65420 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 2014 / Notices 

1No response to this request for information is 

required if a currently valid Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) number is not displayed; the 

OMB number is 14–5–322, expiration date June 30, 

2017. Public reporting burden for the request is 

estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please 

send comments regarding the accuracy of this 

burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S. 

International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436. 

the recommendation, should be 

provided and discussed to the extent 

feasible. 

The Act requires that an 

administering organization administer 

the process for the MHCC’s 

development and interpretation of the 

Federal Standards and Procedural and 

Enforcement Regulations. The 

administering organization that has 

been selected by HUD to administer this 

process is Home Innovation Research 

Labs, Inc. This Notice requests that 

proposed revisions to the Federal 

standards be submitted to the MHCC for 

consideration through the administering 

organization, Home Innovation Research 

Labs, Inc. This organization will be 

responsible for ensuring delivery of all 

appropriately prepared proposed 

changes to the MHCC for its review and 

consideration. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information collection 

requirements contained in this notice 

have been approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), and assigned 

OMB Control Number 2535–0116. In 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, an agency may not 

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information, unless the collection 

displays a currently valid OMB control 

number. 

Dated: October 29, 2014. 

Teresa B. Payne, 

Deputy Administrator, Office of 

Manufactured Housing Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26198 Filed 11–3–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4210–67–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 731–TA–1092 (Review)] 

Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof 

From China; Termination of Previously 

Instituted Five-Year Review and 

Institution of Five-Year Review 

AGENCY: United States International 

Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives 

notice that it has instituted a review 

pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)) (the Act) 

to determine whether revocation of the 

antidumping duty order on diamond 

sawblades and parts thereof from China 

would be likely to lead to continuation 

or recurrence of material injury. 

Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, 

interested parties are requested to 

respond to this notice by submitting the 

information specified below to the 

Commission; 1 to be assured of 

consideration, the deadline for 

responses is December 4, 2014. As 

indicated below, in light of prior 

proceedings in this matter, the 

Commission reserves the right to waive 

its regulations concerning filing of 

comments on whether to conduct an 

expedited review. For further 

information concerning the conduct of 

this review and rules of general 

application, consult the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 

201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 

201), and part 207, subparts A, D, E, and 

F (19 CFR part 207). 

DATES: Effective Date: November 4, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Szustakowski (202–205–3169), 

Office of Investigations, U.S. 

International Trade Commission, 500 E 

Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. 

Hearing-impaired persons can obtain 

information on this matter 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 (http://

www.usitc.gov). The public record for 

this review may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

at http://edis.usitc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background. On November 4, 2009, 

the Department of Commerce issued an 

antidumping duty order on imports of 

diamond sawblades and parts thereof 

from China (74 FR 57145, November 4, 

2009). The effective date of the order 

was January 23, 2009. On December 2, 

2013, the Commission instituted a fiveyear review on the antidumping duty 

order on imports of diamond sawblades 

and parts thereof from China (78 FR 

72116, Dec. 2, 2013). The U.S. 

Department of Commerce (Commerce) 

initiated its five-year review of the order 

on the same day (78 FR 72061, Dec. 2, 

2013). On May 20, 2014, the 

Commission determined to conduct a 

full review of the order (Explanation of 

Commission Determination on 

Adequacy in Diamond Sawblades and 

Parts Thereof from China, Inv. No. 731– 

TA–1092 (Review)). 

The Diamond Sawblades 

Manufacturers’ Coalition (DSMC), an 

association of domestic producers of 

diamond sawblades, subsequently filed 

an action in the U.S. Court of 

International Trade (CIT) to declare that 

the five-year reviews that Commerce 

initiated and the Commission instituted 

were ultra vires because they began 

prematurely. On September 23, 2014, 

the CIT issued a judgment in favor of 

DSMC, directed the Commission to 

cease further work on the five-year 

review it previously instituted, and to 

instead institute a review on November 

4, 2014. Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. 

Coalition v. United States, Slip Op. 14– 

111 (Ct. Int’l Trade Sept. 23, 2014). 

Accordingly, pursuant to the CIT order 

in Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’ 

Coalition, we are hereby terminating the 

previously instituted sunset review, 

effective September 23, 2014. 

Pursuant to the judgment of the CIT, 

the Commission is instituting this 

review to determine whether revocation 

of the antidumping duty order on 

diamond sawblades and parts thereof 

from China would be likely to lead to 

continuation or recurrence of material 

injury to the domestic industry within 

a reasonably foreseeable time. It will 

assess the adequacy of interested party 

responses to this notice of institution to 

determine whether to conduct a full 

review or an expedited review. The 

Commission is mindful, however, that 

both domestic and respondent 

interested parties responded to the 

notice of institution it published on 

December 2, 2013, and that in light of 

these responses the Commission 

determined that conducting a full 

review was appropriate. 

In order to avoid duplication of effort 

and to streamline these proceedings, the 

Commission is not requiring those 

interested parties that submitted 

adequate responses to the December 2, 

2013 institution notice to submit full 

responses to this notice. Instead, each 

such party may simply submit no later 

than December 4, 2014 a response 

indicating that: (1) It incorporates the 

contents of its response to the December 

2, 2013 institution notice and (2) that it 

is willing to participate in this review 

by providing information requested to 

the Commission. Any such party, 

should it desire, may also provide 

additional information of the nature 

specified below. Parties that did not 

submit an adequate response to the 


rmajette on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 2014 / Notices 65421 

December 2, 2013 institution notice may 

also provide additional information of 

the nature specified below no later than 

December 4, 2014. 

Should those parties that submitted 

adequate responses to the December 2, 

2013 institution notice indicate their 

desire to participate in this review, the 

Commission intends to issue a notice 

stating that it will conduct a full review. 

In light of this, the Commission reserves 

the right to waive the process specified 

in 19 CFR 207.62(b) for submitting 

comments to the Commission on 

whether to conduct an expedited review 

should it be unnecessary given the 

unusual circumstances of this 

proceeding. 

Definitions. The following definitions 

apply to these reviews: 

(1) Subject Merchandise is the class or 

kind of merchandise that is within the 

scope of the five-year review, as defined 

by the Department of Commerce. 

(2) The Subject Country in this review 

is China. 

(3) The Domestic Like Product is the 

domestically produced product or 

products which are like, or in the 

absence of like, most similar in 

characteristics and uses with, the 

Subject Merchandise. In its original 

determination, the Commission defined 

the Domestic Like Product as diamond 

sawblades and parts thereof, 

coextensive with Commerce’s scope. 

(4) The Domestic Industry is the U.S. 

producers as a whole of the Domestic 

Like Product, or those producers whose 

collective output of the Domestic Like 

Product constitutes a major proportion 

of the total domestic production of the 

product. In its original determination, 

the Commission determined that the 

Domestic Industry comprised the 

assemblers in addition to all domestic 

producers of finished diamond 

sawblades and component parts. 

(5) The Order Date is the date that the 

antidumping duty order under review 

became effective. In this review, the 

Order Date is January 23, 2009. 

(6) An Importer is any person or firm 

engaged, either directly or through a 

parent company or subsidiary, in 

importing the Subject Merchandise into 

the United States from a foreign 

manufacturer or through its selling 

agent. 

Participation in the proceeding and 

public service list. Persons, including 

industrial users of the Subject 

Merchandise and, if the merchandise is 

sold at the retail level, representative 

consumer organizations, wishing to 

participate in the proceeding as parties 

must file an entry of appearance with 

the Secretary to the Commission, as 

provided in section 201.11(b)(4) of the 

Commission’s rules, no later than 21 

days after publication of this notice in 

the Federal Register. The Secretary will 

maintain a public service list containing 

the names and addresses of all persons, 

or their representatives, who are parties 

to the proceeding. 

Former Commission employees who 

are seeking to appear in Commission 

five-year reviews are advised that they 

may appear in a review even if they 

participated personally and 

substantially in the corresponding 

underlying original investigation or an 

earlier review of the same underlying 

investigation. The Commission’s 

designated agency ethics official has 

advised that a five-year review is not the 

same particular matter as the underlying 

original investigation, and a five-year 

review is not the same particular matter 

as an earlier review of the same 

underlying investigation for purposes of 

18 U.S.C. 207, the post employment 

statute for Federal employees, and 

Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR 

201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 

73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008). 

Consequently, former employees are not 

required to seek Commission approval 

to appear in a review under Commission 

rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the 

corresponding underlying original 

investigation or an earlier review of the 

same underlying investigation was 

pending when they were Commission 

employees. For further ethics advice on 

this matter, contact Carol McCue 

Verratti, Deputy Agency Ethics Official, 

at 202–205–3088. 

Limited disclosure of business 

proprietary information (BPI) under an 

administrative protective order (APO) 

and APO service list. Pursuant to 

section 207.7(a) of the Commission’s 

rules, the Secretary will make BPI 

submitted in this proceeding available 

to authorized applicants under the APO 

issued in the proceeding, provided that 

the application is made no later than 21 

days after publication of this notice in 

the Federal Register. Authorized 

applicants must represent interested 

parties, as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), 

who are parties to the proceeding. A 

separate service list will be maintained 

by the Secretary for those parties 

authorized to receive BPI under the 

APO. 

Certification. Pursuant to section 

207.3 of the Commission’s rules, any 

person submitting information to the 

Commission in connection with this 

proceeding must certify that the 

information is accurate and complete to 

the best of the submitter’s knowledge. In 

making the certification, the submitter 

will be deemed to consent, unless 

otherwise specified, for the 

Commission, its employees, and 

contract personnel to use the 

information provided in any other 

reviews or investigations of the same or 

comparable products which the 

Commission conducts under Title VII of 

the Act, or in internal audits and 

investigations relating to the programs 

and operations of the Commission 

pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3. 

Written submissions. The nature of 

written responses to the notice by those 

parties that submitted adequate 

responses to the December 2, 2013 

notice of institution is specified above. 

Pursuant to section 207.61 of the 

Commission’s rules, each interested 

party that did not provide an adequate 

response to the December 2, 2013 notice 

but desires to respond to this notice 

must provide the information specified 

below. The deadline for filing such 

responses is December 4, 2014. As 

stated above, the Commission reserves 

the right to waive the provision of 

section 207.62(b) of the Commission’s 

rules concerning whether the 

Commission should conduct an 

expedited or full review. All written 

submissions must conform with the 

provisions of sections 201.8 and 207.3 

of the Commission’s rules and any 

submissions that contain BPI must also 

conform with the requirements of 

sections 201.6 and 207.7 of the 

Commission’s rules. Regarding 

electronic filing requirements under the 

Commission’s rules, see also the 

Commission’s Handbook on E-filing, 

available on the Commission’s Web site 

at http://edis.usitc.gov. Also, in 

accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 

207.3 of the Commission’s rules, each 

document filed by a party to the review 

must be served on all other parties to 

the review (as identified by either the 

public or APO service list as 

appropriate), and a certificate of service 

must accompany the document (if you 

are not a party to the review you do not 

need to serve your response). 

Inability to provide requested 

information. Pursuant to section 

207.61(c) of the Commission’s rules, any 

interested party that cannot furnish the 

information requested by this notice in 

the requested form and manner shall 

notify the Commission at the earliest 

possible time, provide a full explanation 

of why it cannot provide the requested 

information, and indicate alternative 

forms in which it can provide 

equivalent information. If an interested 

party does not provide this notification 

(or the Commission finds the 

explanation provided in the notification 

inadequate) and fails to provide a 

complete response to this notice, the 

Commission may take an adverse 


rmajette on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
65422 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 2014 / Notices 

inference against the party pursuant to 

section 776(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 

1677e(b)) in making its determinations 

in the reviews. 

Information To Be Provided in 

Response to this Notice of Institution: 

As used below, the term ‘‘firm’’ includes 

any related firms. 

(1) The name and address of your firm 

or entity (including World Wide Web 

address) and name, telephone number, 

fax number, and Email address of the 

certifying official. 

(2) A statement indicating whether 

your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of 

the Domestic Like Product, a U.S. union 

or worker group, a U.S. importer of the 

Subject Merchandise, a foreign producer 

or exporter of the Subject Merchandise, 

a U.S. or foreign trade or business 

association, or another interested party 

(including an explanation). If you are a 

union/worker group or trade/business 

association, identify the firms in which 

your workers are employed or which are 

members of your association. 

(3) A statement indicating whether 

your firm/entity is willing to participate 

in this proceeding by providing 

information requested by the 

Commission. 

(4) A statement of the likely effects of 

the revocation of the antidumping and 

countervailing duty orders on the 

Domestic Industry in general and/or 

your firm/entity specifically. In your 

response, please discuss the various 

factors specified in section 752(a) of the 

Act (19 U.S.C. 1675a(a)) including the 

likely volume of subject imports, likely 

price effects of subject imports, and 

likely impact of imports of Subject 

Merchandise on the Domestic Industry. 

(5) A list of all known and currently 

operating U.S. producers of the 

Domestic Like Product. Identify any 

known related parties and the nature of 

the relationship as defined in section 

771(4)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 

1677(4)(B)). 

(6) A list of all known and currently 

operating U.S. importers of the Subject 

Merchandise and producers of the 

Subject Merchandise in the Subject 

Country that currently export or have 

exported Subject Merchandise to the 

United States or other countries since 

the Order Date. 

(7) A list of 3–5 leading purchasers in 

the U.S. market for the Domestic Like 

Product and the Subject Merchandise 

(including street address, World Wide 

Web address, and the name, telephone 

number, fax number, and Email address 

of a responsible official at each firm). 

(8) A list of known sources of 

information on national or regional 

prices for the Domestic Like Product or 

the Subject Merchandise in the U.S. or 

other markets. 

(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the 

Domestic Like Product, provide the 

following information on your firm’s 

operations on that product during 

calendar year 2012, except as noted 

(report quantity data in units and value 

data in U.S. dollars, f.o.b. plant). If you 

are a union/worker group or trade/

business association, provide the 

information, on an aggregate basis, for 

the firms in which your workers are 

employed/which are members of your 

association. 

(a) Production (quantity) and, if 

known, an estimate of the percentage of 

total U.S. production of the Domestic 

Like Product accounted for by your 

firm’s(s’) production; 

(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to 

produce the Domestic Like Product (i.e., 

the level of production that your 

establishment(s) could reasonably have 

expected to attain during the year, 

assuming normal operating conditions 

(using equipment and machinery in 

place and ready to operate), normal 

operating levels (hours per week/weeks 

per year), time for downtime, 

maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a 

typical or representative product mix); 

(c) the quantity and value of U.S. 

commercial shipments of the Domestic 

Like Product produced in your U.S. 

plant(s); 

(d) the quantity and value of U.S. 

internal consumption/company 

transfers of the Domestic Like Product 

produced in your U.S. plant(s); and 

(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost 

of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit, 

(iv) selling, general and administrative 

(SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating 

income of the Domestic Like Product 

produced in your U.S. plant(s) (include 

both U.S. and export commercial sales, 

internal consumption, and company 

transfers) for your most recently 

completed fiscal year (identify the date 

on which your fiscal year ends). 

(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a 

trade/business association of U.S. 

importers of the Subject Merchandise 

from the Subject Country, provide the 

following information on your firm’s(s’) 

operations on that product during 

calendar year 2012 (report quantity data 

in units and value data in U.S. dollars). 

If you are a trade/business association, 

provide the information, on an aggregate 

basis, for the firms which are members 

of your association. 

(a) The quantity and value (landed, 

duty-paid but not including 

antidumping or countervailing duties) 

of U.S. imports and, if known, an 

estimate of the percentage of total U.S. 

imports of Subject Merchandise from 

the Subject Country accounted for by 

your firm’s(s’) imports; 

(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. 

port, including antidumping and/or 

countervailing duties) of U.S. 

commercial shipments of Subject 

Merchandise imported from the Subject 

Country; and 

(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. 

port, including antidumping and/or 

countervailing duties) of U.S. internal 

consumption/company transfers of 

Subject Merchandise imported from the 

Subject Country. 

(11) If you are a producer, an exporter, 

or a trade/business association of 

producers or exporters of the Subject 

Merchandise in the Subject Country, 

provide the following information on 

your firm’s(s’) operations on that 

product during calendar year 2012 

(report quantity data in units and value 

data in U.S. dollars, landed and dutypaid at the U.S. port but not including 

antidumping or countervailing duties). 

If you are a trade/business association, 

provide the information, on an aggregate 

basis, for the firms which are members 

of your association. 

(a) Production (quantity) and, if 

known, an estimate of the percentage of 

total production of Subject Merchandise 

in the Subject Country accounted for by 

your firm’s(s’) production; 

(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) 

to produce the Subject Merchandise in 

the Subject Country (i.e., the level of 

production that your establishment(s) 

could reasonably have expected to 

attain during the year, assuming normal 

operating conditions (using equipment 

and machinery in place and ready to 

operate), normal operating levels (hours 

per week/weeks per year), time for 

downtime, maintenance, repair, and 

cleanup, and a typical or representative 

product mix); and 

(c) the quantity and value of your 

firm’s(s’) exports to the United States of 

Subject Merchandise and, if known, an 

estimate of the percentage of total 

exports to the United States of Subject 

Merchandise from the Subject Country 

accounted for by your firm’s(s’) exports. 

(12) Identify significant changes, if 

any, in the supply and demand 

conditions or business cycle for the 

Domestic Like Product that have 

occurred in the United States or in the 

market for the Subject Merchandise in 

the Subject Country since the Order 

Date, and significant changes, if any, 

that are likely to occur within a 

reasonably foreseeable time. Supply 

conditions to consider include 

technology; production methods; 

development efforts; ability to increase 

production (including the shift of 

production facilities used for other 


rmajette on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 2014 / Notices 65423 

1The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 

CFR 207.2(f)). 

products and the use, cost, or 

availability of major inputs into 

production); and factors related to the 

ability to shift supply among different 

national markets (including barriers to 

importation in foreign markets or 

changes in market demand abroad). 

Demand conditions to consider include 

end uses and applications; the existence 

and availability of substitute products; 

and the level of competition among the 

Domestic Like Product produced in the 

United States, Subject Merchandise 

produced in the Subject Country, and 

such merchandise from other countries. 

(13) (Optional) A statement of 

whether you agree with the above 

definitions of the Domestic Like Product 

and Domestic Industry; if you disagree 

with either or both of these definitions, 

please explain why and provide 

alternative definitions. 

Authority: This proceeding is being 

conducted under authority of Title VII of the 

Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published 

pursuant to section 207.61 of the 

Commission’s rules. 

Issued: October 29, 2014. 

By order of the Commission. 

Lisa R. Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26099 Filed 11–3–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 731–TA–1012 (Second 

Review)] 

Certain Frozen Fish Fillets From 

Vietnam 

Determination 

On the basis of the record 1 developed 

in the subject five-year review, the 

United States International Trade 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) 

determines, pursuant to section 751(c) 

of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 

1675(c)), that revocation of the 

antidumping duty order on certain 

frozen fish fillets from Vietnam would 

be likely to lead to continuation or 

recurrence of material injury to an 

industry in the United States within a 

reasonably foreseeable time. 

Background 

The Commission instituted this 

review on June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31345) 

and determined on September 5, 2014, 

that it would conduct an expedited 

review (79 FR 56826). 

The Commission completed and filed 

its determination in this review on 

October 30, 2014. The views of the 

Commission are contained in USITC 

Publication 4498 (October 2014), 

entitled Certain Frozen Fish Fillets 

FSrom Vietnam: Investigation No. 731– 

TA–1012 (Second Review). 

Issued: October 30, 2014. 

By order of the Commission. 

Lisa R. Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26157 Filed 11–3–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–915] 

Certain Set-Top Boxes, Gateways, 

Bridges, and Adapters and 

Components Thereof; Commission 

Determination Not To Review an Initial 

Determination Granting Complainants’ 

Unopposed Motion To Terminate the 

Investigation on the Basis of 

Settlement; 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 not to 

review the presiding administrative law 

judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) initial determination 

(‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 17) granting the 

unopposed motion of complainants 

ViXS Systems, Inc., of Toronto, Ontario, 

Canada and ViXS USA, Inc. of Austin, 

Texas (collectively ‘‘ViXS’’) to terminate 

the above-referenced investigation as to 

respondent Entropic Communications, 

Inc. of San Diego, California 

(‘‘Entropic’’) on the basis of a settlement 

agreement. The investigation is 

terminated. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Megan M. Valentine, Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–2301. 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 21, 2014, based on a Complaint 

filed by ViXS, as supplemented and 

amended. 79 FR 29204 (May 21, 2014). 

The Complaint alleges violations of 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section 

337’’), in the importation into the 

United States, the sale for importation, 

and the sale within the United States 

after importation of certain set-top 

boxes, gateways, bridges, and adapters 

and components thereof by reason of 

infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patent Nos. 7,301,900; 7,099,951; 

7,200,855; and 7,406,598. The 

Complaint further alleges the existence 

of a domestic industry. The 

Commission’s Notice of Investigation 

named as respondents Entropic; 

DirectTV, LLC of El Segundo, California 

(‘‘DirectTV’’); Wistron NeWeb 

Corporation of Hsinchu, Taiwan and 

Winstron Corporation of Taipei Hsien, 

Taiwan (collectively ‘‘Wistron’’); and 

CyberTAN Technology, Inc. of Hsinchu, 

Taiwan (‘‘CyberTAN’’). The Office of 

Unfair Import Investigations was also 

named as a party to the investigation. 

The Commission later terminated the 

investigation with respect to certain 

asserted claims of the patents-in-suit, 

thus limiting the investigation to 

products incorporating Entropic chips 

and, in effect, terminating the 

investigation with respect to 

respondents DirectTV, Wistron, and 

CyberTAN. Notice (Aug. 25, 2014); 

Order No. 9 (Aug. 15, 2014). 

On September 15, 2014, ViXS filed a 

motion to terminate this investigation 

based on a settlement agreement 

between ViXS and Entropic. The motion 

stated that the respondents do not 

oppose the motion. On September 29, 

2014, the Commission investigative 

attorney (Mr. Taylor) filed a response in 

support of the motion. 

On October 7, 2014, the ALJ issued 

the subject ID granting ViXS’s motion 

for termination of the investigation. The 

ALJ found that the joint motion 

complied with the requirements of 

section 210.21(b)(1) of the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

210.21(b)(1)) and that there are no 

extraordinary circumstances that would 

prevent the requested terminations. The 

ALJ also found that granting the motion 


rmajette on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES