65654 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 206 / Tuesday, October 26, 2010 / Notices 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–703] 

In the Matter of: Certain Mobile 

Telephones and Wireless 

Communication Devices Featuring 

Digital Cameras, and Components 

Thereof;Notice of Commission 

Determination ThatJune 22, 2010, 

Initial Determination Is an OrderRather 

Than an Initial Determination 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined that the 

June 22, 2010, initial determination on 

claim construction (‘‘ID’’) issued by the 

presiding administrative law judge 

(‘‘ALJ’’) in the above-captioned 

investigation under section 337 of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 

U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section 337’’) is properly 

issued in the form of an order rather 

than an initial determination. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

James A. Worth, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–3065. 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 (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: This 

investigation was instituted on February 

23, 2010, based upon a complaint filed 

on behalf of Eastman Kodak Company of 

Rochester, New York (‘‘Kodak’’) on 

January 14, 2010, and supplemented on 

February 4, 2010. 75 FR 8112. 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 mobile 

telephones and wireless communication 

devices featuring digital cameras, and 

components thereof, that infringe 

certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 

6,292,218. The complaint named as 

respondents Apple, Inc., of Cupertino, 

Calif. (‘‘Apple’’); Research in Motion, 

Ltd., of Ontario, Canada; and Research 

in Motion Corp., of Irving, Texas 

(collectively, ‘‘RIM’’). 

On June 22, 2010, the ALJ issued the 

subject Markman hearing initial 

determination (‘‘ID’’), finding that a 

Markman ruling was appropriate in this 

case and that summary determination 

was an appropriate vehicle for that 

ruling. He then proceeded to construe 

certain terms of the asserted patent 

claims. ID 8–92. 

On June 30, 2010, the parties filed 

four petitions and contingent petitions 

for review. On September 1, 2009, each 

of the parties filed responses thereto. 

On July 22, 2010, the Commission 

issued notice of its determination to 

review the subject ID and requested 

briefing on the issues on review, 

including the following proposed 

analysis: 

As used in rule 210.18(a), the term ‘‘issues 

to be determined in the investigation’’ can be 

viewed as limited to claims and affirmative 

defenses; a ‘‘part’’ of such an issue includes 

an element (or subpart thereof) of a claim or 

affirmative defense. Thus, the following 

could be a non-exhaustive list of examples of 

issues or parts thereof that are covered by 

rule 210.18(a): Violation, importation, 

infringement, domestic industry (technical or 

economic prong), invalidity on any basis 

(such as anticipation or obviousness), 

unenforceability. Claim construction may be 

a necessary underpinning to the resolution of 

certain issues or elements, and may be part 

of a summary determination that addresses 

an issue or element. On its own, however, 

claim construction might not be viewed as 

constituting such an issue or element. 

75 FR 44282 (July 28, 2010). 

On August 5, 2010, each of the parties 

filed a submission in response to the 

notice of review. On August 16, 2010, 

each of the parties filed a reply thereto. 

Upon review of Commission rules 

210.18 and 210.42, 19 CFR 210.18, 

210.42, and the parties’ submissions, the 

Commission has determined that the 

June 22, 2010, initial determination on 

claim construction issued by the 

presiding administrative law judge is an 

order rather than an initial 

determination. Commission rule 210.42 

does not include claim construction in 

the list of issues that must be decided 

in the form of an initial determination. 

Nor is claim construction properly the 

subject of a motion for summary 

determination under Commission rule 

210.18 since claim construction, 

standing alone, is not an ‘‘issue’’ or ‘‘any 

part of an issue’’ within the meaning of 

that rule. While the Commission finds 

that the rules are unambiguous, to the 

extent interpretation is required, the 

Commission determines in its discretion 

and in the interest of the expeditious 

conclusion of section 337 investigations 

that a ruling on claim construction is 

properly issued in the form of an order. 

This action is taken under the 

authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), 

and under sections 210.18 and 210.42– 

.46 of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.18, 

210.42–.46). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: October 20, 2010. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–26976 Filed 10–25–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–709] 

In the Matter of: Certain Integrated 

Circuits, Chipsets, and Products 

Containing Same Including 

Televisions, Media Players, and 

Cameras; Notice of Commission 

Determination Not To Review an Initial 

Determination Granting a Motion To 

Amend the Complaint and Notice of 

Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined not to 

review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) 

(Order No. 20) issued by the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) 

granting a motion filed by complainant 

Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. 

(‘‘Freescale’’) for leave to amend its 

complaint and the notice of 

investigation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul 

M. Bartkowski, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–5432. 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 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES