Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Notices 25747 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–562] 

Certain Incremental Dental Positioning 

Adjustment Appliances and Methods 

of Producing Same; Notice of 

Institution of Formal Enforcement 

Proceeding 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has instituted a formal 

enforcement proceeding relating to the 

November 13, 2006, consent order 

issued in the above-captioned 

investigation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Clint A. Gerdine, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–3061. Copies of all nonconfidential 

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 

the matter can be obtained by contacting 

the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 

205–1810. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Commission instituted the underlying 

investigation in this matter on February 

15, 2006, based on a complaint filed by 

Align Technology, Inc. (‘‘Align’’) of 

Santa Clara, California (now of San Jose, 

California). 71 FR 7995–96. The 

complaint alleged violations of section 

337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, 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 incremental dental positioning 

adjustment appliances by reason of 

infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patent Nos. 6,685,469; 6,450,807; 

6,394,801; 6,398,548; 6,722,880 (‘‘the 

’880 patent’’); 6,629,840; 6,699,037; 

6,318,994; 6,729,876; 6,602,070; 

6,471,511 (‘‘the ’511 patent’’); and 

6,227,850. The complaint also alleged a 

violation of section 337 by reason of 

misappropriation of trade secrets. The 

Commission’s notice of investigation 

named OrthoClear, Inc. of San 

Francisco, California; OrthoClear 

Holdings, Inc. of Tortola, British Virgin 

Islands; and OrthoClear Pakistan Pvt, 

Ltd. of Lahore, Pakistan as respondents. 

On July 11, 2006, the ALJ granted 

Align’s motion to terminate the 

investigation as to the ’807 patent, 

which the Commission determined not 

to review. Order No. 10 (July 11, 2006), 

Notice of Non-Review (July 20, 2006). 

On November 13, 2006, the 

Commission issued notice of its 

determination not to review the 

presiding administrative law judge’s 

initial determination granting Align’s 

and respondents’ joint motion to 

terminate the investigation as to 

respondents (and in its entirety) based 

on a consent order. The consent order 

prohibits the importing, offering for 

sale, and selling for importation in the 

United States incremental dental 

positioning adjustment appliances and 

any other articles that infringe the 

asserted patents or that contain or use 

the asserted trade secrets. 

On March 1, 2012, Align filed a 

complaint for enforcement proceedings 

under Commission Rule 210.75. On 

March 22, 2012, Align filed a corrected 

complaint for enforcement. Align asserts 

that the successors and bound officers of 

the original respondents have violated 

the November 13, 2006, consent order 

by the continued practice of prohibited 

activities such as importing, offering for 

sale, and selling for importation into the 

United States incremental dental 

positioning adjustment appliances and 

other related products that infringe the 

’511 and ’880 patents. On March 23, 

2012, counsel for proposed respondent 

ClearCorrect Operating, LLC 

(‘‘ClearCorrect USA’’) submitted a letter 

opposing institution of the enforcement 

proceeding. On March 28, 2012, Align 

responded to ClearCorrect USA’s 

submission. 

Having examined the complaint 

seeking a formal enforcement 

proceeding, and having found that the 

complaint complies with the 

requirements for institution of a formal 

enforcement proceeding contained in 

Commission rule 210.75, the 

Commission has determined to institute 

formal enforcement proceedings to 

determine whether ClearCorrect USA of 

Houston, Texas; ClearCorrect Pakistan 

(Private), Ltd. (‘‘ClearCorrect Pakistan’’) 

of Lahore, Pakistan; and Mudassar 

Rathore, Waqas Wahab, Nadeem Arif, 

and Asim Waheed (‘‘the bound 

officers’’), all c/o ClearCorrect Pakistan, 

are in violation of the November 13, 

2006, consent order issued in the 

investigation with respect to the ’511 

and ’880 patents, and what, if any, 

enforcement measures are appropriate. 

The following entities are named as 

parties to the formal enforcement 

proceeding: (1) Align; (2) respondents 

ClearCorrect USA, ClearCorrect 

Pakistan, and the bound officers; and (3) 

the Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations. 

The Commission notes that the 

threshold issue appears to be whether 

the accused digital datasets identified in 

the enforcement complaint that are 

allegedly imported into the United 

States are within the scope of the 

articles covered by the consent order. In 

instituting this enforcement proceeding, 

the Commission has not made any 

determination as to whether such digital 

datasets are within the scope of the 

consent order sought to be enforced. 

Accordingly, the presiding 

administrative law judge may wish to 

consider this issue at an early date. Any 

such decision should be issued in the 

form of an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) 

under Commission rule 210.42(c), 19 

CFR 210.42(c). The ID will become the 

Commission’s final determination 45 

days after the date of service of the ID 

unless the Commission determines to 

review the ID. Any such review will be 

conducted in accordance with 

Commission rules 210.43, 210.4, and 

210.45, 19 CFR 210.43, 210.44, and 

210.45. 

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 

section 210.75 of the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

210.75). 

Issued: April 25, 2012. 

By order of the Commission. 

James R. Holbein, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10367 Filed 4–30–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Inv. No. 337–TA–840] 

Certain Semiconductor Integrated 

Circuit Devices and Products 

Containing Same; Institution of 

Investigation Pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 

1337 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

25748 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 1, 2012 / Notices 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a 

complaint was filed with the U.S. 

International Trade Commission on 

March 23, 2012, under section 337 of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 

U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of Microchip 

Technology Incorporated of Chandler, 

Arizona. A corrected complaint was 

filed on March 30, 2012. An amended 

complaint and supplement were filed 

on April 16, 2012. The complaint, as 

amended, alleges violations of section 

337 based upon the importation into the 

United States, the sale for importation, 

and the sale within the United States 

after importation of certain 

semiconductor integrated circuit 

devices and products containing same 

by reason of infringement of certain 

claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,225,088 

(‘‘the ’088 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 

6,245,597 (‘‘the ’597 patent’’); U.S. 

Patent No. 6,159,765 (‘‘the ’765 patent’’); 

U.S. Patent No. 5,760,720 (‘‘the ’720 

patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 6,559,783 (‘‘the 

’783 patent’’); and U.S. Patent No. 

6,847,904 (‘‘the ’904 patent’’). The 

complaint further alleges that an 

industry in the United States exists as 

required by subsection (a)(2) of section 

337. 

The complainant requests that the 

Commission institute an investigation 

and, after the investigation, issue an 

exclusion order and cease and desist 

orders. 

ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for 

any confidential information contained 

therein, is 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., Room 

112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone 

(202) 205–2000. Hearing impaired 

individuals are advised that information 

on this matter can be obtained by 

contacting the Commission’s TDD 

terminal on (202) 205–1810. Persons 

with mobility impairments who will 

need special assistance in gaining access 

to the Commission should contact the 

Office of the Secretary at (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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The 

Office of the Secretary, Docket Services, 

U.S. International Trade Commission, 

telephone (202) 205–1802. 

Authority: The authority for institution of 

this investigation is contained in section 337 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and 

in section 210.10 of the Commission’s Rules 

of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 

(2012). 

Scope of Investigation: Having 

considered the complaint, the U.S. 

International Trade Commission, on 

April 24, 2012, ordered that— 

(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, an investigation be instituted 

to determine whether there is a 

violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of 

section 337 in the importation into the 

United States, the sale for importation, 

or the sale within the United States after 

importation of certain semiconductor 

integrated circuit devices and products 

containing same that infringe one or 

more of claims 1, 2, 9, 10, 16–18, 25, 26, 

and 32 of the ’088 patent; claims 3, 7, 

8, 11, 12, and 14 of the ’597 patent; 

claims 1–6 of the ’765 patent; claims 12 

and 14 of the ’720 patent; claims 1, 5, 

7, 9, 14–17, 19–24, 26, 28–33, 35, 37, 38, 

and 41 of the ’904 patent; and claims 1, 

2, 6, 7, 9, and 12 of the ’783 patent, and 

whether an industry in the United 

States exists as required by subsection 

(a)(2) of section 337; 

(2) For the purpose of the 

investigation so instituted, the following 

are hereby named as parties upon which 

this notice of investigation shall be 

served: 

(a) The complainant is: 

Microchip Technology Incorporated, 

2355 West Chandler Boulevard, 

Chandler, AZ 85224–6199. 

(b) The respondents are the following 

entities alleged to be in violation of 

section 337, and are the parties upon 

which the complaint is to be served: 

Intersil Corporation, 1001 Murphy 

Ranch Road, Milpitas, CA 95035. 

Zilker Labs, Inc., 4301 Westbank Drive, 

Building A–100, Austin, TX 78746. 

Techwell LLC, 1001 Murphy Ranch 

Road, Milpitas, CA 95035. 

(3) For the investigation so instituted, 

the Chief Administrative Law Judge, 

U.S. International Trade Commission, 

shall designate the presiding 

Administrative Law Judge. 

(4) The Office of Unfair Import 

Investigation will not participate as a 

party in this investigation. 

Responses to the complaint and the 

notice of investigation must be 

submitted by the named respondents in 

accordance with section 210.13 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 

19 CFR 201.16(d)–(e) and 210.13(a), 

such responses will be considered by 

the Commission if received not later 

than 20 days after the date of service by 

the Commission of the complaint and 

the notice of investigation. Extensions of 

time for submitting responses to the 

complaint and the notice of 

investigation will not be granted unless 

good cause therefor is shown. 

Failure of a respondent to file a timely 

response to each allegation in the 

complaint and in this notice may be 

deemed to constitute a waiver of the 

right to appear and contest the 

allegations of the complaint and this 

notice, and to authorize the 

administrative law judge and the 

Commission, without further notice to 

the respondent, to find the facts to be as 

alleged in the complaint and this notice 

and to enter an initial determination 

and a final determination containing 

such findings, and may result in the 

issuance of an exclusion order or a cease 

and desist order or both directed against 

the respondent. 

Issued: April 25, 2012. 

By order of the Commission. 

James R. Holbein, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2012–10366 Filed 4–30–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[USITC SE–12–014] 

Sunshine Act Meeting 

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: United 

States International Trade Commission. 

TIME AND DATE: May 15, 2012 at 9:30 

a.m. 

PLACE: Room 101, 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. No. 731–TA–860 

(Second Review) (Tin- and ChromiumCoated Steel Sheet from Japan). The 

Commission is currently scheduled to 

transmit its determination and 

Commissioners’ opinions to the 

Secretary of Commerce on or before May 

25, 2012. 

5. Vote in Inv. No. 731–TA–891 

(Second Review)(Foundry Coke from 

China). The Commission is currently 

scheduled to transmit its determination 

and Commissioners’ opinions to the 

Secretary of Commerce on or before May 

29, 2012. 

6. 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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES