```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 224 (Thursday, November 20, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69128-69129]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27458]

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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-920]

Certain Integrated Circuits and Products Containing the Same; 
Commission Decision Not To Review an Initial Determination Terminating 
the Investigation in Its Entirety Based on a Settlement Agreement; 
Termination of the 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) 
terminating the investigation in its entirety based on a settlement 
agreement.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Needham, Office of the General 
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-5468. 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: The Commission instituted this investigation 
on July 2, 2014, based on a complaint filed by Freescale Semiconductor, 
Inc. (``Freescale'') of Austin, Texas. 79 FR 37770-71. The complaint 
alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended, 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 integrated circuits and products containing the 
same through the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 
5,962,926; 7,158,432; 7,230,505; 7,518,947; 7,626,276; and 7,746,716. 
Id. at 37770. The Commission's notice of investigation named as 
respondents

[[Page 69129]]

MediaTek Inc. of Hsinchu City, Taiwan and MediaTek USA Inc. of San 
Jose, California (together, ``MediaTek''); Acer Inc. of New Taipei 
City, Taiwan; AmTRAN Technology Co. Ltd. of New Taipei, Taiwan; AmTRAN 
Logistics, Inc. of Irvine, California; ASUSTek Computer Inc. of Taipei, 
Taiwan; ASUS Computer International, Inc. of Fremont, California; BLU 
Products, Inc., of Doral, Florida; Sharp Corporation of Osaka, Japan; 
Sharp Electronics Corporation of Mahwah, New Jersey; Sharp Electronics 
Manufacturing Company of America, Inc. of San Diego, California; Sony 
Corporation of Tokyo, Japan; Sony EMCS (Malaysia) of Penang, Malaysia; 
Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc. of Irvine, California; 
Toshiba Logistics America, Inc. of Irvine, California; TPV Display 
Technology (Xiamen) Co. of Fujian, China; Trend Smart America, Ltd. of 
Lake Forest, California; Vizio, Inc. of Irvine, California; Yamaha 
Corporation of Buena Park, California; Lenovo Group Ltd. of Beijing, 
China; Lenovo (United States) Inc. of Morrisville, North Carolina; Best 
Buy Co., Inc. of Richfield, Minnesota; Newegg Inc. of City of Industry, 
California; Buy.com Inc. d/b/a Rakuten.com Shopping of Aliso Viejo, 
California; Walmart Stores, Inc. of Bentonville, Arkansas; Amazon.com, 
Inc. of Seattle, Washington; B&H Foto & Electronics Corp. of New York, 
New York; and Costco Wholesale Corporation of Issaquah, Washington 
(collectively, ``Respondents''). Id. at 37771. The Office of Unfair 
Import Investigations was also named as a party to the investigation. 
Id.
    On September 29, 2014, Freescale and MediaTek filed a joint motion 
to terminate the entire investigation with prejudice based on a 
settlement agreement covering all Respondents. On October 3, 2014, 
Freescale and MediaTek filed a joint motion for leave to file a 
corrected version of its motion based on comments received from the 
ALJ's attorney-advisor and the Commission Investigative Attorney 
(``IA'').
    On October 7, 2014, the IA filed a response to the corrected 
motion, and contended that the motion should be granted-in-part. The IA 
stated that the moving parties' request to have the investigation 
terminated ``with prejudice'' should be denied, because the Commission 
has previously declined to terminate investigations with prejudice. The 
IA contended that the remainder of the motion complied with the 
Commission's rules, so the investigation should be terminated in its 
entirety without prejudice.
    On October 16, 2014, the ALJ issued the subject ID, granting the 
moving parties' motion to file a corrected motion and granting-in-part 
the moving parties' corrected motion. The ALJ declined to terminate the 
investigation ``with prejudice.'' The ALJ found that the remainder of 
the motion complied with the Commission's rules. Specifically, the ALJ 
found that the moving parties had submitted their settlement agreement, 
and had stated that there were no other agreements, written or oral, 
express or implied, between Freescale and Respondents concerning the 
subject matter of the investigation, and that the termination of the 
investigation does not impose any undue burden on the public health and 
welfare, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the 
production of like or directly competitive articles in the United 
States, and United States consumers. The ALJ thus terminated the 
investigation in its entirety without prejudice based on the settlement 
agreement. No petitions for review of the ID were filed.
    The Commission has determined not to review the subject 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 Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 
part 210).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: November 14, 2014.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014-27458 Filed 11-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
```