Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 211 / Thursday, October 31, 2024 / Notices 86837 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–1383] 

Certain Electronic Eyewear Products 

and Components Thereof; Notice of 

Commission Decision Not To Review 

an Initial Determination Terminating 

the Investigation as to the Remaining 

Respondent Based on Settlement; 

Termination of the Investigation 

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 an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) 

(Order No. 71) of the presiding 

Administrative Law Judge (‘‘ALJ’’) 

granting an unopposed motion to 

terminate the investigation as to the 

remaining respondent Magic Leap, Inc. 

of Plantation, Florida (‘‘Settling 

Respondent’’) based on settlement, 

thereby terminating the investigation in 

its entirety. The investigation is 

terminated. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Houda Morad, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–4716. Copies of non-confidential 

documents filed in connection with this 

investigation may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help 

accessing EDIS, please email 

EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. General 

information concerning the Commission 

may also be obtained by accessing its 

internet server at https://www.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: On 

December 27, 2023, the Commission 

instituted this investigation under 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section 

337’’), based on a complaint filed by 

Ingeniospec, LLC (‘‘Ingeniospec’’) of San 

Jose, California. See 88 FR 89465–66 

(Dec. 27, 2023). The complaint alleges a 

violation 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 electronic eyewear products and 

components thereof by reason of the 

infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patent Nos. 8,770,742; 10,310,296; 

11,762,224 (‘‘the ’224 patent’’); and 

11,803,069 (‘‘the ’069 patent’’). See id. 

In addition to the Settling Respondents, 

the notice of investigation names the 

following respondents: Ampere LLC, 

Ampere Technologies, and GGTR LLC, 

all of Dover, Delaware; Gogotoro LLC of 

Brooklyn, New York; Zhuhai Wicue 

Technology Co., Ltd. of Zhuhai, China; 

Bose Corporation of Framingham, 

Massachusetts; Epson America, Inc. of 

Los Alamitos, California; Seiko Epson 

Corporation of Nagano, Japan; 

Everysight Ltd. of Haifa, Israel; 

Everysight US Inc. of New York, New 

York; Quanta Computer Incorporated of 

Taoyuan City, Taiwan; Lenovo (United 

States), Inc. of Morrisville, North 

Carolina; Lenovo Group Limited of 

Hong Kong, China; Lenovo Information 

Products (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. of 

Shenzhen, China; Lucyd Ltd. of London, 

United Kingdom; Innovative Eyewear, 

Inc. of North Miami, Florida; Luxottica 

Group S.p.A. of Milan, Italy; Luxottica 

of America, Inc. of Mason, Ohio; Razer 

Inc. and Razer USA Ltd., both of Irvine, 

California; TCL Technology Group 

Corporation of Huizhou, China; TCL 

Electronics Holdings Limited of Hong 

Kong, China; Falcon Innovation 

Technology, (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. of 

Shenzhen, China; ThirdEye Gen, Inc. of 

Princeton, New Jersey; Vuzix 

Corporation of West Henrietta, New 

York; XREAL, Inc. of Sunnyvale, 

California; EXREAL Technology Limited 

of Hong Kong, China; and Matrixed 

Reality Technology Co., Ltd. of Wuxi, 

China. Id. The Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations is not a party to the 

investigation. Id. 

The Commission previously 

terminated all respondents other than 

the Settling Respondent. See Order No. 

17 (Jan. 31, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (Feb. 29, 2024); Order 

No. 18 (Feb. 2, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (Mar. 4, 2024); Order 

No. 24 (Feb. 27, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (Mar. 21, 2024); Order 

No. 28 (Mar. 4, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (Mar. 21, 2024); Order 

No. 35 (Mar. 20, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (Apr. 17, 2024); Order 

No. 37 (Mar. 21, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (Apr. 17, 2024); Order 

No. 39 (Apr. 1, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (Apr. 26, 2024); Order 

No. 47 (May 10, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (May 22, 2024); Order 

No. 56 (June 20, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (July 8, 2024); Order No. 

57 (June 20, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (July 8, 2024); Order No. 

69 (Sept. 19, 2024), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (Oct. 8, 2024). 

On July 8, 2024, the Commission 

terminated the investigation as to the 

’069 patent in its entirety, as well as 

claims 29, 30, 32, 40–42, and 48 of the 

’224 patent, based on partial withdrawal 

of the complaint. See Order No. 57 (June 

20, 2024), unreviewed by Comm’n 

Notice (July 8, 2024). 

On September 27, 2024, complainant 

Ingeniospec and the Settling 

Respondent filed a joint motion 

(‘‘Motion’’) to terminate the 

investigation as to the Settling 

Respondent based on settlement, to stay 

the procedural deadlines as to the 

Settling Respondent, and to limit 

service of the settlement agreement. 

On October 9, 2024, the ALJ issued 

the subject ID (Order No. 71) granting 

the Motion. Pursuant to Commission 

Rule 210.21(b) (19 CFR 210.21(b)), the 

ID notes that ‘‘public and confidential 

versions of the settlement agreement 

between Ingeniospec and [the Settling 

Respondent] were attached to the 

motion.’’ ID at 2. The ID also notes that 

‘‘the motion contains a statement that 

there are no other agreements, written or 

oral, express or implied between the 

parties concerning the subject matter of 

the investigation.’’ Id. The ID further 

finds, pursuant to Commission Rule 

210.50(b)(2) (19 CFR 210.50(b)(2)), that 

termination of the Settling Respondent 

from the investigation will not adversely 

affect the public interest. See id. The 

ALJ further granted the request to limit 

service of the confidential version of the 

settlement agreement. See id. Because 

the Settling Respondent is the last 

remaining respondent in the 

investigation, the ID also terminates the 

investigation in its entirety. See id. at 3. 

No petition for review of the subject 

ID was filed. 

The Commission has determined not 

to review the subject ID. The 

investigation is terminated as to the 

Settling Respondent and in its entirety. 

The Commission’s vote for this 

determination took place on October 28, 

2024. 

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 part 

210 of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 

210). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: October 28, 2024. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2024–25379 Filed 10–30–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1