7104 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 26, 2021 / Notices 

public comment period may end before 

the time indicated following the last call 

for comments. Contact Deborah GartrellKemp to register as a speaker. Meeting 

materials will be posted at https://

www.usfa.fema.gov/training/nfa/about/ 

bov.html by March 1, 2021. 

Eriks J. Gabliks, 

Superintendent, National Fire Academy, 

United States Fire Administration, Federal 

Emergency Management Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2021–01571 Filed 1–25–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–74–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–1241] 

Certain Electrical Connectors and 

Cages, Components Thereof, and 

Products Containing the Same: 

Institution of Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a 

complaint was filed with the U.S. 

International Trade Commission on 

December 18, 2020, under section 337 of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on 

behalf of Amphenol Corp. of 

Wallingford, Connecticut. Supplements 

to the complaint were filed on 

December 22, 2020 and January 6, 2021. 

The complaint, as supplemented, 

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 electrical 

connectors and cages, components 

thereof, and products containing the 

same by reason of infringement of 

certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 

7,371,117 (‘‘the ’117 Patent’’); U.S. 

Patent No. 8,371,875 (‘‘the ’875 Patent’’); 

U.S. Patent No. 8,864,521 (‘‘the ’521 

Patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 9,705,255 (‘‘the 

’255 Patent’’); and U.S. Patent No. 

10,381,767 (‘‘the ’767 Patent’’). The 

complaint further alleges that an 

industry in the United States exists as 

required by the applicable Federal 

Statute. 

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 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: 

Katherine Hiner, Office of Docket 

Services, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, telephone (202) 205–1802. 

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 complaint, the U.S. 

International Trade Commission, on 

January 19, 2021, 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 products 

identified in paragraph (2) by reason of 

infringement of one or more of claims 1, 

2, 9, 11, 24–27, and 29 of the ’117 

patent; claims 1, 2, 9, 10, 12, and 13 of 

the ’875 patent; claims 33–35, 38–40, 

45, 46, and 48–50 of the ’521 patent; 

claims 1–3, 5–8, 12–14, and 16–18 of 

the ’255 patent; claims 1–7, 9–17, 19– 

23, 24–27, and 28–30 of the ’767 patent; 

and whether an industry in the United 

States exists as required by subsection 

(a)(2) of section 337; 

(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 ‘‘high speed electrical 

connectors, components thereof, 

electrical connectors disposed within 

metal cages, and products containing 

the same, including electrical 

connectors mounted to printed circuit 

boards, such as test boards, test fixtures, 

or mated compliance boards;’’ 

(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: Amphenol 

Corp. 358 Hall Ave. Wallingford, CT 

06492. 

(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: 

Luxshare Precision Industry Co., Ltd. 

No. 17 Kuiqing Rd. Qinghuang 

Industrial Zone, Qingxi Town 

Dongguan City, Guangdong province, 

523650 China 

Dongguan Luxshare Precision Industry 

Co. Ltd. Floor 1, Building 5, No. 313, 

Beihuan Road, Qingxi Town, 

Dongguan City, Guangdong province, 

523000 China 

Luxshare Precision Limited (HK) Unit 

2018, 20F, Shatin Galleria 18–24 Shan 

Mei Street Fotan, New Territories, 

Hong Kong 

Luxshare-ICT Inc. 890 Hillview Court, 

#200 Milpitas, CA 95035 

(4) For the investigation so instituted, 

the Chief Administrative Law Judge, 

U.S. International Trade Commission, 

shall designate the presiding 

Administrative Law Judge. 

The Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations 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(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 

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. 

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 15 / Tuesday, January 26, 2021 / Notices 7105 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: January 21, 2021. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2021–01649 Filed 1–25–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–1118 (Advisory 

Opinion Proceeding)] 

Certain Movable Barrier Operator 

Systems and Components Thereof 

Notice of a Commission Determination 

To Institute an Advisory Opinion 

Proceeding 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) has 

determined to institute an advisory 

opinion proceeding, as requested by 

respondents Nortek Security & Control, 

LLC of Carlsbad, California; Nortek, Inc. 

of Providence, Rhode Island; and GTO 

Access Systems, LLC of Tallahassee, 

Florida (collectively, ‘‘Nortek’’). The 

Commission has further determined to 

set a target date of six months from the 

date of institution for completion of this 

proceeding, and to refer this matter to 

the Chief Administrative Law Judge 

(‘‘CALJ’’) for assignment to an 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) for 

appropriate proceedings and a 

recommendation, to be completed 

within four months from the date of 

institution. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl 

P. Bretscher, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–2382. Copies of non-confidential 

documents filed in connection with this 

investigation may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket system 

(‘‘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, telephone 

(202) 205–1810. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Commission instituted this investigation 

on June 11, 2018, based on a complaint, 

as supplemented, filed by The 

Chamberlain Group, Inc. (‘‘CGI’’) of Oak 

Brook, Illinois. 83 FR 27020–21 (June 

11, 2018). The complaint alleges that 

Nortek violated section 337 of the Tariff 

Act, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 

(‘‘Section 337’’) by importing, selling for 

importation, or selling in the United 

States after importation certain movable 

barrier operator (‘‘MBO’’) systems, 

including garage door openers 

(‘‘GDOs’’), that allegedly infringe one or 

more of the asserted claims of U.S. 

Patent Nos. 7,755,223 (‘‘the ’223 

patent’’), 8,587,404 (‘‘the ’404 patent’’), 

and 6,741,052 (‘‘the ’052 patent’’). Id. 

The Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations was not named as a party 

to this investigation. Id. 

On December 12, 2018, CGI filed an 

opposed motion for summary 

determination that it satisfied the 

economic prong of the domestic 

industry requirement. On June 6, 2019, 

the presiding ALJ issued a notice 

advising the parties that the motion 

would be granted and a formal written 

order would follow. Order No. 26 (June 

6, 2019). 

On November 25, 2019, the ALJ 

issued Order No. 38, granting CGI’s 

motion for summary determination that 

its investments in labor and capital were 

‘‘significant’’ and satisfied the economic 

prong of the domestic industry 

requirement under 19 U.S.C. 

1337(a)(3)(B). Order No. 38 (Nov. 25, 

2019). Order No. 38 denied summary 

determination with respect to CGI’s 

investments in plant and equipment 

under 19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(3)(A). Id. 

On the same date, the ALJ issued the 

final Initial Determination on Violation 

of Section 337 (‘‘Final ID’’) and 

Recommended Determination on 

Remedy and Bond (‘‘RD’’), finding no 

violation of Section 337 because the 

asserted claims of the ’223 and ’404 

patents are not infringed and the 

asserted claim of the ’052 patent is 

invalid. 

On February 19, 2020, the 

Commission issued a notice of its 

determination to review Order No. 38 

and to partially review the Final ID with 

respect to certain issues relating to each 

of the three asserted patents. 85 FR 

10723–26 (Feb. 25, 2020). 

On April 22, 2020, the Commission 

affirmed there is no violation with 

respect to the ’404 and ’052 patents. 

Comm’n Notice at 3 (April 22, 2020). 

The Commission also vacated Order No. 

38 and remanded the economic prong 

issue to the presiding ALJ for further 

proceedings, while the Commission 

continued to review issues relating to 

the ’223 patent. Id.; Order Vacating and 

Remanding Order No. 38 (April 22, 

2020) (‘‘Remand Order’’). 

On July 10, 2020, the ALJ issued a 

Remand Initial Determination (‘‘Remand 

ID’’), finding that CGI made significant 

investments in plant and equipment and 

labor and capital sufficient to satisfy the 

economic prong of the domestic 

industry requirement under both 

Sections 337(a)(3)(A) and (B) (19 U.S.C. 

1337(a)(3)(A), (B)), respectively. 

Remand ID (July 10, 2020). On 

September 9, 2020, the Commission 

determined to review the Remand ID. 85 

FR 57249–51 (Sept. 15, 2020). 

On December 3, 2020, the 

Commission determined that Nortek 

violated Section 337 by way of 

infringing claims 1 and 21 of the ’223 

patent. The Commission issued a 

limited exclusion order and cease and 

desist orders against Nortek and 

imposed a bond in the amount of 100 

percent of the entered value of the 

covered products during the period of 

Presidential review. 

On December 18, 2020, Nortek filed 

the subject request for an advisory 

opinion that GDOs that allegedly 

operate their obstacle detectors at a 

constant energy level do not infringe 

asserted claims 1 or 21 of the ’223 

patent, and thus are not covered by the 

remedial orders. CGI filed its opposition 

to Nortek’s request on December 30, 

2020. 

On January 7, 2021, Nortek filed a 

motion seeking leave to file a reply to 

CGI’s opposition. On January 11, 2021, 

CGI opposed Nortek’s motion. The 

Commission has determined to deny 

Nortek’s motion. 

Having reviewed the parties’ 

submissions in view of the record 

below, the Commission has determined 

to institute an advisory opinion 

proceeding, per Nortek’s request, to 

ascertain whether GDOs that allegedly 

operate their obstacle detectors at a 

constant energy level infringe asserted 

claims 1 or 21 of the ’223 patent and are 

covered by the remedial orders issued in 

this investigation. The Commission has 

determined to refer the matter to the 

CALJ for assignment to an ALJ for 

appropriate proceedings and a 

recommendation. The ALJ shall conduct 

any appropriate proceedings and issue 

an initial advisory opinion within four 

months from the date that the 

Commission’s notice to conduct the 

proceeding is published in the Federal 

Register. The target date shall be two 

months thereafter. The ALJ may extend 

the target date, allowing two months for 

Commission review, for good cause. 

The Commission voted to approve 

these determinations on January 19, 

2021. 

The authority for the Commission’s 

determinations is contained in Section