Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 15, 2008 / Notices 61169 

On September 17, 2008, the ALJ 

issued the subject ID granting the joint 

motion to amend. No party petitioned 

for review of the ID. The Commission 

has determined not to review this ID. 

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 210.14 and 210.42(c) of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.14, 210.42(c). 

Issued: October 8, 2008 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E8–24555 Filed 10–14–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–602] 

In the Matter of Certain GPS Devices 

and Products Containing Same; Notice 

of Commission Determination To 

Review in Part a Final Determination 

on Violation of Section 337; Schedule 

for Filing Written Submissions on the 

Issues Under Review and 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 to review 

in part the final initial determination 

(‘‘ID’’) issued by the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on 

August 8, 2008, regarding whether there 

is a violation of section 337 of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the 

above-captioned investigation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Daniel E. Valencia, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–1999. 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 May 7, 2007, based on a complaint 

filed by Global Locate, Inc. (‘‘Global 

Locate’’). 72 FR 25777 (May 7, 2007). 

The complaint alleged violations of 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (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 GPS (Global 

Positioning System) devices and 

products containing the same by reason 

of infringement of various claims of 

United States Patent Nos. 6,417,801 

(‘‘the ‘801 patent’’); 6,606,346 (‘‘the ‘346 

patent’’); 6,651,000 (‘‘the ‘000 patent’’); 

6,704,651 (‘‘the ‘651 patent’’); 6,937,187 

(‘‘the ‘187 patent’’); and 7,158,080 (‘‘the 

‘080 patent’’). The complaint named five 

respondents: SiRF Technology, Inc. 

(‘‘SiRF’’); Pharos Science & 

Applications, Inc. (‘‘Pharos’’); MiTAC 

International Corp. (‘‘MiTAC’’); Mio 

Technology Ltd., USA (‘‘Mio’’); and ETEN Information Systems Co., Ltd. (‘‘ETEN’’) (collectively, ‘‘respondents’’). 

The notice of investigation was 

subsequently amended to add Broadcom 

Corporation (‘‘Broadcom’’) as a 

complainant inasmuch as Broadcom 

acquired Global Locate. 

On August 8, 2008, the ALJ issued his 

final ID, and on August 22, 2008, he 

issued his recommended determination 

on remedy and bonding. In his ID, the 

ALJ found a violation of section 337 in 

the importation and the sale after 

importation of certain GPS devices and 

products containing the same, in 

connection with the asserted claims of 

each of the six patents at issue. 

Respondents and the Commission 

investigative attorney (IA) each filed 

petitions for review on August 25, 2008. 

On September 5, 2008, Complainants 

and the IA each filed responses to the 

petitions for review. 

On September 16, 2008, Respondents 

filed a motion for leave to reply in 

support of their petition for review of 

the ID. On September 22, 2008, 

Complainants opposed the motion. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s final 

ID, the petitions for review, and the 

responses thereto, the Commission has 

determined to review the final ID in 

part. Specifically, the Commission has 

determined to review (1) ALJ’s finding 

that Global Locate has standing to assert 

the ’346 patent; (2) the ALJ’s finding 

that SiRF directly infringes claim 1 of 

the ‘651 patent through its commercial 

activities; and (3) the ALJ’s finding that 

SiRF directly infringes claim 1 of the 

‘000 patent through its commercial 

activities. The Commission has 

determined not to review the remaining 

issues raised by the petitions for review, 

and has denied Respondents’ motion for 

leave to file a reply. 

The parties are requested to brief their 

positions on the issues under review 

with reference to the applicable law and 

the evidentiary record. In connection 

with its review, the Commission is 

particularly interested in responses to 

the following questions: 

1. Please address the issue of whether 

Global Locate has standing to assert the 

‘346 patent in light of provision 2.1 in 

RX–286. Please cite record evidence 

and/or relevant legal precedent to 

support your position. 

2. Does SiRF practice the element 

‘‘processing satellite signals * * *’’ of 

the method of claim 1 of the ‘651 patent 

vicariously through end users of the 

accused products? See BMC Resources, 

Inc. v. Paymentech, L.P., 498 F.3d 1373 

(Fed. Cir. 2007) and Muniauction, Inc. v. 

Thomson Corp., 532 F.3d 1318 (Fed. 

Cir. 2008). Please cite record evidence 

and relevant legal authority to support 

your position. 

3. Does SiRF practice the third 

element (‘‘at the remote receiver, 

representing said formatted data in a 

second format supported by the remote 

receiver’’) of the method of claim 1 of 

the ‘000 patent vicariously through end 

users of the accused products? See BMC 

Resources, Inc. v. Paymentech, L.P., 498 

F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2007) and 

Muniauction, Inc. v. Thomson Corp., 

532 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2008). Please 

cite record evidence and any relevant 

legal authority to support your position. 

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 In the Matter of Certain 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
61170 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 15, 2008 / Notices 

Devices for Connecting Computers via 

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

USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994) 

(Commission Opinion). 

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 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 

identified in this notice. 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 address the 

recommended determination by the ALJ 

on remedy and bonding. Complainants 

and the IA are also requested to submit 

proposed remedial orders for the 

Commission’s consideration. 

Complainants are also requested to state 

the dates that the patents 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 Monday, 

October 27, 2008. Reply submissions 

must be filed no later than the close of 

business on Monday, November 3, 2008. 

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 and 210.50 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure (19 CFR 210.42–46 and 

210.50). 

Issued: October 9, 2008. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E8–24553 Filed 10–14–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Bureau of International Labor Affairs; 

Request for Information on Forced/ 

Indentured Child Labor Pursuant to 

Executive Order 13126 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Labor. 

ACTION: Request for information on 

forced child labor in the production of 

bricks, coal, foundry products, 

chemicals, cotton, grape products, toys, 

and fireworks in China. 

SUMMARY: This notice is a request for 

information to assist the Department of 

Labor in conducting a review of a 

submission on forced child labor in the 

production of bricks, coal, foundry 

products, chemicals, cotton, grape 

products, toys, and fireworks in China. 

This review is being conducted 

pursuant to Executive Order 13126 

(‘‘Prohibition of Acquisition of Products 

Produced by Forced or Indentured Child 

Labor’’) and the ‘‘Procedural Guidelines 

for Maintenance of the List of Products 

Requiring Federal Contractor 

Certification as to Forced or Indentured 

Child Labor’’ at 48 CFR Subpart 22.15. 

The Department anticipates that 

written information regarding forced 

child labor in the above products in 

China will aid it in determining, in 

consultation with the Departments of 

State and Homeland Security, whether 

these products, and their originating 

country, should be added to the 

Executive Order list. 

DATES: Submitters of information are 

requested to provide two (2) copies of 

their written submission to the Office of 

Child Labor, Forced Labor and Human 

Trafficking (OCFT) at the address below 

by 5 p.m., December 15, 2008. 

To Submit Information, or for Further 

Information, Contact: OCFT, Bureau of 

International Labor Affairs, U.S. 

Department of Labor at (202) 693–4843 

(this is not a toll free number). 

Information may be submitted by the 

following methods: 

• Facsimile (fax): OCFT at 202–693– 

4830. 

• Mail, Express Delivery, Hand 

Delivery, and Messenger Service: 

Brandie Sasser at U.S. Department of 

Labor, OCFT, Bureau of International 

Labor Affairs, 200 Constitution Avenue, 

NW., Room S–5317, Washington, DC 

20210. 

• E-mail: EO13126@dol.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Executive Order No. 13126, which 

was published in the Federal Register 

on June 16, 1999 (64 FR 32383–32385), 

declared that it was ‘‘the policy of the 

United States Government’’ that the 

executive agencies shall take 

appropriate actions to enforce the laws 

prohibiting the manufacture or 

importation of good, wares articles, and 

merchandise mined, produced or 

manufactured wholly or in part by 

forced or indentured child labor.’’ 

Pursuant to the Executive Order, and 

following public notice and comment, 

the Department of Labor published in 

the January 18, 2001, Federal Register, 

a final list of products (the ‘‘List’’), 

identified by their country of origin, that 

the Department, in consultation and 

cooperation with the Departments of 

State and Treasury [relevant 

responsibilities now within the 

Department of Homeland Security], had 

a reasonable basis to believe might have 

been mined, produced or manufactured 

with forced or indentured child labor 

(66 FR 5353). In addition to the List, the 

Department also published on January 

18, 2001, ‘‘Procedural Guidelines for 

Maintenance of the List of Products 

Requiring Federal Contractor 

Certification as to Forced or Indentured 

Child Labor,’’ which provide for 

maintaining, reviewing, and, as 

appropriate, revising the list of products 

required by Executive Order 13126 (66 

FR 5351). The List can be accessed on 

the Internet at http://www.dol.gov/ilab 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES