11158 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Notices 

from the investigation). The complaint 

named Apple Inc. as the Respondent. 

On October 17, 2011, the ALJ issued 

his final ID, finding no violation of 

section 337 by the Respondent. 

Specifically, the ALJ found that the 

Commission has subject matter 

jurisdiction and that Apple did not 

contest that the Commission has in rem 

and in personam jurisdiction. The ALJ 

also found that there was an importation 

into the United States, sale for 

importation, or sale within the United 

States after importation of the accused 

portable electronic devices and related 

software. Regarding infringement, the 

ALJ found that Apple does not infringe 

claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 10, 11, 14 and 15 of 

the ’800 patent, claims 1 and 10 of the 

’988 patent, claims 8–9 of the ’957 

patent and claims 1–2 of the ’505 patent. 

With respect to invalidity, the ALJ 

found that the asserted claims are not 

invalid. Finally, the ALJ concluded that 

an industry exists within the United 

States that practices the ’988 and ’957 

patents, but not the ’800 and ’505 

patents as required by 19 U.S.C. 

1337(a)(2). 

On October 31, 2011, HTC filed a 

petition for review of the ID, which also 

included a contingent petition for 

review. Also on October 31, 2011, Apple 

filed a contingent petition for review. 

On November 8, 2011, the parties filed 

responses to the petition and contingent 

petitions for review. On December 16, 

2011, the Commission determined to 

review the ID in part. The Commission 

determined to review the ALJ’s findings 

for ’800 patent in its entirety and 

requested briefing on nine issues, and 

on remedy, the public interest and 

bonding. 76 FR 79708–09 (Dec. 22, 

2011). The Commission did not review 

any issues related to the ’505 patent and 

reviewed in part the ALJ’s findings for 

the ’988 and ’957 patents. Id. The 

Commission took no position on one 

limitation and affirmed the remainder of 

the ALJ’s findings for the ’988 and ’957 

patents. Id. The Commission terminated 

those patents from the investigation. Id. 

On January 4, 2012, the parties filed 

written submissions on the issues under 

review, remedy, the public interest, and 

bonding. On January 11, 2012, the 

parties filed reply submissions on the 

issues on review, remedy, the public 

interest, and bonding. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s final 

ID, the Commission has determined that 

there is no violation of section 337. 

Specifically, the Commission has 

determined to reverse the ALJ’s finding 

that the ‘‘switching the PDA system 

from normal mode to sleep mode when 

the PDA system has been idle for a 

second period of time’’ limitation of 

claim 1 is met and affirm the ALJ’s 

determination that the accused products 

do not meet the ‘‘implementing a power 

detection method comprising steps of: 

detecting an amount of power of a 

source in the power system; switching 

the mobile phone system to off mode 

when the detected amount is less than 

a first threshold; and switching the PDA 

system to off mode when the detected 

amount is less than a second threshold’’ 

limitations of claim 1. In addition, the 

Commission affirms the ALJ’s finding 

that no domestic industry exists for the 

’800 patent. The Commission also finds 

that Apple’s waiver argument is moot. 

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). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: February 17, 2012. 

James R. Holbein, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2012–4263 Filed 2–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree 

Under the Toxic Substances Control 

Act 

Notice is hereby given that on 

February 7, 2012, a proposed Consent 

Decree in United States v. Dover 

Chemical Corp., Civil Action No. 5:12– 

cv–00292–SL was lodged with the 

United States District Court for the 

Northern District of Ohio. 

In this action, the United States 

sought injunctive relief from Defendant 

Dover Chemical Corporation (‘‘Dover 

Chemical’’) for violations of the Toxic 

Substances Control Act (‘‘TSCA’’) 

Section 15, 15 U.S.C. 2614. The 

Complaint alleges that Dover Chemical 

manufactured and continues to 

manufacture multiple ‘‘new chemical 

substances’’ as defined in TSCA Section 

3(9), 15 U.S.C. 2602(9), at its chemical 

manufacturing plants located in Dover, 

Ohio and Hammond, Indiana, while 

failing to comply with the 

manufacturing and processing notices 

required under TSCA Section 5, 15 

U.S.C. 2604. 

The Consent Decree requires Dover 

Chemical to pay a $1.4 million civil 

penalty. Dover Chemical has halted 

manufacture of short-chain chlorinated 

paraffins and committed to submit 

premanufacture notices (‘‘PMNs’’) for 

medium and long-chain chlorinated 

paraffins, pursuant to TSCA Section 5. 

The proposed Consent Decree prohibits 

Dover Chemical from manufacturing 

any chlorinated paraffin product not 

placed on the TSCA Inventory via the 

PMN process. 

The Department of Justice will receive 

for a period of thirty (30) days from the 

date of this publication comments 

relating to the Consent Decree. 

Comments should be addressed to the 

Assistant Attorney General, 

Environment and Natural Resources 

Division, and either emailed to 

pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov or 

mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. 

Department of Justice, Washington, DC 

20044–7611, and should refer to United 

States v. Dover Chemical Corp., D.J. Ref. 

90–5–2–1–10116. 

During the public comment period, 

the Consent Decree, may also be 

examined on the following Department 

of Justice Web site, to http:// 

www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ 

Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the 

Consent Decree may also be obtained by 

mail from the Consent Decree Library, 

P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of 

Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611 or 

by faxing or emailing a request to 

‘‘Consent Decree Copy’’(EESCDCopy.

ENRD@usdoj.gov), fax no. (202) 514– 

0097, phone confirmation number (202) 

514–5271. If requesting a copy from the 

Consent Decree Library by mail, please 

enclose a check in the amount of $6.75 

(25 cents per page reproduction cost) 

payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if 

requesting by email or fax, forward a 

check in that amount to the Consent 

Decree Library at the address given 

above. 

Maureen Katz, 

Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement 

Section, Environment and Natural Resources 

Division. 

[FR Doc. 2012–4369 Filed 2–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Proposed 

Consent Decree Under the Clean Water 

Act 

Notice is hereby given that on 

February 17, 2012, a proposed Consent 

Decree in In Re: Oil Spill by the Oil Rig 

‘‘Deepwater Horizon’’ in the Gulf of 

Mexico, on April 20, 2010, MDL 2179, 

was lodged with the United States 

District Court for the Eastern District of 

Louisiana. 

In this action the United States 

sought, in part, civil penalties under 

Section 311(b) of the Clean Water Act, 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 2012 / Notices 11159 

33 U.S.C. 1321(b), against multiple 

parties, including MOEX Offshore 2007 

LLC (‘‘MOEX’’), in connection with the 

discharge of oil into the Gulf of Mexico 

resulting from the April 20, 2010 

blowout of the Macondo well and 

explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil 

rig. The Complaint alleges that MOEX is 

liable for civil penalties as a co-lessee of 

the Macondo well and as co-owner of 

the well casing and equipment. 

Pursuant to the proposed Consent 

Decree, MOEX will pay $70 million in 

civil penalties, of which $45 million 

will go to the United States and the 

remaining $25 million will be divided 

among the states of Louisiana, Alabama, 

Florida, Mississippi and Texas. The 

proposed Consent Decree also requires 

MOEX to perform supplemental 

environmental projects valued at $20 

million in the Gulf States proximate to 

the Gulf of Mexico. The proposed 

Consent Decree does not resolve all 

claims in the Complaint alleged against 

MOEX, nor does it resolve claims 

alleged in the Complaint against other 

parties. 

The Department of Justice will receive 

for a period of thirty (30) days from the 

date of this publication comments 

relating to the Consent Decree. 

Comments should be addressed to the 

Assistant Attorney General, 

Environment and Natural Resources 

Division, and either emailed to 

pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov or 

mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. 

Department of Justice, Washington, DC 

20044–7611, and should refer to In Re: 

Oil Spill by the Oil Rig ‘‘Deepwater 

Horizon’’ in the Gulf of Mexico, on April 

20, 2010, MDL 2179, D.J. Ref. 90–5–1– 

1–10026. During the public comment 

period, the Consent Decree may be 

examined on the following Department 

of Justice Web site: http:// 

www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ 

Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the 

Consent Decree may also be obtained by 

mail from the Consent Decree Library, 

P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of 

Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611 or 

by faxing or emailing a request to 

‘‘Consent Decree Copy’’ 

(EESCDCopy.ENRD@usdoj.gov), fax no. 

(202) 514–0097, phone confirmation 

number (202) 514–5271. If requesting a 

copy from the Consent Decree Library 

by mail, please enclose a check in the 

amount of $13.00 (25 cents per page 

reproduction cost) payable to the U.S. 

Treasury or, if requesting by fax, 

forward a check in that amount to the 

Consent Decree Library at the address 

given above. 

Maureen M. Katz, 

Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement 

Section, Environment and Natural Resources 

Division. 

[FR Doc. 2012–4368 Filed 2–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Settlement 

Agreement Under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

Notice is hereby given that on 

February 9, 2012, a proposed Settlement 

Agreement (the ‘‘Agreement’’) in In re: 

Wood Treaters, LLC, Bankruptcy Case 

No. 3:09–bk–01895–PMG, was lodged 

with the United States Bankruptcy 

Court for the Middle District of Florida. 

In this Chapter 7 bankruptcy case, the 

United States filed a claim for 

administrative expenses seeking 

payment under Section 107(a)(1) and (2) 

of the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9607(a)(1) 

and (2), of past and future costs incurred 

by the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (‘‘EPA’’) for environmental 

response activities related to the 

releases and threatened releases of 

hazardous substances from the Fairfax 

Street Wood Treaters Site, located at 

2610 Fairfax Street in Jacksonville, 

Duvall County, Florida. The Site was 

formerly operated by Debtor Wood 

Treaters, LLC. Under the Agreement 

between the United States, on behalf of 

EPA, and the Chapter 7 Trustee, EPA 

covenants not to take administrative or 

civil action against the Debtor or Trustee 

pursuant to CERCLA Sections 106 or 

107, 42 U.S.C. 9606 or 9607, subject to 

certain reservations of rights. In 

exchange, the United States, on behalf 

of EPA, shall have an allowed priority 

claim for administrative expenses of 

$4,352,672. Further, the Trustee shall 

pay the United States $70,000; pay the 

United States 25% of certain net 

proceeds retained from the recovery of 

pre-Chapter 7 conversion accounts 

receivable and from recovery claims 

under 11 U.S.C. 549; and assign to EPA 

all rights to insurance claims proceeds 

that the Trustee may collect on any 

insurance policy relating to 

environmental liability for the Site. To 

the extent that the aforementioned sums 

are insufficient to satisfy EPA’s allowed 

priority claim, the unpaid balance shall 

be converted to and allowed as a general 

nonpriority unsecured claim. 

The Department of Justice will receive 

for a period of thirty (30) days from the 

date of this publication comments 

relating to the Agreement. Comments 

should be addressed to the Assistant 

Attorney General, Environment and 

Natural Resources Division, and either 

emailed to pubcommentees.enrd@usdoj.gov or mailed to P.O. 

Box 7611, U.S. Department of Justice, 

Washington, DC 20044–7611, and 

should refer to In re: Wood Treaters, 

LLC, D.J. Ref. 90–11–3–10194. 

During the public comment period, 

the Agreement may also be examined on 

the following Department of Justice Web 

site, at http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ 

Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the 

Agreement may also be obtained by mail 

from the Consent Decree Library, P.O. 

Box 7611, U.S. Department of Justice, 

Washington, DC 20044–7611 or by 

faxing or emailing a request to ‘‘Consent 

Decree Copy’’ 

(EESCDCopy.ENRD@usdoj.gov), fax no. 

(202) 514–0097, phone confirmation 

number (202) 514–5271. If requesting a 

copy from the Consent Decree Library 

by mail, please enclose a check in the 

amount of $5.50 (25 cents per page 

reproduction cost) payable to the U.S. 

Treasury or, if requesting by email or 

fax, forward a check in that amount to 

the Consent Decree Library at the 

address given above. 

Henry Friedman, 

Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement 

Section, Environment and Natural Resources 

Division. 

[FR Doc. 2012–4350 Filed 2–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employee Benefits Security 

Administration 

160th Meeting of the Advisory Council 

on Employee Welfare and Pension 

Benefit Plans; Notice of Meeting 

Pursuant to the authority contained in 

Section 512 of the Employee Retirement 

Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 

U.S.C. 1142, the 160th open meeting of 

the Advisory Council on Employee 

Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans (also 

known as the ERISA Advisory Council) 

will be held on March 13, 2012. 

The meeting will take place in Room 

S–2508, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20210. The purpose of the open 

meeting, which will run from 1:30 p.m. 

to approximately 4:30 p.m. Eastern 

Standard Time, is to welcome the new 

members, introduce the Council Chair 

and Vice Chair, receive an update from 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES