6704 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 10, 2010 / Notices 

them under federal antidiscrimination 

and whistleblower protection laws. 

Antidiscrimination Laws 

A federal agency cannot discriminate 

against an employee or applicant with 

respect to the terms, conditions, or 

privileges of employment on the basis of 

race, color, religion, sex, national origin, 

age, disability, marital status or political 

affiliation. Discrimination on these 

bases is prohibited by one or more of the 

following statutes: 5 U.S.C. 2302(b)(1); 

29 U.S.C. 206(d); 29 U.S.C. 631; 29 

U.S.C. 633a; 29 U.S.C. 791; and 42 

U.S.C. 2000e–16. 

If you believe that you have been the 

victim of unlawful discrimination on 

the basis of race, color, religion, sex, 

national origin, or disability, you must 

contact an Equal Employment 

Opportunity (‘‘EEO’’) counselor within 

45 calendar days of the alleged 

discriminatory action, or in the case of 

a personnel action, within 45 calendar 

days of the effective date of the action, 

before you can file a formal complaint 

of discrimination with your agency. See, 

e.g., 29 CFR 1614. If you believe that 

you have been the victim of unlawful 

discrimination on the basis of age, you 

must either contact an EEO counselor as 

noted above, or give notice of intent to 

sue to the Equal Employment 

Opportunity Commission (‘‘EEOC’’) 

within 180 calendar days of the alleged 

discriminatory action. If you are alleging 

discrimination based on marital status 

or political affiliation, you may file a 

written complaint with the U.S. Office 

of Special Counsel (OSC) (See contact 

information below). 

Whistleblower Protection Laws 

A federal employee with authority to 

take, direct others to take, recommend, 

or approve any personnel action must 

not use that authority to take or fail to 

take, or threaten to take or fail to take, 

a personnel action against an employee 

or applicant because of disclosure of 

information by that individual that is 

reasonably believed to evidence 

violations of law, rule, or regulation; 

gross mismanagement; gross waste of 

funds; an abuse of authority; or a 

substantial and specific danger to public 

health or safety, unless disclosure of 

such information is specifically 

prohibited by law, and such information 

is specifically required by executive 

order to be kept secret in the interest of 

national defense or the conduct of 

foreign affairs. 

Retaliation against an employee or 

applicant for making a protected 

disclosure is prohibited by 5 U.S.C. 

2302(b)(8). If you believe that you have 

been the victim of whistleblower 

retaliation, you may file a written 

complaint (using Form OSC–11) with 

the U.S. Office of Special Counsel at 

1730 M Street, NW., Suite 218, 

Washington, DC 20036–4505 or online 

through the OSC Web site (http:// 

www.osc.gov). 

Retaliation for Engaging in Protected 

Activity 

A federal agency cannot retaliate 

against an employee or applicant 

because that individual exercises his or 

her rights under any of the federal 

antidiscrimination or whistleblower 

protection laws listed above. If you 

believe that you are the victim of 

retaliation for engaging in protected 

activity, you must follow, as 

appropriate, the procedures described in 

the Antidiscrimination Laws and 

Whistleblower Protection Laws sections. 

Disciplinary Actions 

Under the existing laws, each agency 

retains the right, where appropriate, to 

discipline a federal employee for 

conduct that is inconsistent with 

Federal Antidiscrimination and 

Whistleblower Protection Laws, up to 

and including removal from the federal 

service. If the OSC has initiated an 

investigation under 5 U.S.C. 1214, 

however, according to 5 U.S.C. 1214(f), 

agencies must seek approval from the 

Special Counsel to discipline employees 

for, among other activities, engaging in 

prohibited retaliation. Nothing in the No 

FEAR Act alters existing laws or permits 

an agency to take unfounded 

disciplinary action against a federal 

employee or to violate the procedural 

rights of a federal employee who has 

been accused of discrimination. 

Existing Rights Unchanged 

Pursuant to section 205 of the No 

FEAR Act, neither the Act nor this 

notice creates, expands or reduces any 

rights otherwise available to any 

employee, former employee, or 

applicant under the laws of the United 

States, including the provisions of law 

specified in 5 U.S.C. 2302(d). 

Additional Information 

Additional information regarding 

federal antidiscrimination, 

whistleblower protection, and 

retaliation laws can be found at the 

EEOC Web site (http://www.eeoc.gov) 

and the OSC Web site (http:// 

www.osc.gov). 

George T. Skibine, 

Acting Chairman. 

Steffani A. Cochran, 

Commissioner. 

[FR Doc. 2010–2901 Filed 2–9–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7565–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–663] 

In the Matter of Certain Mobile 

Telephones and Wireless 

Communication Devices Featuring 

Digital Cameras, and Components 

Thereof; Notice of the Commission’s 

Determination To Grant a Joint Motion 

To Terminate the Investigation With 

Respect to Respondents Samsung 

Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung 

Electronics America, Inc., and 

Samsung Telecommunications 

America, LLC on the Basis of a 

Settlement Agreement; Termination of 

the Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined to grant a 

joint motion to terminate the abovecaptioned investigation with respect to 

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung 

Electronics America, Inc., and Samsung 

Telecommunications America, LLC 

based upon a settlement agreement. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jia 

Chen, Esq., Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–4737. 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 (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. 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 27 / Wednesday, February 10, 2010 / Notices 6705 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Commission instituted this investigation 

on December 18, 2008, based on a 

complaint filed by Eastman Kodak 

Company (‘‘Kodak’’) of Rochester, New 

York. 73 FR 77061 (Dec. 18, 2008). The 

complainant named the following 

respondents: Samsung Electronics Co., 

Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 

Samsung Telecommunications America, 

LLC (collectively ‘‘Samsung’’), LG 

Electronics Inc., LG Electronics USA, 

Inc., and LG Electronics MobileComm 

USA, Inc. (collectively ‘‘LG’’). The 

complaint, as amended, alleged 

violations of section 337 of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the 

importation, sale for importation, and 

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 Nos. 5,493,335 

(‘‘the ’335 patent’’) and 6,292,218 (‘‘the 

’218 patent’’). 

On December 16, 2009, Kodak and LG 

filed a joint motion before the 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) to 

terminate the investigation with respect 

to the LG respondents on the basis of a 

settlement agreement. The ALJ granted 

this motion on January 14, 2010. The 

Commission determined not to review 

the initial determination (‘‘ID’’). On 

December 17, 2009 the ALJ issued his 

final ID, finding that the Samsung 

respondents’ accused products infringe 

the asserted claims of both the ’335 

patent and the ’218 patent, that the 

asserted claims are not invalid, and that 

the ’218 patent is not unenforceable due 

to inequitable conduct. The Commission 

has stayed the deadline for filing any 

petitions for review of the final ID. 

On January 8, 2010, Kodak and 

Samsung (‘‘the parties’’) filed their joint 

motion to terminate the investigation 

with respect to the Samsung 

respondents on the basis of a settlement 

agreement. On January 20, 2010, the IA 

filed a response supporting the parties’ 

joint motion. Having examined the 

record of this investigation, the 

Commission has determined to grant 

Kodak and Samsung’s joint motion and 

terminate this investigation. 

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 210.21 of the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

210.21). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: February 2, 2010. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–2893 Filed 2–9–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Inv. No. 337–TA–702] 

In the Matter of: Certain Liquid Crystal 

Display Modules and Products 

Containing the Same, and Methods for 

Making the Same; Notice of 

Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Institution of investigation 

pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1337. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a 

complaint was filed with the U.S. 

International Trade Commission on 

January 8, 2010, under section 337 of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 

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

Corporation of Japan. The complaint 

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 liquid crystal 

display modules and products 

containing the same, and methods for 

making the same by reason of 

infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patent Nos. 7,379,140; 6,141,075; 

7,283,192; 5,670,994; and 7,408,588. 

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 a cease and desist 

order. 

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: 

Anne Goalwin, Esq., Office of Unfair 

Import Investigations, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, telephone (202) 

205–2574. 

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 

(2009). 

Scope of Investigation: Having 

considered the complaint, the U.S. 

International Trade Commission, on 

February 3, 2010, 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 liquid crystal display 

modules or products containing the 

same, or methods for making the same 

that infringe one or more of claims 1– 

3 of U.S. Patent No. 7,379,140; claims 

22, 23, 28–31, and 36–38 of U.S. Patent 

No. 6,141,075; claims 1 and 11 of U.S. 

Patent No. 7,283,192; claims 5, 6, 12, 13, 

and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 5,670,994; and 

claims 1, 3, 5, 29, and 32 of U.S. Patent 

No. 7,408,588, 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: 

Sharp Corporation, 22–22 Nagaike-cho, 

Abeno-ku, Osaka 545–8522, Japan. 

(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: 

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 416 

maetan-dong, Youngtong-gu, Suwon, 

Kyunggi-Do, Korea 443–742. 

Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 105 

Challenger Road, Ridgefield Park, NJ 

07660. 

Samsung Semiconductor, Inc., 3655 

North First Street, San Jose, CA 

95134. 

(c) The Commission investigative 

attorney, party to this investigation, is 

Anne Goalwin, Esq., Office of Unfair 

Import Investigations, U.S. International 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES