Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 63 / Friday, April 3, 2009 / Notices 15301 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

Custer County 

Hermosa Masonic Lodge, W. side of 2nd St., 

between Folsom St. and Hwy 40, Hermosa, 

09000043, LISTED, 2/17/09 

Hutchinson County 

Tucek-Sykora Farmstead, 28883 412th Ave., 

Tripp vicinity, 09000044, LISTED, 2/17/09 

(Czech Folk Architecture in Southeastern 

South Dakota MRA) 

VIRGINIA 

Louisa County 

Baker-Strickler House, 10074 W. Gordon Rd., 

Gordonsville, 09000046, LISTED, 2/18/09 

WISCONSIN 

Columbia County 

Mills, Richard W. and Margaret, House, 104 

Grand Ave., Lodi, 09000048, LISTED, 

2/18/09 

* Denotes: Federal determination of 

eligibility. 

[FR Doc. E9–7526 Filed 4–2–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–51–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–631] 

In the Matter of Certain Liquid Crystal 

Display Devices and Products 

Containing the Same; Notice of 

Commission Decision To Review-inPart a Final Initial Determination 

Finding a Violation of Section 337; 

Request for Written Submissions 

Regarding Remedy, Bonding, and the 

Public Interest; and Extension of 

Target Date 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined to reviewin-part a final initial determination 

(‘‘ID’’) of the presiding administrative 

law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) finding a violation of 

section 337 in the above-captioned 

investigation, and to request written 

submissions regarding remedy, bonding, 

and the public interest. The 

Commission has also extended the 

target date for completion of the 

investigation by 30 days until May 27, 

2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Clint Gerdine, Esq., Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–2310. Copies of non-confidential 

documents filed in connection with this 

investigation are or 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 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. 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: The 

Commission instituted this investigation 

on January 25, 2008, based on a 

complaint filed by Samsung Electronics 

Co., Ltd. (‘‘Samsung’’) of Korea. 73 FR 

4626–27. The complaint, as 

supplemented, alleges violations of 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, 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 liquid crystal display (‘‘LCD’’) 

devices and products containing the 

same by reason of infringement of 

certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 

7,193,666 (‘‘the ’666 patent’’); 6,771,344 

(‘‘the ’344 patent’’); 7,295,196; and 

6,937,311 (‘‘the ’311 patent’’). The 

complaint further alleges the existence 

of a domestic industry. The 

Commission’s notice of investigation 

named the following respondents: Sharp 

Corporation of Japan; Sharp Electronics 

Corporation of Mahwah, New Jersey; 

and Sharp Electronics Manufacturing 

Company of America, Inc. of San Diego, 

California (collectively ‘‘Sharp’’). 

On January 26, 2009, the ALJ issued 

his final ID finding a violation of section 

337 by respondents. On February 9, 

2009, Sharp and the Commission 

investigative attorney (‘‘IA’’) filed 

petitions for review of the final ID. The 

IA and Samsung filed responses to the 

petitions on February 17, 2009. Also, on 

March 12, 2009, Sharp filed a motion to 

extend the target date for completion of 

the investigation to allow consideration 

of the final ID scheduled to issue in 

Certain Liquid Crystal Display Modules, 

Products Containing Same, and 

Methods for Using the Same, Inv. No. 

337–TA–634, on June 12, 2009. On 

March 23, 2009, Samsung and the IA 

filed responses in opposition to Sharp’s 

motion. On March 26, Sharp filed a 

motion for leave to file a reply to 

Samsung’s and the IA’s responses in 

opposition. 

Upon considering the parties’ filings, 

the Commission has determined to 

review-in-part the ID. Specifically, the 

Commission has determined to review: 

(1) The ALJ’s construction of the claim 

term ‘‘domain dividers’’ relating to the 

’311 patent; (2) the ALJ’s determination 

that Sharp’s LCD devices infringe the 

’311 patent; (3) the ALJ’s determination 

that the ’311 patent is not 

unenforceable; and (4) the ALJ’s 

determination that the asserted claims 

of the ’344 patent are not invalid as 

anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 5,309,264 

(‘‘the ’264 patent’’). The Commission 

has determined not to review the 

remainder of the ID. Also, the 

Commission has extended the target 

date for completion of the investigation 

by 30 days until May 27, 2009, for 

procedural reasons. It has denied 

Sharp’s motion to extend the target date 

to the extent necessary to allow 

consideration of the final ID to issue in 

Inv. No. 337–TA–634. Also, the 

Commission has denied Sharp’s motion 

for leave to file a reply to Samsung’s and 

the IA’s responses in opposition to 

Sharp’s motion to extend the target date. 

On review, with respect to violation, 

the parties are requested to submit 

briefing limited to the following issues: 

(1) Whether one of ordinary skill in 

the art would understand that the claim 

term ‘‘domain dividers’’ in claims 6 and 

8 of the ’311 patent includes 

protrusions, in light of the intrinsic 

evidence and the context of the claimed 

invention. Please discuss Wang Labs, 

Inc. v. Am. Online, 197 F.3d 1377 (Fed. 

Cir. 1999) in your response. 

(2) Under the ID’s construction for the 

claim term ‘‘domain dividers’’ which 

includes protrusions, whether claims 6 

and 8 of the ’311 patent are invalid 

under 35 U.S.C. 112, ¶ 1. Please discuss 

ICU Med., Inc. v. Alaris Med. Sys., No. 

2008–1077, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 5271 

(Fed. Cir. Mar. 13, 2009) and 

LizardTech, Inc. v. Earth Res. Mapping, 

Inc., 424 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2005) in 

your response. 

(3) Under the ID’s construction of 

‘‘aperture’’in claims 7 and 8 of the ‘344 

patent, (a) whether U.S. Patent No. 

5,309,264 anticipates those claims; and 

(b) how the ‘‘orientation’’ of a multipronged aperture is determined. 

Assume the Commission finds that all 

other claim terms are met. 

In addressing these issues, the parties 

are requested to make specific reference 

to the evidentiary record and to cite 

relevant authority. 

In connection with the final 

disposition of this investigation, the 

Commission may issue an order that 

results in the exclusion of the subject 

articles from entry into the United 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
15302 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 63 / Friday, April 3, 2009 / Notices 

States. 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 In the Matter of Certain 

Devices for Connecting Computers via 

Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, 

USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994) 

(Commission Opinion). 

When 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. 

When the Commission orders some 

form of remedy, the U.S. Trade 

Representative, as delegated by the 

President, has 60 days to approve or 

disapprove the Commission’s action. 

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 

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: The parties to 

the investigation are requested to file 

written submissions on the issues under 

review. The submissions should be 

concise and thoroughly referenced to 

the record in this investigation. 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, and such submissions should 

address the recommended 

determination by the ALJ on remedy 

and bonding. The complainant and the 

Commission investigative attorney are 

also requested to submit proposed 

remedial orders for the Commission’s 

consideration. Complainants are also 

requested to state the dates that the 

patents at issue expire and the HTSUS 

numbers under which the accused 

products are imported. The written 

submissions and proposed remedial 

orders must be filed no later than close 

of business on April 10, 2009. Reply 

submissions must be filed no later than 

the close of business on April 17. No 

further submissions on these issues will 

be permitted unless otherwise ordered 

by the Commission. 

Persons filing written submissions 

must file the original document and 12 

true copies thereof on or before the 

deadlines stated above with the Office 

of the Secretary. Any person desiring to 

submit a document to the Commission 

in confidence must request confidential 

treatment unless the information has 

already been granted such treatment 

during the proceedings. All such 

requests should be directed to the 

Secretary of the Commission and must 

include a full statement of the reasons 

why the Commission should grant such 

treatment. See 19 CFR 210.6. Documents 

for which confidential treatment by the 

Commission is sought will be treated 

accordingly. All nonconfidential written 

submissions will be available for public 

inspection at the Office of the Secretary. 

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 

sections 210.42–46 of the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 

210.42–46. 

Issued: March 30, 2009. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

William R. Bishop, 

Acting Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–7478 Filed 4–2–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree 

Under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

Notice is hereby given that on March 

23, 2009, a proposed consent decree in 

United States, et al., v. Petroleum 

Reclaiming Service, Inc., No. 09-cv05157, was lodged with the United 

States District Court for the Western 

District of Washington. 

In this action, the United States, State 

of Washington, Puyallup Tribe of 

Indians and Muckleshoot Indian Tribe 

sought natural resource damages for 

releases of hazardous substances into 

Commencement Bay, Washington. 

Under the consent decree, defendant 

will pay $638,391.06 in natural resource 

damages and reimburse $111,608.94 in 

damage assessment costs. 

For thirty (30) days after the date of 

this publication, the Department of 

Justice will receive comments relating to 

the Consent Decree. Comments should 

be addressed to the Assistant Attorney 

General, Environment and Natural 

Resources Division, and either e-mailed 

to pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov or 

mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. 

Department of Justice, Washington, DC 

20044–7611. In either case, the 

comments should refer to United States 

v. Petroleum Reclaiming Service, Inc., 

No. 09-cv-05157, D.J. Ref. No. 90–11–2– 

1049/14. 

During the comment period, the 

Consent Decree may be examined on the 

following Department of Justice Web 

site: http://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ 

Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the 

Consent Decree may also be obtained by 

mail from the Consent Decree Library, 

P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of 

Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611, or 

by faxing or e-mailing a request to Tonia 

Fleetwood (tonia.fleetwood@usdoj.gov), 

fax no. (202) 514–0097, phone 

confirmation number (202) 514–1547. In 

requesting a copy from the Consent 

Decree Library, please enclose a check 

in the amount of $6.25 (25 cents per 

page reproduction cost) payable to the 

United States Treasury or, if by e-mail 

or fax, forward a check in that amount 

to the Consent Decree Library at the 

stated address. 

Maureen Katz, 

Assistant Section Chief, Environmental 

Enforcement Section, Environment and 

Natural Resources Division. 

[FR Doc. E9–7474 Filed 4–2–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms 

and Explosives 

[OMB Number 1140–NEW] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comments Requested 

ACTION: 30-Day Notice of Information 

Collection Under Review: Student and 

Supervisor Training Validation Surveys. 

The Department of Justice (DOJ), 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms 

and Explosives (ATF) will be submitting 

the following information collection 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES