[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 206 (Tuesday, October 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65651-65652]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27024]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-698]


In the Matter of Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products 
Containing Same; Notice of Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial 
Determination Terminating The Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Corrected Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined not to review the presiding administrative 
law judge's initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 56) granting a 
joint motion to terminate the investigation as to one respondent and 
terminating the investigation in its entirety.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sidney A. Rosenzweig, Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-2532. 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 December 29, 2009, based on a complaint filed by Richtek Technology 
Corp. (Taiwan) and Richtek USA, Inc. (San Jose, California) 
(collectively ``Richtek''), alleging a violation of section 337 in the 
importation, sale for importation, and sale within the United States 
after importation of certain DC-DC controllers by reason of 
infringement

[[Page 65652]]

of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,315,190; 6,414,470; and 
7,132,717; and by reason of trade secret misappropriation. 75 FR 446 
(Jan. 5, 2010). The complaint, as amended, named eight respondents: uPI 
Semiconductor Corp. (Taiwan) (``uPI''); Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. 
(Sunnyvale, California) (``AMD''); Sapphire Technology Ltd. (Hong Kong) 
(``Sapphire''); Best Data Products d/b/a Diamond Multimedia 
(Chatsworth, California) (``Diamond''); Eastcom, Inc. d/b/a XFX 
Technology USA (Rowland Heights, California) (``XFX''); Micro-Star 
International Co., Ltd. (Taiwan) and MSI Computer Corp. (City of 
Industry, California) (collectively, ``MSI''); and VisionTek Products 
LLC (Inverness, Illinois) (``VisionTek''). See Second Am. Compl. ]] 12-
34 (May 20, 2010).
    The investigation has been terminated by settlement agreement or 
consent order against all parties other than VisionTek: On July 12, 
2010, the Commission determined not to review the ALJ's termination of 
the investigation as against AMD, Diamond, and XFX. On August 13, 2010, 
the Commission determined not to review the ALJ's termination of the 
investigation against uPI and Sapphire. On August 20, 2010, the 
Commission determined not to review the ALJ's termination of the 
investigation against the MSI respondents.
    On July 27, 2010, VisionTek and Richtek jointly moved to terminate 
the investigation based on a consent order stipulation and proposed 
consent order. The ALJ denied the motion. Order No. 51 (July 29, 2010). 
On August 5, 2010, VisionTek and Richtek jointly moved to terminate the 
investigation based on a settlement agreement. On August 17, 2010, the 
ALJ granted the motion. Order No. 56. Because VisionTek is the last 
respondent, termination against VisionTek results in termination of the 
investigation.
    No petitions for review of the ID were filed. The Commission has 
determined not to review the 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 210.21(b) and 210.42 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (19 CFR 210.21(b), 210.42).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: October 21, 2010.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-27024 Filed 10-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P