Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Notices 16817 

The above-described lands contain a 

total of 30.754 acres, more or less, 

which are subject to all valid rights, 

reservations, rights-of-way, and 

easements of record. 

This proclamation does not affect title 

to the land described above, nor does it 

affect any valid existing easements for 

public roads and highways, public 

utilities and for railroads and pipelines 

and any other rights-of-way or 

reservations of record. 

Dated: March 24, 2007. 

Carl J. Artman, 

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. 

[FR Doc. E7–6388 Filed 4–4–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–W7–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 332–489] 

U.S. Agricultural Sales to Cuba: 

Certain Economic Effects of U.S. 

Restrictions 

AGENCY: United States International 

Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Institution of investigation and 

scheduling of public hearing. 

SUMMARY: Following receipt of a request 

on March 16, 2007, from the Committee 

on Finance of the United States Senate 

(Committee), the Commission instituted 

investigation No. 332–489, U.S. 

Agricultural Sales to Cuba: Certain 

Economic Effects of U.S. Restrictions, 

under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 

1930 (19 U.S.C. 1332(g)). 

DATES:

March 30, 2007: Date of institution. 

April 24, 2007: Deadline for filing 

requests to appear at the public hearing. 

April 26, 2007: Deadline for filing prehearing briefs and statements. 

May 1, 2007, 9:30 a.m.: Public 

hearing. 

May 8, 2007: Deadline for written 

statements, including any post-hearing 

briefs. 

June 29, 2007: Transmittal of report to 

the Committee on Finance. 

ADDRESSES: All Commission offices, 

including the Commission’s hearing 

rooms, are located in the United States 

International Trade Commission 

Building, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC. All written 

submissions, including requests to 

appear at the hearing, statements, and 

briefs, should be addressed to the 

Secretary, United States International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436. 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: 

Industry-specific information may be 

obtained from John Reeder, Project 

Leaders (202–205–3319; 

john.reeder@usitc.gov), or Joanna 

Bonarriva, Project Leaders (202–205–

3312; joanna.bonarriva@usitc.gov), 

Office of Industries, United States 

International Trade Commission, 

Washington, DC, 20436. For information 

on the legal aspects of this investigation, 

contact William Gearhart of the Office of 

General Counsel (202–205–3091; 

william.gearhart@usitc.gov). The media 

should contact Margaret O’Laughlin, 

Public Affairs Office (202–205–1819; 

margaret.olaughlin@usitc.gov). Hearing 

impaired individuals are advised that 

information on this matter can be 

obtained by contacting the TDD 

terminal on (202–205–1810). General 

information concerning the Commission 

may also be obtained by accessing its 

Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). 

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. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As 

requested by the Committee, the 

Commission will conduct an 

investigation and provide a report that 

contains, to the extent possible, the 

following information: 

• An overview of Cuba’s purchases of 

agricultural, fish and forestry products 

from, to the extent possible, 2000 to the 

present, including identification of 

major supplying countries, products, 

and market segments; 

• An analysis of the effects that U.S. 

restrictions, including those relating to 

export financing terms and travel to 

Cuba by U.S. citizens, may have had or 

currently have on Cuban purchases of 

U.S. agricultural, fish, and forestry 

products; and, 

• A qualitative and, to the extent 

possible, quantitative estimate of U.S. 

sales of agricultural, fish and forestry 

products to Cuba, in the event that: (i) 

Statutory, regulatory, or other 

restrictions affecting agricultural exports 

are removed, (ii) statutory, regulatory, or 

other restrictions on travel to Cuba by 

U.S. citizens are lifted, and, (iii) 

statutory, regulatory, or other 

restrictions affecting agricultural exports 

are removed and statutory, regulatory or 

other restrictions on travel to Cuba by 

U.S. citizens are lifted. 

As requested, the Commission will 

transmit its report to the Committee by 

June 29, 2007. 

Public Hearing: A public hearing in 

connection with the investigation is 

scheduled to be held at the U.S. 

International Trade Commission 

Building, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC beginning at 9:30 a.m. 

on May 1, 2007. All persons shall have 

the right to appear, by counsel or in 

person, to present information and to be 

heard. Requests to appear at the public 

hearing should be filed with the 

Secretary, United States International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, no later than 

5:15 p.m., April 24, 2007. Any prehearing briefs (original and 14 copies) 

should be filed not later than 5:15 p.m., 

April 26, 2007. The deadline for filing 

post-hearing briefs or statements is 5:15 

p.m., May 8, 2007. In the event that, as 

of the close of business on April 24, 

2007, no witnesses are scheduled to 

appear at the hearing, the hearing will 

be canceled. Any person interested in 

attending the hearing as an observer or 

non-participant may call the Secretary 

(202–205–2000) after April 24, 2007, to 

determine whether the hearing will be 

held. 

Written Statements: In lieu of or in 

addition to participating in the hearing, 

interested persons are invited to submit 

written statements concerning the 

investigation. All submissions should be 

addressed to Secretary, United States 

International Trade Commission, 500 E 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, and 

should be received no later than the 

close of business on May 8, 2007. All 

written submissions must conform with 

the provisions of section 201.8 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure (19 CFR 201.8). Section 201.8 

of the rules requires that a signed 

original (or a copy designated as an 

original) and fourteen (14) copies of 

each document be filed. In the event 

that confidential treatment of the 

document is requested, at least four (4) 

additional copies must be filed, in 

which the confidential information 

must be deleted (see the following 

paragraph for further information 

regarding confidential business 

information). The Commission’s rules 

do not authorize filing submissions with 

the Secretary by facsimile or electronic 

means, except as permitted by section 

201.8 of the Commission’s Rules (19 

CFR 201.8) (see Handbook for Electronic 

Filing Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/ 

secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/ 

documents/ 

handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf. 

Any submissions that contain 

confidential business information must 

also conform with the requirements of 

section 201.6 of the Commission’s Rules 

of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
16818 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 65 / Thursday, April 5, 2007 / Notices 

201.6). Section 201.6 of the rules 

requires that the cover of the document 

and the individual pages be clearly 

marked as to whether they are the 

‘‘confidential’’ or ‘‘non-confidential’’

version, and that the confidential 

business information be clearly 

identified by means of brackets. All 

written submissions, except for 

confidential business information, will 

be made available in the Office of the 

Secretary to the Commission for 

inspection by interested parties. The 

Committee has asked that the report that 

the Commission transmits not contain 

any confidential business information. 

Any confidential business information 

received by the Commission in this 

investigation and used in preparing the 

report will not be published in a manner 

that would reveal the operations of the 

firm supplying the information. 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: April 2, 2007. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E7–6409 Filed 4–4–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–551] 

In the Matter of Certain Laser Bar Code 

Scanners and Scan Engines, 

Components Thereof, and Products 

Containing Same; Notice of 

Commission Determination To Review 

a Final Determination on Violation of 

Section 337; Schedule for Briefing on 

the Issues on Review and on Remedy, 

Public Interest, and Bonding; Denial of 

Motion for Stay of Sanctions Order 

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 

November 20, 2006, regarding whether 

there is a violation of section 337 of the 

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

above-captioned investigation. The 

Commission has also determined to 

deny respondents’ motion for stay of the 

ALJ’s sanctions order. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

M. Bartkowski, Esq., Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–5432. 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: This 

investigation was instituted on October 

26, 2005, based on a complaint filed by 

Symbol Technologies Inc. (‘‘Symbol’’) of 

Holtsville, New York. The complaint, as 

amended, alleged violations of section 

337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (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 laser bar code 

scanners or scan engines, components 

thereof, or products containing the 

same, by reason of infringement of 

various claims of United States Patent 

Nos. 5,457,308 (‘‘the ‘308 patent’’); 

5,545,889 (‘‘the ‘889 patent’’); 6,220,514 

(‘‘the ‘514 patent’’); 5,262,627 (‘‘the ‘627 

patent’’); and 5,917,173 (‘‘the ‘173 

patent’’). The complaint named two 

respondents: Metro Technologies Co., 

Ltd. of Suzhou, China; and Metrologic 

Instruments, Inc. of Blackwood, New 

Jersey (collectively, ‘‘Metrologic’’). 

On January 29, 2007, the ALJ issued 

an ID finding a violation of Section 337 

in the importation of certain laser bar 

code scanners and scan engines, 

components thereof, and products 

containing the same, in connection with 

certain asserted claims. The ID also 

issued monetary sanctions against 

Respondents for discovery abuses. 

Complainant, Respondents, and the 

Commission investigative attorney (IA) 

each filed petitions for review on 

February 8, 2007. They each filed 

responses to each other’s petitions on 

February 16, 2007. 

Meanwhile, on February 8, 2007, 

Metrologic filed a motion for stay of the 

ALJ’s sanctions order. The IA and 

Symbol filed oppositions to the motion 

on February 20, 2007. Upon 

consideration of the parties’ filings, the 

Commission has determined to deny 

Metrologic’s motion for stay. 

On February 21, 2007, the 

Commission extended the deadline for 

determining whether to review the 

subject ID by fifteen (15) days, to March 

30, 2007. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s final 

ID and the submissions of the parties, 

the Commission has determined to 

review the final ID in part. Specifically, 

the Commission has determined to 

review: (1) The construction of ‘‘single, 

unitary, flexural component’’ in the ‘173 

patent, and related issues of 

infringement, domestic industry, and 

validity; (2) the construction of 

‘‘oscillatory support means’’ in the ‘627 

patent, and related issues of 

infringement, domestic industry, and 

validity; (3) the construction of claims 

containing the so-called ‘‘central area’’

limitations in the ‘889 patent, and 

related issues of infringement, domestic 

industry, and validity; (4) the 

construction of the ‘‘scan fragment’’

limitation in the ‘308 patent; and (5) the 

construction of the term ‘‘plurality’’ in 

the ‘308 patent. The Commission 

requests briefing based on the 

evidentiary record on certain of the 

issues on review. The Commission is 

particularly interested in responses to 

the following questions: 

Regarding the ‘173 patent: 

(1) What is the effect of Symbol’s 

statement in the prosecution history that 

‘‘[c]laim 70 [issued claim 17] also 

contains the feature of allowable claim 

58’’ on a proper claim construction? 

(2) If Symbol’s statement limited the 

scope of the claim, what is the effect on 

claim construction, infringement, 

domestic industry, and validity issues 

as they relate to the ‘173 patent? 

(3) If Symbol’s statement limits the 

scope of the claim by providing that the 

component have ‘‘spring portions 

integral with each other,’’ what would 

be the effect, if any, on the analysis? In 

other words, if a flexural component is 

‘‘single,’’ and ‘‘unitary,’’ does it 

necessarily have ‘‘spring portions 

integral with each other’’? 

Regarding the ‘627 patent: 

(1) How should the modifier 

‘‘oscillatory’’ be construed in the 

limitation ‘‘oscillatory support means’’? 

(2) How does the construction of the 

word ‘‘oscillatory’’ affect infringement, 

domestic industry, and validity as those 

issues relate to the ‘627 patent? 

Regarding the ‘889 patent: 

(1) What effect does Symbol’s 

statements during prosecution history 

such that the smaller mirror is 

‘‘centrally positioned’’ with respect to 

the larger mirror have on claim 

construction? 

(2) If such statements limit claim 

scope, what effect does that limitation 

have on claim construction, 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES