16766 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 57 / Thursday, March 24, 2022 / Notices 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–1297] 

Certain Video Processing Devices, 

Components Thereof, and Digital 

Smart Televisions Containing the 

Same II; Notice of a Commission 

Determination Not To Review an Initial 

Determination Granting a Motion To 

Intervene of Amazon.Com, Inc. 

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. 9) issued by the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on 

February 25, 2022, granting a motion to 

intervene of Amazon.com, Inc. 

(‘‘Amazon’’). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–2392. 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 

February 3, 2022, the Commission 

instituted this investigation under 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, based on a 

complaint filed by DivX, LLC of San 

Diego, California (‘‘DivX’’). 87 FR 6200– 

01 (Feb. 3, 2022). The complaint alleged 

a violation 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 video processing devices, 

components thereof, and digital smart 

televisions containing the same by 

reason of infringement of certain claims 

of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,832,297 and 

8,472,792. The complaint also alleged 

the existence of a domestic industry. 

The notice of investigation named as 

respondents: TCL Technology Group 

Corporation of Huizhou, Guangdong, 

China; TCL Electronics Holdings 

Limited of Shenzhen, Guangdong, 

China; TTE Technology, Inc. of 

Shenzhen, Guangdong, China; TCL King 

Electrical Appliances (Huizhou) Co. Ltd. 

of Huizhou, Guangdong, China; TCL 

MOKA International Limited of Sha Tin, 

New Territories, Hong Kong; and TCL 

Smart Device (Vietnam) Co., Ltd. of Tan 

Binh Commune, Bae Tan Uyen District, 

Binh Duong Province, Vietnam 

(collectively, ‘‘TCL’’). Id. at 6201. The 

Commission’s Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations was not named as a party 

in this investigation. Id. 

On February 11, 2022, Amazon 

moved pursuant to 19 CFR 210.19 to 

intervene in this investigation. 

Respondents TCL did not oppose. Order 

No. 9, at 1 (Feb. 25, 2022). While 

complainant DivX did not oppose 

Amazon’s requested relief, and ‘‘does 

not otherwise plan to file a response to 

the motion, it (i) takes no position as to 

whether it is more appropriate for 

Amazon to intervene in this 

Investigation as an intervenor or as a 

respondent, and reserves all rights, and 

(ii) makes no representations regarding 

TCL’s knowledge of Amazon 

technology.’’ Id. (quoting Mot. at 1). 

Amazon requests that it be permitted 

to intervene in this investigation as an 

intervenor ‘‘with full participation 

rights and obligations with respect to 

the issues of infringement/noninfringement, validity/invalidity, any 

related subsidiary issues (e.g., claim 

construction), any other issue directed 

to or otherwise involving Amazon’s 

technology, including reasonable 

discovery of the foregoing (subject to 

Amazon’s objections), such as 

responding to discovery requests, 

producing corporate designees for 

deposition and hearing testimony, and 

being subject to motions to compel to 

the same extent as any of the 

Respondents.’’ Id. at 1–2 (quoting Mot. 

at 1). Amazon did not ask to be 

accorded respondent status. Id. at 2 

(citing Mem. at 2–10). 

Amazon explains that DivX accuses 

certain TCL products of infringing the 

asserted patents ‘‘at least in part because 

they use and incorporate Amazon 

technology—primarily, Amazon’s Prime 

Video.’’ Id. (quoting Mem. at 8). 

Amazon therefore contends that it has a 

‘‘substantial interest in this 

investigation with respect to Prime 

Video, and TCL’s interests are not only 

centered on their own devices, but TCL 

also lacks the knowledge and 

information to be able to adequately 

represent Amazon’s interest with 

respect to Prime Video and any other 

Amazon technologies.’’ Id. (quoting 

Mem. at 7). 

On February 25, 2022, the ALJ issued 

the subject ID, granting Amazon’s 

motion. The ID found that there is no 

dispute that Amazon has an interest in 

infringement and invalidity issues 

regarding the asserted patents, that 

Amazon’s interests are not adequately 

protected by TCL, and that intervention 

has been granted in similar 

circumstances in previous 

investigations. Id. at 2–3 (citing Certain 

Communications or Computing Devices 

and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337– 

TA–925, Order No. 6 at 4 (Sept. 9, 2014) 

(granting Google’s motion to intervene), 

unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Oct. 10, 

2014)). The ID further found that there 

is also no dispute that Amazon’s motion 

was timely filed, having been filed only 

days after the institution of the 

investigation. Id. at 3. The ID also found 

that no party claims any undue 

prejudice from Amazon’s intervention, 

and that there is no opposition to 

Amazon’s intervention in this 

investigation. Id. The ID found that, 

therefore, Amazon’s participation will 

facilitate discovery and aid the 

Commission in resolving the parties’ 

dispute. 

On March 3, 2022, DivX, TCL, and 

Amazon filed a letter with the 

Commission requesting an expedited 

determination on whether to review the 

subject ID and indicating that none of 

the parties would petition for review of 

the ID. 

The Commission has determined not 

to review the ID. Amazon’s intervention 

as intervenor in this investigation is 

granted. 

The Commission vote for this 

determination took place on March 18, 

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: March 18, 2022. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–06177 Filed 3–23–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

[Docket No: DOL–2021–00##] 

Privacy Act of 1974; System of 

Records 

AGENCY: Office of Assistant Secretary for 

Administration and Management, DOL. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES