[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 1, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19319-19320]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10818]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-371]


Certain Memory Devices With Increased Capacitance and Products 
Containing Same; Notice of Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial 
Determination Terminating the Investigation on the Basis of a Finding 
of No Violation of Section 337

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 19320]]

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Commission has determined not 
to review the initial determination (ID) issued by the presiding 
administrative law judge (ALJ) on March 21, 1996, terminating the 
above-captioned investigation on the basis of a finding of no violation 
of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark D. Kelly, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone 202-
205-3106.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 30, 1995, the Commission ordered 
that an investigation be instituted to determine whether there are 
violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, in the 
importation, sale for importation, or sale within the United States 
after importation of certain memory devices with increased capacitance 
and products containing same by reason of infringement of certain 
claims of U.S. Letters Patent 5,166,904 (the '904 patent), owned by 
complainants Emanuel Hazani and Patent Enforcement Fund, Inc., and 
whether there exists an industry in the United States as required by 
subsection (a)(2) of section 337.
    The Commission instituted an investigation of the complaint and 
published a notice of investigation in the Federal Register on February 
6, 1995. 60 FR 7068. The following thirteen firms were named as 
respondents: Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Tokyo, Japan; Mitsubishi 
Electronics America, Inc., Cypress, CA; NEC Corporation, Tokyo, Japan; 
NEC Electronics, Inc., Mountain View, CA; OKI Electronic Industry Co., 
Ltd., Tokyo, Japan; OKI America, Inc., Hackensack, NJ; Hitachi, Ltd., 
Tokyo, Japan; Hitachi America, Ltd., Tarrytown, NY; Samsung Electronics 
Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea; Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Ridgefield 
Park, NJ; Samsung Semiconductors, Inc., San Jose, CA; Hyundai 
Electronics Industries Co., Ltd, Seoul, Korea; and Hyundai Electronics 
America, Inc., San Jose, CA. The complaint alleged that the respondents 
manufactured and imported 16- and 64-Mbit dynamic random-access 
memories (DRAMs) that infringe certain claims of the '904 patent.
    On October 13, 1995, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 63) granting a 
motion filed by the NEC respondents for summary determination of the 
invalidity of claims 1-2, 4-13, 15-17, 22 and 25 based on anticipation 
by U.S. Letters Patent 4,758,986 to Kuo (the ``Kuo patent''). On 
October 20, 1995, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 64) granting a motion 
filed by the Samsung respondents for summary determination of the 
invalidity of claims 18-20 and 26-28 also based on anticipation by the 
Kuo patent and terminating the investigation as to claim 21. On October 
30, 1995, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 65) granting a motion filed 
by the Mitsubishi respondents for summary determination of non-
infringement as to claim 14.
    On December 14, 1995, the Commission determined not to review 
Orders Nos. 63 and 65, but determined to review in part and remand the 
ID (Order No. 64) issued by the ALJ on October 20, 1995.
    On March 21, 1996, after further briefing from the parties, the ALJ 
issued an ID (Order No. 71) granting a motion filed by the Samsung 
respondents for summary determination of invalidity of claims 18-20 and 
26-28 based on anticipation by the Kuo patent. Complainants filed a 
petition for review of the ID on March 28, 1996. The Samsung 
respondents and the Commission investigative attorney filed oppositions 
to the petition for review on April 12, 1996.
    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. Sec. 1337, and Commission rule 210.42, 19 
C.F.R. Sec. 210.42. Copies of the public versions of the ALJ's ID and 
all other public 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 S.W., Washington, D.C. 
20436, telephone 202-205-2000. Hearing-impaired persons are advised 
that information on the matter can be obtained by contacting the 
Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810.

    Issued: April 22, 1996.

    By order of the Commission.
Donna R. Koehnke,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-10818 Filed 4-30-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P