22550 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Notices 

Trade Secret Nos. 1, 6, 14, and 15. The 

ALJ further found no violation of 

section 337 with respect to claims 6, 10, 

and 11 of the ’928 patent, claim 1 of the 

’158 patent, and Trade Secret Nos. 3 and 

4. 

On July 28, 2014, OUII, Manitowoc, 

and Sany each filed a petition for 

review. On August 5, 2014, the parties 

replied to the respective petitions for 

review. 

On September 19, 2014, the 

Commission determined to review the 

final ID and solicited briefing from the 

parties on questions concerning 

violation, remedy, bonding, and the 

public interest. 79 Fed. Reg. 57566–68. 

Specifically, the Commission 

determined to review the ALJ’s findings 

with respect to: (1) Importation of the 

accused products; (2) infringement of 

the asserted patents; (3) estoppel; (4) the 

technical prong of the domestic industry 

requirement; and (5) the asserted trade 

secrets. The parties provided initial 

submissions to the Commission’s 

questions on October 1, 2014, and 

responsive submissions on October 8, 

2014. 

On December 3, 2014, the 

Commission determined to request 

additional briefing. Notice (December 3, 

2014). On December 12, 2014, the 

parties filed initial submissions in 

response to the Commission’s notice 

and filed response submissions on 

December 19, 2014. 

After considering the final ID, written 

submissions, and the record in this 

investigation, the Commission has 

determined to affirm-in-part and 

reverse-in-part the final ID and to 

terminate the investigation with a 

finding of violation of section 337. 

Specifically, the Commission: (1) Finds 

the asserted method claims of the ’928 

patent are not infringed; (2) finds the 

asserted method claim of the ’158 patent 

is not infringed; (3) finds that claims 

23–26 of the ’928 patent are infringed by 

at least one product; (4) takes no 

position on the ALJ’s estoppel findings; 

(5) finds that the domestic industry 

requirement has been met; and (6) finds 

Trade Secret Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, 14, and 15 

are protectable and have been 

misappropriated. The Commission has 

issued its opinion setting forth the 

reasons for its determination. 

Commissioner Kieff concurs in the 

outcome and has filed an opinion 

concurring in result and dissenting in 

part. 

Having found a violation of section 

337 in this investigation, the 

Commission has determined that the 

appropriate form of relief is: (1) A 

limited exclusion order prohibiting the 

unlicensed entry of certain crawler 

cranes and components thereof that (a) 

infringe one or more of claims 23–26 of 

the ’928 patent and are manufactured 

by, or on behalf of, or are imported by 

or on behalf of the Respondents or any 

of their affiliated companies, parents, 

subsidiaries, agents, or other related 

business entities, or their successors or 

assigns; and/or (b) are manufactured 

abroad by or on behalf of, or imported 

by or on behalf of, Respondents or any 

of their affiliated companies, parents, 

subsidiaries, or other related business 

entities, or their successors or assigns, 

using any of Trade Secret Nos. 1, 3, 4, 

6, 14, and 15, for a period of ten (10) 

years; and (2) a cease and desist order 

prohibiting the domestic respondent 

from conducting any of the following 

activities in the United States: 

Importing, selling, marketing, 

advertising, distributing, transferring 

(except for exportation), and soliciting 

United States, agents or distributors for, 

certain crawler cranes and components 

therefore manufactured using any of 

Trade Secret Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, 14, and 15. 

The Commission has also determined 

that the public interest factors 

enumerated in section 337(d) and (f) (19 

U.S.C. 1337(d) and (f)) do not preclude 

issuance of the limited exclusion order 

or a cease and desist order. Finally, the 

Commission has determined that a bond 

during the period of presidential review 

(19 U.S.C. 1337(j)) shall be in the 

amount of 100 percent (100%) of the 

entered value of the imported articles 

that are subject to the limited exclusion 

order or cease and desist order. The 

Commission’s orders and opinion were 

delivered to the President and to the 

United States Trade Representative on 

the day of their issuance. 

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: April 16, 2015. 

Lisa R. Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2015–09280 Filed 4–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Antitrust Division 

Notice Pursuant To The National 

Cooperative Research And Production 

Act Of 1993—Network Centric 

Operations Industry Consortium, Inc. 

Notice is hereby given that, on March 

25, 2015, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the 

National Cooperative Research and 

Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 

et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), Network Centric 

Operations Industry Consortium, Inc. 

(‘‘NCOIC’’) has filed written 

notifications simultaneously with the 

Attorney General and the Federal Trade 

Commission disclosing changes in its 

membership. The notifications were 

filed for the purpose of extending the 

Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of 

antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages 

under specified circumstances. 

Specifically, Harry Raduege (individual 

member), Arlington, VA; Tata Power 

SED, Andheri, Mumbai, INDIA; and 

Vikram Chauhan (individual member), 

Great Falls, VA, have been added as 

parties to this venture. 

In addition, NJVC, LLC, Vienna, VA, 

Saab AB, Ostersund, SWEDEN; and The 

MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA, have 

withdrawn as parties to this venture. 

No other changes have been made in 

either the membership or planned 

activity of the group research project. 

Membership in this group research 

project remains open, and NCOIC 

intends to file additional written 

notifications disclosing all changes in 

membership. 

On November 19, 2004, NCOIC filed 

its original notification pursuant to 

Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department 

of Justice published a notice in the 

Federal Register pursuant to Section 

6(b) of the Act on February 2, 2005 (70 

FR 5486). 

The last notification was filed with 

the Department on January 27, 2015. A 

notice was published in the Federal 

Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the 

Act on February 27, 2015 (80 FR 10716). 

Patricia A. Brink, 

Director of Civil Enforcement Antitrust 

Division. 

[FR Doc. 2015–09322 Filed 4–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–11–P 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES