Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 231 / Tuesday, December 1, 2020 / Notices 77239 

the United States after importation of 

certain digital imaging devices and 

products containing the same and 

components thereof by reason of 

infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patent No. 6,838,651 (‘‘the ’651 patent’’); 

U.S. Patent No. 7,800,145 (‘‘the ’145 

patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 7,064,768 (‘‘the 

’768 patent’’); and U.S. Patent No. 

7,323,671 (‘‘the ’671 patent’’); and that 

an industry in the United States exists 

as required by the applicable Federal 

Statute. The amended complaint further 

alleges violations of section 337 based 

upon the importation into the United 

States, or in the sale of certain digital 

imaging devices and products 

containing the same and components 

thereof by reason of misappropriation of 

trade secrets, the threat or effect of 

which is to destroy or substantially 

injure an industry in the United States. 

The complainant requests that the 

Commission institute an investigation 

and, after the investigation, issue a 

limited exclusion order and cease and 

desist orders. 

ADDRESSES: The amended complaint, 

except for any confidential information 

contained therein, may be viewed on 

the Commission’s electronic docket 

(EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help 

accessing EDIS, please email 

EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. 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 

https://www.usitc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Pathenia M. Proctor, The Office of 

Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. 

International Trade Commission, 

telephone (202) 205–2560. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority: The authority for 

institution of this investigation is 

contained in section 337 of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 

1337, and in section 210.10 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2020). 

Scope of Investigation: Having 

considered the amended complaint, the 

U.S. International Trade Commission, 

on November 24, 2020, ordered that— 

(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, an investigation be instituted 

to determine: 

(a) 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 products identified in paragraph 

(2) by reason of infringement of one or 

more of claim 1–12 and 18 of the ’651 

patent; claims 1 and 12 of the ’145 

patent; claims 1, 2, 8, and 13 of the ’768 

patent; and claims 1–26 of the ’671 

patent, and whether an industry in the 

United States exists as required by 

subsection (a)(2) of section 337; 

(b) whether there is a violation of 

subsection (a)(1)(A) of section 337 in the 

importation, or in the sale of certain 

products identified in paragraph (2) by 

reason of misappropriation of trade 

secrets, the threat or effect of which is 

to destroy or substantially injure an 

industry in the United States; 

(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of 

the Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the 

plain language description of the 

accused products or category of accused 

products, which defines the scope of the 

investigation, is ‘‘digital imaging sensors 

and mobile phone handsets, tablet 

computers, laptop computers, web 

cameras, home monitoring cameras, and 

digital cameras that contain those 

sensors’’; 

(3) 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: Pictos 

Technologies, Inc, 109 Bonaventura 

Drive, San Jose CA 95134. 

(b) The respondents are the following 

entities alleged to be in violation of 

section 337, and are the parties upon 

which the amended complaint is to be 

served: 

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 129 

Samseong-Ro, Yeongtong-Gu, Suwon, 

Gyeonggi 16677, Republic of Korea 

Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 85 

Challenger Rd., Ridgefield Park, NJ 

07660–2118 

Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., 3655 

North First Street, San Jose, CA 

95134–1713 

(c) The Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW, Suite 

401, Washington, DC 20436; and 

(4) For the investigation so instituted, 

the Chief Administrative Law Judge, 

U.S. International Trade Commission, 

shall designate the presiding 

Administrative Law Judge. 

Responses to the amended 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(e) and 210.13(a), as 

amended in 85 FR 15798 (March 19, 

2020), such responses will be 

considered by the Commission if 

received not later than 20 days after the 

date of service by the complainant of the 

amended complaint and the notice of 

investigation. Extensions of time for 

submitting responses to the amended 

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 

amended 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 amended 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. 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: November 25, 2020. 

Katherine Hiner, 

Supervisory Attorney. 

[FR Doc. 2020–26467 Filed 11–30–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–1216] 

Certain Vacuum Insulated Flasks and 

Components Thereof; Notice of a 

Commission Determination Not To 

Review an Initial Determination 

Granting Complainants’ Motion To 

Amend the Complaint and the Notice 

of Investigation 

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. 12) of the presiding chief 

administrative law judge (‘‘CALJ’’) 

granting complainants’ motion to amend 

the complaint and the notice of 

investigation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES4
77240 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 231 / Tuesday, December 1, 2020 / Notices 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–2392. 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 

EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. 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 3, 2020, the Commission 

instituted this investigation under 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section 

337’’), based on a complaint filed by 

Steel Technology LLC d/b/a Hydro 

Flask and Helen of Troy Limited 

(collectively, ‘‘Complainants’’). 85 FR 

55030–31 (Sep. 3, 2020). The complaint 

alleges a violation 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 vacuum insulated flasks and 

components thereof by reason of 

infringement of: (1) The sole claim of 

U.S. Design Patent Nos. D806,468; 

D786,012 (‘‘the ’012 patent’’); and 

D799,320; and (2) U.S. Trademark 

Registration Nos. 4,055,784; 5,295,365; 

5,176,888; and 4,806,282. The 

complaint also alleges the existence of 

a domestic industry. The notice of 

investigation names the following as 

respondents: Everich and Tomic 

Houseware Co., Ltd. of Hangzhou, China 

(‘‘Everich’’); Cangnan Kaiyisi ECommerce Technology, Co., Ltd. of 

Wenzhou, Zhejiang, China; Shenzhen 

Huichengyuan Technology Co., Ltd. of 

Shenzhen, Guangdong, China; Sinbada 

Impex Co., Ltd. of Hefei, Anhui, China; 

Yongkang Huiyun Commodity Co., Ltd. 

of Jinhua, Zhejiang, China; Wuyi Loncin 

Bottle Co., Limited of Jinhua, Zhejiang, 

China; Yiwu Honglu Daily Necessities 

Co., Ltd. of Yiwu City, Zhejiang, China; 

Zhejiang Yuchuan Industry & Trade Co., 

Ltd. of Jinhua, Zhejiang, China; Zhejiang 

Yongkang Unique Industry & Trade Co., 

Ltd. of Jinhua, Zhejiang, China; Suzhou 

Prime Gifts Co., Ltd. of Suzhou, Jiangsu, 

China; Hangzhou Yuehua Technology 

Co., Ltd. of Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China; 

Guangzhou Yawen Technology Co., Ltd. 

of Guangzhou, China; Yiwu Yiju Ecommerce Firm of Yiwu City, Zhejiang 

Province, China; Jinhua Ruizhi 

Electronic Commerce Co., Ltd. of Jinhua 

City, Zhejiang Province, China; Womart 

(Tianjin) International Trade Co., Ltd. of 

Tianjin, China; Shenzhen Yaxin General 

Machinery Co., Ltd. of Shenzhen, China; 

Dunhuang Group a.k.a. DHgate of 

Beijing, China; Eddie Bauer, LLC of 

Bellevue, Washington; PSEB Holdings, 

LLC of Wilmington, Delaware; and 

HydroFlaskPup of Phoenix, Arizona. Id. 

at 55031. The Commission’s Office of 

Unfair Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) is 

also named as a party in this 

investigation. Id. 

On October 16, 2020, Complainants 

moved to amend the complaint and 

notice of investigation to: ‘‘(1) assert the 

’012 patent against additional infringing 

products sold by Everich; (2) 

incorporate into the complaint the 

information and additional paragraphs 

included in Complainants’ 

Supplemental Letter to the Commission 

of August 18, 2020; and (3) correct the 

corporate names of four non-appearing 

respondents.’’ Mot. at 1. Specifically, 

the requested amendment seeks to 

amend the complaint and notice of 

investigation to correctly name Yiwu 

Yiju E-Commerce Firm as ‘‘Yiwu Houju 

E-Commerce Firm,’’ Jinhua Ruizhi 

Electronic Commerce Co., Ltd. as 

‘‘Jinhua City Ruizhi E-Commerce Co., 

Ltd.,’’ Womart (Tianjin) International 

Trade Co., Ltd. as ‘‘Wo Ma Te (Tianjin) 

International Trade Co., Ltd.,’’ and 

Shenzhen Yaxin General Machinery Co., 

Ltd. as ‘‘Shenzhen City Yaxin General 

Machinery Co., Ltd.’’ Id. On October 28, 

2020, Everich filed an opposition to the 

motion with respect to Complainants’ 

first proposed amendment, but took no 

position as to the second and third 

proposed amendments. Opp. at 2. n.1. 

According to the motion, respondents 

Eddie Bauer, LLC and Dunhuang Group 

took no position. Mot. at 3. On October 

28, 2020, OUII filed a response in 

support of the motion. 

On November 6, 2020, the CALJ 

issued the subject ID (Order No. 12) 

granting Complainants’ motion. Based 

on the review of the evidence, the ID 

finds that good cause exists to amend 

the complaint and the notice of 

institution of investigation. The ID also 

finds that amending the complaint and 

notice of investigation will promote 

judicial efficiency and is not prejudicial 

to any party. No party petitioned for 

review of the ID. 

The Commission has determined not 

to review the subject ID. 

The Commission vote for this 

determination took place on November 

24, 2020. 

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: November 24, 2020. 

William Bishop, 

Supervisory Hearings and Information 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2020–26409 Filed 11–30–20; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms 

and Explosives 

[OMB Number 1140–0080] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed eCollection 

eComments Requested; Notification of 

Change of Mailing or Premise Address 

AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 

Firearms and Explosives, Department of 

Justice. 

ACTION: 30-Day notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Justice 

(DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 

Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will 

submit the following information 

collection request to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review and approval in accordance with 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Comments are encouraged and 

will be accepted for an additional 30 

days until December 31, 2020. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments and 

recommendations for the proposed 

information collection should be sent 

within 30 days of publication of this 

notice to www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain. Find this particular 

information collection by selecting 

‘‘Currently under 30-day Review—Open 

for Public Comments’’ or by using the 

search function. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Written 

comments and suggestions from the 

public and affected agencies concerning 

the proposed collection of information 

are encouraged. Your comments should 

address one or more of the following 

four points: 

—Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

—Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

—Evaluate whether and if so how the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES4