22802 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 17, 2012 / Notices 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–754] 

Certain Handbags, Luggage, 

Accessories, and Packaging Thereof; 

Determination Not To Review an Initial 

Determination Granting Complainant’s 

Motion for Summary Determination 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined not to 

review the presiding administrative law 

judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) initial determination 

(‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 16) granting 

complainant’s motion for summary 

determination of violation of Section 

337 in the above captioned 

investigation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Megan M. Valentine, Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–2301. 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 January 5, 2011, based on a 

complaint filed by Louis Vuitton 

Malletier S.A. of Paris, France and Louis 

Vuitton U.S. Manufacturing, Inc., San 

Dimas, California (collectively ‘‘Louis 

Vuitton’’), as amended on December 10, 

2010, alleging violations of Section 337 

of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 

19 U.S.C. § 1337 (‘‘section 337’’), in the 

importation into the United States, the 

sale for importation, and the sale within 

the United States after importation of 

certain handbags, luggage, accessories, 

and packaging thereof by reason of 

infringement of U.S. Trademark 

Registration Nos. 297,594; 1,643,625; 

1,653,663; 1,875,198 (‘‘the ’198 mark’’); 

2,773,107; 2,177,828; 2,181,753; and 

1,519,828. 76 FR 585–6 (Jan. 5, 2011). 

Louis Vuitton later withdrew its 

allegations as to its ’198 mark in the 

Second Amended Complaint filed 

March 24, 2011. See 76 FR 24522 (May 

2, 2011). The complaint further alleges 

the existence of a domestic industry. 

The Commission’s Notice of 

Investigation named as respondents 

T&T Handbag Industrial Co., Ltd. of 

Guangzhou, China Sanjiu Leather Co., 

Ltd. of Guangzhou, China; Meada 

Corporation (d/b/a/Diophy Internation) 

of El Monte, California; Pacpro, Inc. of 

El Monte, California; Jianyong Zheng 

(a/k/a/Jui Go Zheng, Jiu An Zheng, Jian 

Yong Zheng, Peter Zheng) of Arcadia, 

California; Alice Bei Wang (a/k/a Alice 

B. Wang) of Arcadia, California; Trendy 

Creations, Inc. of Chatsworth, 

California; The Inspired Bagger of 

Dallas, Texas; House of Bags of Los 

Angeles, California; Ronett Trading, Inc. 

(d/b/a/Ronett Wholesale & Import) of 

New York, New York; EZ Shine Group, 

Inc. of New York, New York; Master of 

Handbags of Los Angeles, California; 

Choicehandbags.com, Inc. (d/b/a/Choice 

Handbags) of Los Angeles, California; 

and Rasul Enterprises, LLC (d/b/a/The 

Handbag Warehouse) of Dallas, Texas. 

On April 27, 2011, the Commission 

determined not to review an ID 

amending the Notice of Investigation: 

(1) To add Jiu An Zheng and Jiu Gao 

Zheng in place of Jianyong Zhen; (2) to 

add Rimen Leather Co., Ltd, Guangzhou 

Rimen Leather Goods Company 

Limited, and Guangzhou Rui Ma 

Leatherware Co., Ltd. in place of Sanjiu 

Leather Co., Ltd; and (3) to add Monhill, 

Inc. and Zhixian Lu as respondents. 76 

FR 24522 (May 2, 2011). The 

Commission eventually found all of the 

respondents in default or terminated 

them from the investigation based on 

settlement and consent orders. See 

Notice (Aug. 17, 2011) (Order No. 11); 

Notice (Aug. 26, 2011) (Order No. 12); 

Notice (Nov. 2, 2011) (Order No. 14) 

(unreviewed in relevant part). 

On June 28, 2011, the Commission 

determined not to review an ID (Order 

No. 7) granting Louis Vuitton’s motion 

for summary determination that it has 

satisfied the domestic industry 

requirement. Notice (June 28, 2011). 

On August 17, 2011, Louis Vuitton 

filed a motion pursuant to section 

210.18 of the Commission Rules of 

Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.18) 

for summary determination of violation 

of section 337 and requesting issuance 

of a general exclusion order. On August 

30, 2011, the Commission investigative 

attorney filed a response supporting the 

motion. 

On March 5, 2012, the ALJ issued the 

subject ID granting Louis Vuitton’s 

motion for summary determination of 

violation of section 337. No petitions for 

review of the ID were filed. The ID also 

contained the ALJ’s recommended 

determination of remedy and bonding. 

Specifically, the ALJ recommended 

issuance of a general exclusion order. 

The ALJ further recommended that the 

Commission set a bond of 100 percent 

during the period of Presidential review. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s final 

ID, the Commission has determined not 

to review the ID. 

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(s) 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 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 (December 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 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 74 / Tuesday, April 17, 2012 / Notices 22803 

would be entitled to enter the United 

States under bond, in an amount 

determined by the Commission and 

prescribed by the Secretary of the 

Treasury. The Commission is therefore 

interested in receiving submissions 

concerning the amount of the bond that 

should be imposed if a remedy is 

ordered. 

Written Submissions: 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. 

Complainants and the IA are also 

requested to submit proposed remedial 

orders for the Commission’s 

consideration. Complainants are also 

requested to state the dates that the 

patents expire and the HTSUS numbers 

under which the accused products are 

imported. The written submissions and 

proposed remedial orders must be filed 

no later than close of business on April 

26, 2012. Reply submissions must be 

filed no later than the close of business 

on May 3, 2012. No further submissions 

on these issues will be permitted unless 

otherwise ordered by the Commission. 

Persons filing written submissions 

must do so in accordance with 

Commission rule 210.4(f), 19 CFR 

210.4(f) which requires electronic filing. 

The original document and eight (8) true 

copies thereof must also be filed 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 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 and 210.50 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure (19 CFR 210.42–46 and 

210.50). 

Issued: April 12, 2012. 

By order of the Commission. 

James R. Holbein, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9175 Filed 4–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Inv. No. 337–TA–837] 

Certain Audiovisual Components and 

Products Containing the Same; 

Institution of Investigation Pursuant to 

19 U.S.C. 1337 

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 

March 12, 2012, under section 337 of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 

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

Corporation of Milpitas, California and 

Agere Systems Inc. of Allentown, 

Pennsylvania. Supplements to the 

Complaint were received on March 21, 

26, and 28, 2012. An amended 

complaint was filed on March 28, 2012. 

The amended 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 audiovisual components and 

products containing the same by reason 

of infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patent No. 5,870,087 (‘‘the ‘087 patent’’); 

U.S. Patent No. 6,452,958 (‘‘the ‘958 

patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 6,707,867 (‘‘the 

‘867 patent’’); and U.S. Patent No. 

6,982,663 (‘‘the ‘663 patent’’). The 

amended complaint further alleges that 

an industry in the United States exists 

as required by subsection (a)(2) of 

section 337. 

The complainants request that the 

Commission institute an investigation 

and, after the investigation, issue an 

exclusion order and cease and desist 

orders. 

ADDRESSES: The amended 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: The 

Office of the Secretary, Docket Services 

Division, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, telephone (202) 205–1802. 

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 

(2012). 

Scope of Investigation: Having 

considered the complaint, the U.S. 

International Trade Commission, on 

April 11, 2012, 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 audiovisual 

components and products containing 

the same that infringe one or more of 

claims 1, 5, 7–11, and 16 of the ‘087 

patent; claims 1–7, 10, 11, 22–26, 29, 30, 

32, 35, and 36 of the ‘958 patent; claims 

1, 4–7, 9–21, 23, 24, 26–40, 44, 45, 47, 

and 49–74 of the ‘867 patent; and claims 

1–11 of the ‘663 patent, 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 complainants are: 

LSI Corporation, 1621 Barber Lane, 

Milpitas, CA 95305. 

Agere Systems Inc., 1110 American 

Parkway NE., Allentown, PA 18109. 

(b) The respondents are the following 

entities alleged to be in violation of 

section 337, and are the parties upon 

which the amended complaint is to be 

served: 

Funai Electric Company, Ltd., 7–7–1 

Nakagaito, Daito City, Osaka 574– 

0013, Japan. 

Funai Corporation, Inc., 201 Route 17 

North, Rutherford, NJ 07070. 

P&F USA, Inc., 3015 Windward Plaza, 

Windward Fairways II—Suite 100, 

Alpharetta, GA 30005. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES