24514 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices 

205–2000. The public version of the 

complaint can be accessed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

at http://edis.usitc.gov, and 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. Hearingimpaired 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 has received a complaint 

and a submission pursuant to section 

210.8(b) of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure filed on behalf 

of Anu IP LLC on April 18, 2012. The 

complaint alleges 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 electronic devices 

having a retractable USB connector. The 

complaint names as respondents 

AIPTEK International, Inc. of Taiwan; 

Aluratek, Inc. of CA; Archos S. A. of 

France; Archos, Inc. of CO; Bluestar 

Alliance LLC of NY; Centon Electronics, 

Inc. of CA; Coby Electronics Corporation 

of NY; Corsair Memory, Inc. of CA; 

Emtec Electronics, Inc. of OH; General 

Imaging Company of CA; Huawei 

Technology Company, Ltd. of China; 

Iriver, Inc. of CA; JVC Kenwood 

Corporation of Japan; JVC Americas 

Corporation of NJ; Latte 

Communications, Inc. of CA; Lexar 

Media, Inc. of CA; Maxell Corporation 

of America, Inc. of NJ; Hitachi Maxell, 

Ltd. of Japan; Office Depot, Inc. of FL; 

Olympus Corporation of Japan; 

Olympus Corporation of the Americas of 

PA; Option NV of Belgium; Option, Inc. 

of GA; Panasonic Corporation of Japan; 

Panasonic Corporation North America 

of NJ; Patriot Memory LLC of CA; 

Provantage LLC of OH; RITEK 

Corporation of Taiwan; Advanced 

Media, Inc. (d/b/a RITEK U.S.A.) of CA; 

Sakar International, Inc. of NJ; Samsung 

Electronics Co., Ltd. of South Korea; 

Samsung Electronics America of NJ; 

Sanyo Electric Co, Ltd. of Japan; Sanyo 

North America Corporation of CA; 

Silicon Power Computer and Comm., 

Inc. of Taiwan; Silicon Power Computer 

and Comm. USA, Inc. of CA; 

Supersonic, Inc. of CA; Super Talent 

Technology Corporation of CA; Toshiba 

Corporation of Japan; Toshiba America, 

Inc. of NY; ViewSonic Corporation of 

CA; VOXX International Corporation of 

NY; Audiovox Accessories Corporation 

of IN; Yamaha Corporation of Japan; and 

Yamaha Corporation of America of CA. 

Proposed respondents, other 

interested parties, and members of the 

public are invited to file comments, not 

to exceed five (5) pages in length, 

inclusive of attachments, on any public 

interest issues raised by the complaint 

or section 210.8(b) filing. Comments 

should address whether issuance of the 

relief specifically requested by the 

complainant in this investigation would 

affect the public health and welfare in 

the United States, competitive 

conditions in the United States 

economy, the production of like or 

directly competitive articles in the 

United States, or United States 

consumers. 

In particular, the Commission is 

interested in comments that: 

(i) Explain how the articles 

potentially subject to the requested 

remedial orders are used in the United 

States; 

(ii) Identify any public health, safety, 

or welfare concerns in the United States 

relating to the requested remedial 

orders; 

(iii) Identify like or directly 

competitive articles that complainant, 

its licensees, or third parties make in the 

United States which could replace the 

subject articles if they were to be 

excluded; 

(iv) Indicate whether complainant, 

complainant’s licensees, and/or third 

party suppliers have the capacity to 

replace the volume of articles 

potentially subject to the requested 

exclusion order and/or a cease and 

desist order within a commercially 

reasonable time; and 

(v) Explain how the requested 

remedial orders would impact United 

States consumers. 

Written submissions must be filed no 

later than by close of business, eight 

calendar days after the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register. There will be further 

opportunities for comment on the 

public interest after the issuance of any 

final initial determination in this 

investigation. 

Persons filing written submissions 

must file the original document 

electronically on or before the deadlines 

stated above and submit 8 true paper 

copies to the Office of the Secretary by 

noon the next day pursuant to section 

210.4(f) of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to 

the docket number (‘‘Docket No.2892’’) 

in a prominent place on the cover page 

and/or the first page. (See Handbook for 

Electronic Filing Procedures, http:// 

www.usitc.gov/secretary/ 

fed_reg_notices/rules/ 

handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf). 

Persons with questions regarding filing 

should contact the Secretary (202–205– 

2000). 

Any person desiring to submit a 

document to the Commission in 

confidence must request confidential 

treatment. All such requests should be 

directed to the Secretary to the 

Commission and must include a full 

statement of the reasons why the 

Commission should grant such 

treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents 

for which confidential treatment by the 

Commission is properly sought will be 

treated accordingly. All nonconfidential 

written submissions will be available for 

public inspection at the Office of the 

Secretary and on EDIS. 

This action is taken under the 

authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), 

and of sections 201.10 and 210.8(c) of 

the Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: April 19, 2012. 

James R. Holbein, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9785 Filed 4–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–839] 

Certain Consumer Electronics, 

Including Mobile Phones and Tablets; 

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 13, 2012, under section 337 of 

the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 

U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of Pragmatus AV, 

LLC of Alexandria, Virginia. A letter 

supplementing the complaint was filed 

on March 30, 2012. The complaint, as 

supplemented, 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 79 / Tuesday, April 24, 2012 / Notices 24515 

certain consumer electronics, including 

mobile phones and tablets, by reason of 

infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patent No. 5,854,893 (‘‘the ‘893 patent’’); 

U.S. Patent No. 6,237,025 (‘‘the ‘025 

patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 7,054,904 (‘‘the 

‘904 patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 7,185,054 

(‘‘the ‘054 patent’’); and U.S. Patent No. 

7,206,809 (‘‘the ‘809 patent’’). 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 cease and desist 

orders. 

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: The 

Office of Unfair Import Investigations, 

U.S. International Trade Commission, 

telephone (202) 205–2560. 

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 17, 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 consumer 

electronics, including mobile phones 

and tablets, that infringe one or more of 

claims 13, 15, and 16 of the ‘893 patent; 

claims 33–37 and 43 of the ‘025 patent; 

claims 17, 19, 20, 22, and 23 of the ‘904 

patent; claims 10, 11, 13, and 14 of the 

‘054 patent; claims 1–12, 34, 37, 40, and 

41 of the ‘809 patent, and whether an 

industry in the United States exists as 

required by subsection (a)(2) of section 

337; 

(2) Pursuant to Commission Rule 

210.50(b)(1), 19 C.F.R. § 210.50(b)(1), 

the presiding administrative law judge 

shall take evidence or other information 

and hear arguments from the parties and 

other interested persons with respect to 

the public interest in this investigation, 

as appropriate, and provide the 

Commission with findings of fact and a 

recommended determination on this 

issue, which shall be limited to the 

statutory public interest factors, 19 

U.S.C. 1337(d)(1), (f)(1), (g)(1); 

(3) 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: Pragmatus 

AV, LLC, 601 King Street, Suite 200, 

Alexandria, VA 22314. 

(b) The respondents the following 

entities alleged to be in violation of 

section 337, and are the parties upon 

which the complaint is to be served: 

ASUSTeK Computer, Inc., 4F, 150, LiTe Road, Beitou District, Taipei City, 

Taiwan; 

ASUS Computer International, Inc., 800 

Corporate Way, Fremont, CA 94539; 

HTC Corporation, 23 Xinghua Road, 

Taoyuan, 330, Taiwan; 

HTC America, Inc., 13920 SE Eastgate 

Way, Suite 400, Bellevue, WA 98005; 

LG Electronics, Inc., LG Twin Towers, 

20, Yoido-dong, Youngdungpo-gu, 

Seoul, 157–721, Republic of Korea; 

LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., 1000 Sylvan 

Ave., Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632; 

LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., 

Inc., 10101 Old Grove Road, San 

Diego, CA 92131; 

Pantech Co., Ltd., 1–2, DMC Sangamdon Mapo-gu, Seoul, Republic of 

Korea; 

Pantech Wireless, Inc., 5607 Glenridge 

Drive, Suite 500, Atlanta, GA 30342; 

Research In Motion Ltd., 295 Phillip 

Street, Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3W8, 

Canada; 

Research In Motion Corp., 122 W. John 

Carpenter Parkway, Suite 430, Irving, 

TX 75039; 

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, 1320–10, 

Seocho 2-dong Seocho-gu, Seoul, 

Republic of Korea; 

Samsung Electronics America, Inc., 105 

Challenger Rd., Ridgefield Park, NJ 

07660; 

Samsung Telecommunications America, 

L.L.C., 1301 East Lookout Drive, 

Richardson, TX 75082. 

(c) The Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW., Suite 

401, Washington, DC 20436; and 

(4) For the investigation so instituted, 

the Chief Administrative Law Judge, 

U.S. International Trade Commission, 

shall designate the presiding 

Administrative Law Judge. 

Responses to the complaint and the 

notice of investigation must be 

submitted by the named respondents in 

accordance with section 210.13 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 

19 CFR 201.16(d)–(e) and 210.13(a), 

such responses will be considered by 

the Commission if received not later 

than 20 days after the date of service by 

the Commission of the complaint and 

the notice of investigation. Extensions of 

time for submitting responses to the 

complaint and the notice of 

investigation will not be granted unless 

good cause therefor is shown. 

Failure of a respondent to file a timely 

response to each allegation in the 

complaint and in this notice may be 

deemed to constitute a waiver of the 

right to appear and contest the 

allegations of the complaint and this 

notice, and to authorize the 

administrative law judge and the 

Commission, without further notice to 

the respondent, to find the facts to be as 

alleged in the complaint and this notice 

and to enter an initial determination 

and a final determination containing 

such findings, and may result in the 

issuance of an exclusion order or a cease 

and desist order or both directed against 

the respondent. 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: April 18, 2012. 

James R. Holbein, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2012–9767 Filed 4–23–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree 

Pursuant to the Clean Water Act 

Notice is hereby given that on April 

16, 2012 a proposed Consent Decree 

(‘‘Decree’’) in United States of America 

and the State of Tennessee v. the City 

of Memphis (‘‘City’’), Civil Action No. 

2:10–CV–02083–SHM–dkv was lodged 

with the United States District Court for 

the Western District of Tennessee. This 

Decree represents a settlement of claims 

against the City of Memphis under 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES