73126 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices 

collection approved under OMB Control 

Number 1024–0216. 

DATES: Public comments on this 

Information Collection Request (ICR) 

will be accepted on or before December 

29, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Please send your comments 

and suggestions on this ICR to the Desk 

Officer for the Department of the 

Interior at OMB–OIRA at (202) 395– 

5806 (fax) or 

OIRA_DOCKET@OMB.eop.gov (e-mail). 

Please also send a copy of your 

comments on the ICR to Dr. Bruce 

Peacock, NPS Social Science Division, 

1201 Oakridge Drive, Fort Collins, CO 

80525; or at Bruce_Peacock@nps.gov (email). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jennifer Hoger-Russell, Park Studies 

Unit, College of Natural Resources, 

University of Idaho, P.O. Box 441139, 

Moscow, ID 83844–1139; Phone: (208) 

885–4806; Fax: (208) 885–4216; 

jhoger@uidaho.edu (e-mail). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

The National Park Service Act of 

1916, 38 Stat 535, 16 U.S.C. 1, et seq., 

requires that the NPS preserve national 

parks for the use and enjoyment of 

present and future generations. At the 

field level, this means resource 

preservation, public education, facility 

maintenance and operation, and 

physical developments as are necessary 

for public use, health, and safety. Other 

Federal mandates (National 

Environmental Policy Act and NPS 

Management Policies) require visitor 

use data in the impact assessment of 

development on users and resources as 

part of each park’s general management 

plan. The Government Performance and 

Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 (Pub. L. 

103–62) requires that the NPS develop 

goals to improve program effectiveness 

and public accountability and to 

measure performance related to these 

goals. The Visitor Survey Card (VSC) 

project measures performance toward 

those goals through a short visitor 

survey card. The project is an element 

of the NPS Strategic Plan and the 

Department of the Interior (DOI) 

Strategic Plan. 

The NPS has used the VSC to conduct 

surveys at approximately 330 National 

Park Service units annually since 1998. 

The purpose of the VSC is to measure 

visitors’ opinions about park facilities, 

services, and recreational opportunities 

in each park unit and System-wide. This 

effort is required by GPRA and other 

NPS and DOI strategic planning efforts. 

Data from the proposed survey is 

needed to assess performance regarding 

NPS GPRA goals IIa1A and IIb1. 

In addition, the survey collects data to 

support the DOI Strategic Plan goal on 

visitor satisfaction with the value for 

entrance fees paid to access public lands 

managed by the DOI. NPS performance 

on all goals measured in this study will 

contribute to DOI Department-wide 

performance reports. Results of the VSC 

will also be used by park managers to 

improve visitor services at the 

approximately 330 units of the National 

Park System where the survey is 

administered. 

The VSC is a component of the Visitor 

Services Project, which is funded by the 

NPS through a cooperative agreement 

with the Park Studies Unit at the 

University of Idaho, and has been in use 

since 1998. 

II. Data 

OMB Number: 1024–0216. 

Title: National Park Service Visitor 

Survey Card. 

Type of Request: This is a renewal of 

a currently approved collection. 

Respondent Obligation: Voluntary. 

Frequency of Collection: One-time per 

respondent. 

Description of respondents: Visitors to 

approximately 330 NPS units. 

Estimated average number of 

respondents: 132,000 visitors who 

accept the survey card (92,400 nonrespondents and 39,600 respondents) 

and 1,188 visitors who refuse to take the 

survey card but are willing to answer 

the two demographic questions and the 

overall satisfaction question. 

Estimated average burden hours per 

response: 1 minute for non-respondents, 

3 minutes for respondents, and 2 

minutes for visitors who refuse to take 

the survey card but are willing to 

answer the two demographic questions 

and the overall satisfaction question. 

Estimated annual reporting burden: 

3,540 hours. 

III. Request for Comments 

We are inviting comments concerning 

this ICR on: (a) Whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the agency to perform its duties, 

including whether the information is 

useful; (b) the accuracy of the agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

collection of information; (c) ways to 

enhance the quality, usefulness, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden on the respondents, including 

the use of automated collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. 

Comments that you submit in 

response to this notice are a matter of 

public record. Before including your 

address, phone number, e-mail address 

or other personal identifying 

information in your comment, you 

should be aware that your entire 

comment including your personal 

identifying information, may be made 

publicly available at any time. While 

you can ask us in your comment to 

withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Dated: November 23, 2010. 

Robert Gordon, 

Information Collection Clearance Officer, 

National Park Service. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29974 Filed 11–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–52–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–687] 

Certain Video Displays, Components 

Thereof, and Products Containing 

Same; Notice of Commission 

Determination to Review a Final Initial 

Determination in Part and Set a 

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 

in part the final initial determination 

(‘‘ID’’) issued by the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on 

September 17, 2010, in the abovecaptioned investigation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Liberman, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–3116. 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 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices 73127 

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 

September 16, 2009, based on a 

complaint filed by LG Electronics, Inc. 

(‘‘LG’’), alleging a violation of section 

337 in the importation, sale for 

importation, and sale within the United 

States after importation of certain video 

displays, components thereof, or 

products containing same that infringe 

one or more of claims 24 and 25 of U.S. 

Patent No. 5,790,096; claims 1–9 of U.S. 

Patent No. 5,537,612; claim 1 of U.S. 

Patent No. 5,459,522; claims 1–5 and 

7–16 of U.S. Patent No. 7,154,564. 74 FR 

47616 (2009) Complainant named Funai 

Electric Company, Ltd. of Osaka, Japan, 

Funai Corporation, Inc. of Rutherford, 

New Jersey, P&F USA, Inc. of 

Alpharetta, Georgia (collectively, 

‘‘Funai’’), and Vizio, Inc. of Irvine, 

California (‘‘Vizio’’) as respondents. On 

January 8, 2010, the presiding ALJ 

issued an ID granting Complainant’s 

motion for leave to file a second 

amended complaint and amend the 

Notice of Investigation to, inter alia, add 

AmTran Technology Co. Ltd. and 

AmTran Logistics, Inc. as respondents 

to the investigation. Order No. 12 

(unreviewed by the Commission). 

Subsequently, respondents Funai 

Electric Company, Ltd., Funai 

Corporation, Inc., and P&F USA, Inc. 

were terminated from the investigation 

based on a settlement agreement. 

The evidentiary hearing on violation 

of Section 337 was held from June 9, 

2010 through June 21, 2010. On 

September 17, 2010, the ALJ issued his 

final ID finding a violation of section 

337. All the parties to the investigation, 

including the Commission investigative 

attorney (IA), filed timely petitions for 

review of various portions of the final 

ID, as well as timely responses to the 

petitions. 

Having examined the record in this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s final 

ID, the petitions for review, and the 

responses thereto, the Commission has 

determined to review the ID in part. In 

particular, the Commission has 

determined to review: (1) The ID’s 

finding that dependent claims 4, 6, and 

7 of the ‘612 patent are not invalid as 

anticipated or obvious; (2) the ID’s 

findings and conclusions with respect to 

independent claim 5 of the ‘564 patent. 

The Commission has determined not to 

review the remainder of the final ID. 

On review, the Commission requests 

briefing on the above-listed issues based 

on the evidentiary record. The 

Commission is particularly interested in 

responses to the following questions: 

(1) With respect to the ‘612 patent: 

(a) Does the record evidence show, 

clearly and convincingly, that claim 4 is 

anticipated by: (i) The CableData HTU 

device (RPX–4); (ii) U.S. Patent No. 

4,896,354 (‘‘the ‘354 patent’’); and (iii) 

U.S. Patent No. 4,930,160 (‘‘the ‘160 

patent’’)? 

(b) Does the record evidence show, 

clearly and convincingly, that claim 4 is 

obvious in view of any of the above 

prior art references alleged to anticipate 

claim 4? 

(c) Does the record evidence show, 

clearly and convincingly, that claim 6 is 

anticipated by: (i) the ‘160 patent; (ii) 

U.S. Patent No. 4,510,623 (‘‘the ‘623 

patent’’); (iii) U.S. Patent No. 5,033,085 

(‘‘the ‘085 patent’’); and (iv) the ‘354 

patent? 

(d) Does the record evidence show, 

clearly and convincingly, that claim 6 is 

obvious in view of any of the above 

prior art references alleged to anticipate 

claim 6? 

(e) Does the record evidence show, 

clearly and convincingly, that claim 7 is 

anticipated by: (i) The ‘160 patent; (ii) 

the ‘623 patent; (iii) the ‘085 patent; and 

(iv) the ‘354 patent? 

(f) Does the record evidence show, 

clearly and convincingly, that claim 7 is 

obvious in view of any of the above 

prior art references alleged to anticipate 

claim 7? 

(2) With respect to the ‘564 patent: 

(a) Does the record evidence show 

that claim 5 is infringed? 

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 the 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 are 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 (Dec. 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 U.S. 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. The 

Commission is therefore interested in 

receiving submissions concerning the 

amount of the bond that should be 

imposed. 

Written Submissions: The parties to 

the investigation are requested to file 

written submissions on the issues under 

review. The submissions should be 

concise and thoroughly referenced to 

the record in this investigation. 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 further 

requested to provide the expiration date 

of the involved patents and state the 

HTSUS numbers under which the 

accused articles are imported. The 

written submissions and proposed 

remedial orders must be filed no later 

than the close of business on December 

3, 2010. Reply submissions must be 

filed no later than the close of business 

on December 10, 2010. 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 (or portion thereof) 

to the Commission in confidence must 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

73128 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 228 / Monday, November 29, 2010 / Notices 

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 section 201.6 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for 

which confidential treatment by the 

Commission is sought will be treated 

accordingly. All nonconfidential 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 of the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

210.42-.46). 

Issued: November 19, 2010. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29911 Filed 11–26–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–690] 

Certain Printing and Imaging Devices 

and Components Thereof; Notice of 

Commission Determination To Reviewin-Part a Final Determination Finding a 

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 a 

portion of the final initial determination 

(‘‘ID’’) issued by the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on 

September 23, 2010 finding a violation 

of section 337 and to request briefing on 

the issues under review and on remedy, 

the public interest, and bonding. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Daniel E. Valencia, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–1999. 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: The 

Commission instituted this investigation 

on October 26, 2009, based on a 

complaint filed by Ricoh Company, Ltd. 

of Tokyo, Japan; Ricoh Americas 

Corporation of West Caldwell, New 

Jersey; and Ricoh Electronics, Inc. of 

Tustin, California (collectively ‘‘Ricoh’’). 

74 FR 55065 (Oct. 26, 2009). The 

complaint alleged, inter alia, violations 

of section 337 in the importation into 

the United States, the sale for 

importation, and the sale within the 

United States after importation of 

certain printing and imaging devices 

and components thereof by reason of 

infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 

6,209,048 (‘‘the ‘048 patent’’); 6,212,343 

(‘‘the ‘343 patent’’); 6,388,771 (‘‘the ‘771 

patent’’); 5,764,866 (‘‘the ‘866 patent); 

and 5,863,690 (‘‘the ‘690 patent’’). The 

complaint named Oki Data Corporation 

of Tokyo, Japan and Oki Data Americas, 

Inc. of Mount Laurel, New Jersey 

(collectively ‘‘Oki’’) as respondents. 

On September 23, 2010, the ALJ 

issued his final ID finding that Oki 

violated section 337 in the importation 

into the United States, the sale for 

importation, and the sale within the 

United States after importation of 

certain printing and imaging devices 

and components thereof by reason of 

infringement of several claims in the 

‘690 patent. The ALJ found that Oki has 

not violated section 337 with respect to 

the ‘048, ‘343, ‘771, and ‘866 patents. 

Along with the ID, the ALJ issued a 

recommended determination on remedy 

and bonding (‘‘RD’’). Complainant Ricoh, 

respondent Oki, and the Commission 

investigative attorney (‘‘IA’’) filed 

petitions for review of the ID on October 

6, 2010. Ricoh, Oki, and the IA each 

filed responses to the petitions for 

review on October 14, 2010. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s final 

ID, the petitions for review, and the 

responses thereto, the Commission has 

determined to review the final ID in 

part. In particular, the Commission has 

determined to review all findings and 

conclusions relating to whether a 

violation of section 337 has occurred 

with respect to the ‘343 and ‘690 

patents. 

The parties are requested to brief their 

positions on the issues under review 

with 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: 

The ‘343 Patent 

(1) The Commission has determined 

to review all findings relating to the 

limitation ‘‘a direction orthogonal to a 

longitudinal direction of the developing 

roller,’’ as recited in the asserted claims 

of the ‘343 patent. 

(a) Please state your position on the 

meaning of ‘‘a longitudinal direction of 

the developing roller,’’ as recited in the 

asserted claims. How does your position 

differ from the ALJ’s construction? 

(b) Specifically, does ‘‘a longitudinal 

direction’’ include any line extending 

parallel to the central axis of the roller? 

Or, does this refer to the central axis 

itself? 

(c) Please state your position on the 

meaning of ‘‘a direction orthogonal to a 

longitudinal direction of the developing 

roller.’’ Please take into account that the 

planar blade is bent along its entire 

width, and do not confine your analysis 

to two-dimensional cross-sections. 

(d) Assuming ‘‘a longitudinal 

direction’’ can include any line 

extending parallel to the central axis of 

the roller, can ‘‘a direction orthogonal’’ 

refer to a direction that is not 

perpendicular to the surface of the 

roller, i.e., a tangent extending through 

the surface of the roller? 

(e) Given the planar shape of the 

blade contacts the roller in three 

dimensions along the entire width of the 

blade, and is bent along the entire width 

of the blade, is there any bend that 

would not meet the ‘‘direction 

orthogonal’’ limitation? 

(f) How does your answer to (d) 

comport with the preferred embodiment 

of the ‘343 patent shown in Figures 8A 

and 8B? Is the blade 17 shown in 

Figures 8A and 8B bent in ‘‘a direction 

orthogonal to a longitudinal direction of 

the developing roller?’’ 

(g) How do your answers to (a) 

through (e) affect the ALJ’s findings 

regarding infringement, validity, and 

domestic industry? 

(2) The Commission has determined 

to review the ALJ’s construction of ‘‘a 

lower edge,’’ as recited in the asserted 

claims of the ‘343 patent. The asserted 

claims of the ‘343 patent recite, among 

other things: 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES