38424 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 28, 2022 / Notices 

investigation, issue a limited exclusion 

order and cease and desist orders. 

ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for 

any confidential information contained 

therein, may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

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

accessing EDIS, please email 

EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. Hearing impaired 

individuals are advised that information 

on this matter can be obtained by 

contacting the Commission’s TDD 

terminal on (202) 205–1810. Persons 

with mobility impairments who will 

need special assistance in gaining access 

to the Commission should contact the 

Office of the Secretary at (202) 205– 

2000. General information concerning 

the Commission may also be obtained 

by accessing its internet server at 

https://www.usitc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Katherine Hiner, Office of Docket 

Services, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, telephone (202) 205–1802. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority: The authority for 

institution of this investigation is 

contained in section 337 of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 

1337, and in section 210.10 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2021). 

Scope of Investigation: Having 

considered the complaint, the U.S. 

International Trade Commission, on 

June 22, 2022, ordered that— 

(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, an investigation be instituted 

to determine whether there is a 

violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) 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 products 

identified in paragraph (2) by reason of 

infringement of one or more of claims 

1–30 of the ’649 patent; claims 1–20 of 

the ’650 patent; claims 1–3, 5–7, and 20 

of the ’519 patent; claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, 

11, 12, 16, 19, and 20 of the ’188 patent; 

and claims 1–4, 13, 19–22, 25, 26, 29– 

32, 40, 42, 47–50, and 57 of the ’309 

patent, and whether an industry in the 

United States exists as required by 

subsection (a)(2) of section 337; 

(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of 

the Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the 

plain language description of the 

accused products or category of accused 

products, which defines the scope of the 

investigation, is ‘‘barcode scanners (also 

known as barcode readers, barcode 

decoders, stationary scanners, handheld 

scanners, companion scanners, cabled 

scanners, wireless scanners, and mobile 

scanning devices), handheld computers, 

mobility devices, scan engines, 

undecoded scan engines, decoder 

boards, and imaging modules’’; 

(3) For the purpose of the 

investigation so instituted, the following 

are hereby named as parties upon which 

this notice of investigation shall be 

served: 

(a) The complainants are: 

Honeywell International Inc., 855 S 

Mint Street, Charlotte, NC 28202 

Hand Held Products, Inc., 855 S Mint 

Street, Charlotte, NC 28202 

(b) The respondents are the following 

entities alleged to be in violation of 

section 337, and are the parties upon 

which the complaint is to be served: 

Zebra Technologies Corporation, 3 

Overlook Point, Lincolnshire, IL 

60069 

Symbol Technologies, Inc., 1 Zebra 

Plaza, Holtsville, NY 11742 

(4) For the investigation so instituted, 

the Chief Administrative Law Judge, 

U.S. International Trade Commission, 

shall designate the presiding 

Administrative Law Judge. 

The Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations will not participate as a 

party to this investigation. 

Responses to the complaint and the 

notice of investigation must be 

submitted by the named respondents in 

accordance with section 210.13 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 

19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), as 

amended in 85 FR 15798 (March 19, 

2020), such responses will be 

considered by the Commission if 

received not later than 20 days after the 

date of service by the complainants of 

the complaint and the notice of 

investigation. Extensions of time for 

submitting responses to the complaint 

and the notice of investigation will not 

be granted unless good cause therefor is 

shown. 

Failure of a respondent to file a timely 

response to each allegation in the 

complaint and in this notice may be 

deemed to constitute a waiver of the 

right to appear and contest the 

allegations of the complaint and this 

notice, and to authorize the 

administrative law judge and the 

Commission, without further notice to 

the respondent, to find the facts to be as 

alleged in the complaint and this notice 

and to enter an initial determination 

and a final determination containing 

such findings, and may result in the 

issuance of an exclusion order or a cease 

and desist order or both directed against 

the respondent. 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: June 22, 2022. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13718 Filed 6–27–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–1258] 

Certain Smart Thermostat Systems, 

Smart HVAC Systems, Smart HVAC 

Control Systems, and Components 

Thereof; Commission Decision To 

Review in Part a Final Initial 

Determination; Commission Final 

Determination Finding No Violation of 

Section 337; Termination of 

Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined to review 

in part a final initial determination 

(‘‘FID’’) of the presiding Administrative 

Law Judge (‘‘ALJ’’). On review, the 

Commission affirms the FID’s finding of 

no violation of section 337 of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended, in this 

investigation. 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 April 

2, 2021, 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 EcoFactor, Inc. of 

Palo Alto, California (‘‘Complainant’’). 

See 86 FR 17402–03 (Apr. 2, 2021). The 

complaint, as amended and 

supplemented, alleges a violation of 

section 337 based upon the importation 

into the United States, the sale for 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 123 / Tuesday, June 28, 2022 / Notices 38425 

importation, and the sale within the 

United States after importation of 

certain smart thermostat systems, smart 

HVAC systems, smart HVAC control 

systems, and components thereof by 

reason of infringement of certain claims 

of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,423,322 (‘‘the ’322 

patent’’); 8,019,567 (‘‘the ’567 patent’’); 

10,612,983 (‘‘the ’983 patent’’); 

8,596,550 (‘‘the ’550 patent’’); and 

8,886,488 (‘‘the ’488 patent’’). See id. 

The notice of investigation names the 

following respondents: ecobee Ltd. and 

ecobee, Inc. of Toronto, Canada 

(collectively, ‘‘ecobee’’); Google LLC of 

Mountain View, California (‘‘Google’’); 

Carrier Global Corporation of Palm 

Beach Gardens, Florida (‘‘Carrier’’); 

Emerson Electric Co. of St. Louis, 

Missouri (‘‘Emerson’’); Honeywell 

International Inc. of Charlotte, North 

Carolina (‘‘Honeywell’’); Resideo 

Technologies, Inc. of Austin, Texas 

(‘‘Resideo’’); Johnson Controls 

International, PLC of Cork, Ireland 

(‘‘JCP’’); and Siemens Industry, Inc. of 

Buffalo Grove, Illinois and Siemens AG 

of Munich, Germany (collectively, 

‘‘Siemens’’). See id. The Office of Unfair 

Import Investigations is not a party to 

the investigation. See id. 

The Commission previously 

terminated the investigation as to 

respondents Emerson, Siemens, 

Honeywell, Resideo, and Carrier based 

on the withdrawal of the allegations in 

the complaint as to those respondents. 

See Order No. 3 (Apr. 12, 2021), 

unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Apr. 29, 

2021); Order No. 7 (May 13, 2021), 

unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (May 24, 

2021); Order No. 13 (July 16, 2021), 

unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (July 30, 

2021). 

On May 11, 2021, the Commission 

amended the complaint and notice of 

investigation to add respondent Johnson 

Controls Inc. (‘‘JCI’’) and to terminate 

respondent JCP. See Order No. 4 (Apr. 

20, 2021), unreviewed by Comm’n 

Notice (May 11, 2021). On August 6, 

2021, the Commission terminated the 

investigation as to JCI based on 

settlement. See Order No. 17 (Aug. 6, 

2021), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice 

(Aug. 18, 2021). Respondents ecobee 

and Google (hereinafter, ‘‘Respondents’’) 

remain in this investigation. 

On August 18, 2021, the Commission 

terminated the investigation as to the 

’322 patent based on the withdrawal of 

the allegations in the complaint as to 

that patent. See Order No. 16 (Aug. 5, 

2021), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice 

(Aug. 18, 2021). On December 8, 2021, 

the Commission terminated the 

investigation as to the ’567 and ’983 

patents based on the withdrawal of the 

allegations in the complaint as to those 

patents. See Order No. 26 (Nov. 8, 

2021), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice 

(Dec. 8, 2021). Claims 9 and 17 of the 

’550 patent and claims 1 and 2 of the 

’488 patent (collectively, ‘‘the Asserted 

Patents’’) remain in this investigation. 

On September 1, 2021, the ALJ issued 

a claim construction order construing 

certain terms disputed by the parties 

before the ALJ. See Order No. 18 (Sept 

1, 2021). In addition, the ALJ 

determined that the asserted claims of 

the ’567 patent were invalid as 

indefinite. See id. 

On April 4, 2022, the ALJ issued the 

FID finding no violation of section 337. 

In particular, the FID finds that 

Complainant failed to establish 

infringement of any of the asserted 

claims of the ’550 and ’488 patents by 

the Respondents. In addition, the FID 

finds all of the asserted claims to be 

invalid as follows: (1) claims 9 and 17 

of the ’550 patent and claims 1 and 2 of 

the ’488 patent lack written description 

under 35 U.S.C. 112 (section 112); and 

(2) claim 9 (but not claim 17) of the ’550 

patent and claims 1 and 2 of the ’488 

patent are patent ineligible under 35 

U.S.C. 101 (section 101). The FID also 

finds that claims 9 and 17 of the ’550 

patent and claims 1 and 2 of the ’488 

patent are not invalid as anticipated or 

obvious under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 

(section 102 or 103). Furthermore, the 

FID finds that the technical prong is not 

satisfied with respect to any of the 

asserted claims. The FID also finds that 

the economic prong of the domestic 

industry requirement is satisfied with 

respect to both Asserted Patents. 

The ALJ’s Recommended 

Determination (‘‘RD’’) recommends, 

should the Commission find a violation 

of section 337, that the Commission 

issue a limited exclusion order against 

smart thermostat systems, smart HVAC 

systems, smart HVAC control systems, 

and components thereof imported by or 

on behalf of the Respondents. The RD 

does not recommend issuance of a cease 

and desist order against any of the 

Respondents. In addition, the RD 

recommends that the Commission 

decline to set a bond during the period 

of Presidential review. 

On April 18, 2022, both Complainant 

and Respondents filed petitions for 

Commission review of the FID. 

Complainant petitions for Commission 

review of the FID’s findings on: (1) 

certain claim constructions; (2) noninfringement; (3) invalidity for lack of 

written description under section 112; 

and (4) patent ineligibility under section 

101 of claim 9 of the ’550 patent and 

claims 1 and 2 of the ’488 patent. 

Respondents contingently petition for 

Commission review of the FID’s 

findings on: (1) certain infringement 

findings; (2) validity of claims 1 and 2 

of the ’488 patent under section 102 or 

103; (3) patent eligibility of claim 17 of 

the ’550 patent under section 101; and 

(4) the economic prong of the domestic 

industry requirement. On April 26, 

2022, the parties filed responses to each 

other’s petition. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the FID and the 

parties’ submissions, the Commission 

has determined to review in part and, 

upon review, to affirm the FID’s 

determination of no violation of section 

337. Specifically, as explained in the 

Commission Opinion issued 

concurrently herewith, the Commission 

has determined to: (1) modify the FID’s 

claim construction findings with respect 

to the terms ‘‘measurement’’ and 

‘‘operational efficiency’’; (2) affirm with 

modifications the FID’s noninfringement findings as to both 

Asserted Patents; (3) take no position as 

to the FID’s finding that the technical 

prong of the domestic industry 

requirement is not satisfied as to both 

Asserted Patents; (4) take no position as 

to the FID’s invalidity findings for lack 

of written description and patent 

ineligibility as to both Asserted Patents; 

(5) take no position as to the FID’s 

finding that claim 1 of the ’488 patent 

is not anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 

6,478,233 (‘‘Shah’’) and that claim 2 of 

the ’488 patent is not obvious over Shah 

in view of U.S. Patent No. 6,789,739 

(‘‘Rosen’’); and (6) take no position as to 

the economic prong of the domestic 

industry requirement. The Commission 

adopts all findings in the FID that are 

not inconsistent with the Commission’s 

determination. 

The investigation is terminated. 

The Commission’s vote for this 

determination took place on June 22, 

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: June 22, 2022. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–13717 Filed 6–27–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES