9086 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 33 / Thursday, February 17, 2022 / Notices 

amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the 

importation into the United States, the 

sale for importation, or the sale within 

the United States after importation of 

certain blowers and components thereof 

by reason of infringement of one or 

more of claims 1, 2, 7–10, and 15 of U.S. 

Patent No. 8,079,834 (‘‘the ’834 patent’’). 

Id. at 55492. The Commission’s notice 

of investigation named as respondents 

East West Manufacturing, LLC of 

Atlanta, Georgia, and East West 

Industries of Binh Duong, Vietnam 

(collectively, ‘‘East West’’ or 

‘‘Respondents’’). Id. at 55492. The Office 

of Unfair Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) 

did not participate as a party in the 

original investigation. Id. 

On November 12, 2020, the 

Commission terminated the original 

investigation with respect to 

Respondents based upon a consent 

order stipulation and entry of a consent 

order. 85 FR 73511 (Nov. 18, 2020). The 

Consent Order directs East West to ‘‘not 

sell for importation, import or sell after 

importation the Subject Articles . . . 

except under consent or license from 

Complainant.’’ Consent Order at ¶ 5. 

The Consent Order defines ‘‘Subject 

Articles’’ as ‘‘certain blowers and 

components thereof that infringe claims 

1, 2, 7–10, and 15 of the ’834 Patent.’’ 

Id. at ¶ 3. 

On January 15, 2021, Regal filed an 

enforcement complaint at the 

Commission alleging that East West’s 

redesigned blower infringes claims 1, 2, 

7–10, and 15 of the ’834 patent in 

violation of the consent order. On 

February 19, 2021, the Commission 

instituted a formal enforcement 

proceeding, pursuant to Commission 

Rule 210.75(a), to determine whether a 

violation of the consent order issued in 

the original investigation has occurred 

and to determine what, if any, 

enforcement measures are appropriate. 

86 FR 10335 (Feb. 19, 2021). The 

respondents named in the enforcement 

proceeding are the same as the 

respondents named in the original 

investigation, i.e., East West 

Manufacturing, LLC of Atlanta, Georgia, 

and East West Industries of Binh Duong, 

Vietnam. Id. OUII was named as a party 

in the enforcement proceeding. Id. 

On March 1, 2021, East West filed a 

motion for monetary and other 

sanctions alleging that Regal and its 

attorneys tampered with and 

misrepresented the accused redesigned 

blower in the enforcement complaint. 

Regal and OUII filed responses thereto 

on March 11, 2021, and March 18, 2021, 

respectively. The presiding 

Administrative Law Judge (‘‘ALJ’’) 

further permitted the private parties to 

file replies and sur-replies to the 

sanctions briefing. EID at 16. 

On June 29, 2021, the ALJ issued a 

Markman Order (Order No. 22), styled 

‘‘Markman Claim Constructions With 

Abbreviated Rationales’’ (‘‘Markman 

Order I’’). On July 13, 2021, the ALJ 

issued Order No. 23, clarifying Order 

No. 22. 

The ALJ held an evidentiary hearing 

from July 20–23, 2021 and received 

post-hearing briefs thereafter. On 

September 22, 2021, the ALJ held a 

supplemental hearing on the sanctions 

motion. EID at 18. 

On October 29, 2021, the ALJ issued 

Order No. 32 (Markman Order II), 

providing extensive explanations as to 

the adopted constructions in Order No. 

22. 

On December 14, 2021, the ALJ issued 

the subject EID finding no violation of 

the consent order. The EID found that 

the parties do not contest personal 

jurisdiction, and that the Commission 

has in rem jurisdiction over the accused 

products. EID at 19–20. The EID noted 

that the private parties filed a ‘‘Joint 

Stipulation on Importation and Sales,’’ 

describing ‘‘the number of units of the 

Accused or Redesigned Blower that East 

West imported and sold.’’ Id. at 20. The 

EID found that Regal failed to show that 

East West’s redesigned blower infringes 

asserted claims 1, 2, 7–10, and 15 of the 

’834 patent, and thus failed to show a 

violation of the consent order. See id. at 

9–10. The EID states that ‘‘in the event 

the Commission were to find to the 

contrary, an imposed civil penalty 

should be de minimus and not the 

maximum civil penalty that Regal has 

proposed.’’ Id. at 10. Specifically, the 

EID recommends that ‘‘East West 

disgorge its profits plus an additional 

one-half of its profits from any sales that 

violated the Consent Order.’’ Id. at 10– 

11. 

On December 14, 2021, the ALJ also 

issued Order No. 36 denying East West’s 

motion for monetary sanctions. The ALJ 

issued a public warning to Regal, citing 

the Commission’s sanctions authority 

under Commission Rule 210.4(c) and 

(d), 19 CFR 210.4(c), (d), and ordered 

Regal to correct potentially misleading 

portions of the enforcement complaint. 

On January 4, 2022, Regal filed a 

petition for review of the EID, and 

Respondents filed a contingent petition 

for review of the EID and a petition for 

review of Order No. 36. On January 10, 

2022, the parties replied to the petitions 

for review. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the EID, the 

petitions for review, and the responses 

thereto, the Commission has determined 

to review the EID in its entirety. The 

Commission has also determined to 

review Order No. 36. 

The Commission does not request 

additional briefing from the parties. 

The Commission’s vote on this 

determination took place on February 

11, 2022. 

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 210). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: February 11, 2022. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–03402 Filed 2–16–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–1196] 

Certain In Vitro Fertilization Products, 

Components Thereof, and Products 

Containing the Same; Commission 

Decision Not To Review a Final Initial 

Determination Finding a Violation of 

Section 337; Schedule for Filing 

Written Submissions on Remedy, the 

Public Interest, and Bonding 

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 a final initial determination 

(‘‘FID’’) of the presiding Administrative 

Law Judge (‘‘ALJ’’) finding a violation of 

section 337 by respondents Fast IVF of 

Scottsdale, Arizona (‘‘Fast IVF’’) and 

Hermes Ezcanesi of Istanbul, Turkey 

(collectively, the ‘‘Defaulting 

Respondents’’). The Commission also 

requests written submissions from the 

parties, interested government agencies 

and interested persons, under the 

schedule set forth below, on remedy, the 

public interest, and bonding. 

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 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 33 / Thursday, February 17, 2022 / Notices 9087 

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 April 

16, 2020, 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 complainant EMD 

Serono, Inc. of Rockland, Massachusetts 

(‘‘Complainant’’). See 85 FR 21267–68 

(Apr. 16, 2020). The complaint, as 

amended and supplemented, alleges a 

violation of section 337 based on the 

importation into the United States, the 

sale for importation, and the sale within 

the United States after importation of 

certain in vitro fertilization products, 

components thereof, and products 

containing same (collectively, ‘‘Gray 

Market IVF Products’’), by reason of 

infringement of U.S. Trademark 

Registration Nos. 4,689,651; 1,772,761; 

3,777,170; 3,389,332; 3,816,320; 

1,972,079; 3,604,207; and 3,185,427 

(collectively, ‘‘the Asserted 

Trademarks’’); unfair methods of 

competition and unfair acts in the 

importation and sale of Gray Market IVF 

Products by reason of false designation 

of source; and unfair methods of 

competition and unfair acts in the 

importation and sale of the Gray Market 

IVF Products by reason of false 

advertising. See id. In addition to the 

Defaulting Respondents, the notice of 

investigation names General Plastik 

Drug Stores (‘‘Unserved Respondent’’) of 

Istanbul Suadiye, Turkey as a 

respondent in this investigation. See id. 

The Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations is also a party to the 

investigation. See id. 

On September 1, 2020, the Chief ALJ 

issued an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) 

finding each of the Defaulting 

Respondents in default. See Order No. 

6 (Sept. 1, 2020), unreviewed by 

Comm’n Notice (Sept. 24, 2020). On 

October 13, 2020, the Chief ALJ also 

issued an ID terminating Unserved 

Respondent from the investigation 

based on the withdrawal of the 

complaint allegations as to that 

respondent. See Order No. 8 (Oct. 13, 

2020), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice 

(Oct. 26, 2020). 

On April 16, 2021, the Chief ALJ 

issued an ID (Order No. 10) (‘‘SD’’) 

granting in part Complainant’s motion 

for summary determination of violation 

of section 337 by the Defaulting 

Respondents with respect to 

Complainant’s claim under section 

337(a)(1)(C) (infringement of the 

Asserted Trademarks) but denied the 

motion with respect to Complainant’s 

unfair competition claims under section 

337(a)(1)(A). The SD also finds that 

Complainant has satisfied the economic 

prong of the domestic industry 

requirement under subsection (C) of 

section 337(a)(3). 

On May 18, 2021, the Commission 

determined to review the SD (Order No. 

10) in part. See Comm’n Notice (May 18, 

2021). Specifically, the Commission 

determined to review the SD’s findings 

with respect to the economic prong of 

the domestic industry requirement. See 

id. The Commission determined not to 

review any other findings in the SD. 

On October 6, 2021, the Commission 

determined to vacate the SD in part. 

Specifically, the Commission vacated 

the SD’s finding that Complainant has 

satisfied the economic prong of the 

domestic industry requirement. 

Consequently, the Commission also 

vacated the SD’s finding of a violation 

of section 337 and remanded the 

investigation to the Chief ALJ. 

Commissioners Karpel and Schmidtlein 

dissented from the Commission’s 

decision that Complainant had failed to 

satisfy the economic prong of the 

domestic industry requirement and 

would have found a violation of Section 

337 based on substantial, reliable, and 

probative evidence. 

After the Commission decision to 

vacate the SD, EMD Serono abandoned 

its request for a general exclusion order; 

thereafter, it requested a limited 

exclusion order against both defaulting 

respondents and a cease and desist 

order against FastIVF. See FID at 6 

(citing Motion Docket No. 1196–008 at 

1 n.1, 8–9). On December 15, 2021, the 

ALJ issued an ID partially terminating 

the investigation as to Complainant’s 

unfair competition claims under section 

337(a)(1)(A). See Order No. 13 (Dec. 15, 

2021), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice 

(Jan 10, 2022). 

On December 15, 2021, the ALJ issued 

the FID finding a violation of section 

337 based on the infringement by the 

Defaulting Respondents of 

Complainant’s Asserted Trademarks 

pursuant to section 337(g)(1), 19 U.S.C. 

1337(g)(1). In addition, the ALJ 

recommended that the Commission 

issue a limited exclusion order (‘‘LEO’’) 

against the infringing articles imported 

by or on behalf of the Defaulting 

Respondents and a cease and desist 

order (‘‘CDO’’) against FastIVF. 

No petition for review of the FID was 

filed. 

On January 4, 2022, Complainant filed 

a statement on the public interest 

pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50, 19 

CFR 210.50. On the same day, 

Complainant filed a declaration 

requesting relief against the Defaulting 

Respondents, namely, an LEO against 

the Defaulting Respondents’ infringing 

products and a CDO against FastIVF. No 

third-party submissions were filed in 

response to the Federal Register notice 

requesting public interest comments. 

See 86 FR 72620–21 (Dec. 22, 2021). 

The Commission has determined not 

to review the FID. 

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 Certain Devices for 

Connecting Computers via Telephone 

Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, USITC 

Pub. No. 2843, Comm’n Op. at 7–10 

(Dec. 1994). 

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, or take no action on the 

Commission’s determination. See 

Presidential Memorandum of July 21, 

2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). 

During this period, the subject articles 

would be entitled to enter the United 

States under bond, in an amount 

determined by the Commission and 

prescribed by the Secretary of the 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
9088 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 33 / Thursday, February 17, 2022 / Notices 

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 also address the 

recommended determination by the ALJ 

on remedy and bonding. Complainant is 

also requested to submit proposed 

remedial orders for the Commission’s 

consideration. Complainant is further 

requested to provide the HTSUS 

numbers under which the accused 

products are imported, and to supply 

the names of known importers of the 

products at issue in this investigation. 

Written submissions and proposed 

remedial orders must be filed no later 

than close of business on February 28, 

2022. Reply submissions must be filed 

no later than the close of business on 

March 7, 2022. No further submissions 

on any of these issues will be permitted 

unless otherwise ordered by the 

Commission. 

Persons filing written submissions 

must file the original document 

electronically on or before the deadlines 

stated above. The Commission’s paper 

filing requirements in 19 CFR 210.4(f) 

are currently waived. 85 FR 15798 

(March 19, 2020). Submissions should 

refer to the investigation number (‘‘Inv. 

No. 337–TA–1196’’) in a prominent 

place on the cover page and/or the first 

page. (See Handbook for Electronic 

Filing Procedures, https://

www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_

on_filing_procedures.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 by marking each document 

with a header indicating that the 

document contains confidential 

information. This marking will be 

deemed to satisfy the request procedure 

set forth in Rules 201.6(b) and 

210.5(e)(2) (19 CFR 201.6(b) & 

210.5(e)(2)). Documents for which 

confidential treatment by the 

Commission is properly sought will be 

treated accordingly. All information, 

including confidential business 

information and documents for which 

confidential treatment is properly 

sought, submitted to the Commission for 

purposes of this Investigation may be 

disclosed to and used: (i) By the 

Commission, its employees and Offices, 

and contract personnel (a) for 

developing or maintaining the records 

of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in 

internal investigations, audits, reviews, 

and evaluations relating to the 

programs, personnel, and operations of 

the Commission including under 5 

U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. 

government employees and contract 

personnel, solely for cybersecurity 

purposes. All contract personnel will 

sign appropriate nondisclosure 

agreements. All non-confidential 

written submissions will be available for 

public inspection at the Office of the 

Secretary and on EDIS. 

While temporary remote operating 

procedures are in place in response to 

COVID–19, the Office of the Secretary is 

not able to serve parties that have not 

retained counsel or otherwise provided 

a point of contact for electronic service. 

Accordingly, pursuant to Commission 

Rules 201.16(a) and 210.7(a)(1) (19 CFR 

201.16(a), 210.7(a)(1)), the Commission 

orders that the Complainant(s) complete 

service for any party/parties without a 

method of electronic service noted on 

the attached Certificate of Service and 

shall file proof of service on the 

Electronic Document Information 

System (EDIS). 

The Commission’s vote for this 

determination took place on February 

11, 2022. 

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: February 11, 2022. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–03404 Filed 2–16–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION 

Retrospective Review of Regulations 

AGENCY: Legal Services Corporation. 

ACTION: Request for information. 

SUMMARY: The Legal Services 

Corporation (LSC) is requesting public 

input on its regulatory priorities in 2022 

and future years. Although LSC makes 

its regulatory priorities available for 

public comment annually in April, LSC 

has not formally sought the public’s 

views on its regulatory activities since 

2007. 

DATES: Comments due May 18, 2022. 

Listening sessions, all conducted via 

Zoom, all times Eastern: 

1. Thursday, March 3, 2022, 11:00 a.m.– 

1:00 p.m. 

2. Monday, March 14, 2022 2:00 p.m.– 

4:00 p.m. 

3. Tuesday, March 29, 2022, 3:00 p.m.– 

5:00 p.m. 

4. Wednesday, April 13, 10:00 a.m.– 

12:00 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Email: lscrulemaking@lsc.gov. 

Include ‘‘2022 Regulatory Review 

Comments’’ in the subject line of the 

message. 

• Fax: 202–337–6519. Please send to 

the attention of Stefanie Davis, Senior 

Associate General Counsel, and include 

‘‘2022 Regulatory Review Comments’’ 

on the cover page. 

• Mail: Legal Services Corporation, 

ATTN: Stefanie Davis, Senior Associate 

General Counsel, 3333 K Street NW, 

Washington, DC 20007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stefanie Davis, Senior Associate General 

Counsel, Legal Services Corporation, 

3333 K Street NW, Washington, DC 

20007; (202) 295–1563 (phone); 202– 

337–6831 (fax); or sdavis@lsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Listening Session Access Information: 

To participate in the listening sessions 

via Zoom, please follow the link or use 

the dial-in instructions below: 

Link: https://lsc-gov.zoom.us/j/ 

2464362303. 

Meeting ID: 246 436 2303. 

Find your local number: https://lscgov.zoom.us/u/a293EJE37. 

Background: LSC last solicited input 

broadly on its Rulemaking Agenda in 

2007 via an email to Executive 

Directors. In the intervening years, LSC 

has identified rulemaking priorities 

through a combination of: 

• LSC Task Force reports; 

• Comments from stakeholders, 

including grantees, the client board 

member community, LSC’s Board of 

Directors, and the National Legal Aid 

and Defender Association; 

• Audit and investigation reports 

issued by LSC’s Office of the Inspector 

General; 

• Statutory changes; and 

• Discrete situations that indicated a 

need for rulemaking. 

Since 2010, LSC has completed 17 

separate rulemakings. These 

rulemakings have ranged from ones 

needed to reflect Congressional action, 

such as revisions to the Freedom of 

Information Act or the expansion of 

grantees’ authority to represent 

defendants in Tribal criminal courts 

under the Tribal Law and Order Act of 

2010, to complete overhauls of LSC’s 

subgrant rule. LSC repealed one 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1