advise the Secretary of the Interior, 

through the Assistant Secretary—Indian 

Affairs, on the needs of Indian children 

with disabilities. The meetings are open 

to the public. 

The following items will be on the 

agenda: 

• Report from Gloria Yepa, 

Supervisory Education Specialist, BIE, 

Division of Performance and 

Accountability. 

• Report from BIE Director’s Office. 

• Report from Dr. Jeffrey Hamley, 

Associate Deputy Director, BIE. 

• Advisory Board work on priorities. 

• Native American Student 

Information System (NASIS) Update. 

• Native Star Update—Gaye Leia 

King. 

• Public Comment (via conference 

call, May 5, 2011, meeting only*). 

• Panel discussion with Special 

Education faculty from Sherman Indian 

School, Riverside, California. 

• BIE Advisory Board—Advice and 

Recommendations. 

*During the May 5, 2011, meeting, 

time has been set aside for public 

comment via conference call from 11:30 

a.m.–12 p.m. Pacific Standard Time. 

The call-in information is: Conference 

Number 1–888–417–0376, Passcode 

1509140. 

Dated: March 21, 2011. 

Donald Laverdure, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian 

Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7582 Filed 3–30–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–6W–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–703] 

In the Matter of Certain Mobile 

Telephones and Wireless 

Communication Devices Featuring 

Digital Cameras, and Components 

Thereof Notice of Commission 

Determination To Review A Final 

Determination of No Violation of 

Section 337; Schedule for Filing 

Written Submissions on the Issues 

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’’) 

issued by the presiding administrative 

law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on January 24, 2011, 

finding no violation of section 337 in 

the above-captioned investigation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sidney A. Rosenzweig, Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–2532. 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: This 

investigation was instituted on February 

23, 2010, based upon a complaint filed 

on behalf of Eastman Kodak Company of 

Rochester, New York (‘‘Kodak’’) on 

January 14, 2010, and supplemented on 

February 4, 2010. 75 FR 8112. 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 mobile 

telephones and wireless communication 

devices featuring digital cameras, and 

components thereof, that infringe 

certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 

6,292,218 (‘‘the ’218 patent’’). The 

complaint named as respondents Apple, 

Inc., of Cupertino, Calif. (‘‘Apple’’); 

Research in Motion, Ltd., of Ontario, 

Canada; and Research in Motion Corp., 

of Irving, Texas (collectively, ‘‘RIM’’). 

Claim 15 is now the only claim in issue. 

On January 24, 2011, the ALJ issued 

a final ID finding no violation of section 

337. The ALJ found that none of the 

accused Apple and RIM products 

infringe asserted claim 15 of the ’218 

patent. In addition, the ALJ found that 

claim 15 is invalid for obviousness 

under 35 U.S.C. 103. The ALJ found, 

however, that the domestic industry 

requirement is satisfied with respect to 

the asserted patent. With respect to 

remedy, the ALJ recommended that if 

the Commission disagrees with the 

finding of no violation, the Commission 

should issue a limited exclusion order 

and cease and desist orders directed to 

Apple and RIM. In addition, the ALJ 

recommended, in the event that a 

violation is found, that no bond be 

required during the Presidential review 

period. 

On February 7, 2011, Kodak, Apple, 

RIM, and the Commission investigative 

attorney each filed a petition for review 

of the ALJ’s final ID. The parties each 

filed a response submission on February 

15, 2011. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s final 

ID and the submissions of the parties, 

the Commission has determined to 

review the final ID in its entirety. 

The parties should brief their 

positions on the issues on review with 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES
17966 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 62 / Thursday, March 31, 2011 / Notices 

reference to the applicable law and the 

evidentiary record. In connection with 

its review, the Commission is 

particularly interested in responses to 

the following questions: 

1. Kodak has argued in its petition for 

review that the ALJ made a ruling on 

obviousness with respect to prior art 

combinations that Kodak did not have 

an opportunity to address. The parties 

should address whether the ALJ 

permissibly relied on these prior art 

combinations and whether these 

combinations render claim 15 invalid 

for obviousness. 

2. Kodak has argued in its petition for 

review that the ALJ did not address the 

claim constructions of the presiding ALJ 

in Inv. No. 337–TA–663. The parties 

should address whether the ALJ should 

have considered the claim constructions 

in Inv. No. 337–TA–663 and what effect 

those constructions should have in this 

case. 

3. Kodak has argued in its petition for 

review that the ALJ did not address the 

reexaminations at the U.S. Patent and 

Trademark Office of the ’218 patent. The 

parties should address whether the ALJ 

should have considered the 

reexaminations and what effect those 

reexaminations should have in this case. 

4. Please explain whether U.S. Patent 

No. 5,493,335 is prior art, and if so, on 

what statutory basis. 

5. What is the meaning of ‘‘color pixel 

value’’ in part (b) of claim 15? Is it ‘‘the 

value of a color pixel’’? In your answer, 

address the patent’s discussion of each 

red, green, or blue element of a display 

being a ‘‘pixel’’ (column 8 lines 17–28). 

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 a respondent 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 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 United States 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 and 

prescribed by the Secretary of the 

Treasury. 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 are requested to file 

written submissions on the issues 

identified in this notice. 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 Commission investigative 

attorney are also requested to submit 

proposed remedial orders for the 

Commission’s consideration. 

Complainant is also requested to state 

the date that the patent expires 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 Friday April 

8, 2011. Reply submissions must be 

filed no later than the close of business 

on Friday April 15, 2011. The written 

submissions must be no longer than 100 

pages and the reply submissions must 

be no longer than 50 pages. 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 non-confidential 

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). 

Issued: March 25, 2011. 

By order of the Commission. 

James R. Holbein, 

Acting Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7553 Filed 3–30–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[USITC SE–11–008] 

Government In the Sunshine Act 

Meeting Notice 

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: United 

States International Trade Commission. 

TIME AND DATE: April 12, 2011 at 11 a.m. 

PLACE: Room 110, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436. Telephone: 

(202) 205–2000. 

STATUS: Open to the public. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

1. Agendas for future meetings: none. 

2. Minutes. 

3. Ratification List. 

4. Vote in Inv. Nos. 731–TA–1084– 

1087 (Review) (Purified 

Carboxymethylcellulose from Finland, 

Mexico, Netherlands, and Sweden). The 

Commission is currently scheduled to 

transmit its determinations and 

Commissioners’ opinions to the 

Secretary of Commerce on or before May 

3, 2011. 

5. Outstanding action jackets: none. 

In accordance with Commission 

policy, subject matter listed above, not 

disposed of at the scheduled meeting, 

may be carried over to the agenda of the 

following meeting. Earlier Notification 

of this meeting was not possible. 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES