69128 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Notices 

and BPI service list. Pursuant to section 

207.7(a) of the Commission’s rules, the 

Secretary will make BPI gathered in 

these reviews available to authorized 

applicants under the APO issued in the 

reviews, provided that the application is 

made by 45 days after publication of 

this notice. Authorized applicants must 

represent interested parties, as defined 

by 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to 

the reviews. A party granted access to 

BPI following publication of the 

Commission’s notice of institution of 

the reviews need not reapply for such 

access. A separate service list will be 

maintained by the Secretary for those 

parties authorized to receive BPI under 

the APO. 

Staff report. The prehearing staff 

report in the reviews will be placed in 

the nonpublic record on Monday, 

February 23, 2015, and a public version 

will be issued thereafter, pursuant to 

section 207.64 of the Commission’s 

rules. 

Hearing. The Commission will hold a 

hearing in connection with the reviews 

beginning at 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, 

March 12, 2015, at the U.S. International 

Trade Commission Building. Requests 

to appear at the hearing should be filed 

in writing with the Secretary to the 

Commission on or before Thursday, 

March 5, 2015. A nonparty who has 

testimony that may aid the 

Commission’s deliberations may request 

permission to present a short statement 

at the hearing. All parties and 

nonparties desiring to appear at the 

hearing and make oral presentations 

should attend a prehearing conference 

to be held at 9:30 a.m. on Friday, March 

6, 2015, at the U.S. International Trade 

Commission Building. Oral testimony 

and written materials to be submitted at 

the public hearing are governed by 

sections 201.6(b)(2), 201.13(f), 207.24, 

and 207.66 of the Commission’s rules. 

Parties must submit any request to 

present a portion of their hearing 

testimony in camera no later than 7 

business days prior to the date of the 

hearing. 

Written submissions. Each party to the 

review may submit a prehearing brief to 

the Commission. Prehearing briefs must 

conform with the provisions of section 

207.65 of the Commission’s rules; the 

deadline for filing is Tuesday, March 3, 

2015. Parties may also file written 

testimony in connection with their 

presentation at the hearing, as provided 

in section 207.24 of the Commission’s 

rules, and posthearing briefs, which 

must conform with the provisions of 

section 207.67 of the Commission’s 

rules. The deadline for filing 

posthearing briefs is Monday, March 23, 

2015. In addition, any person who has 

not entered an appearance as a party to 

the reviews may submit a written 

statement of information pertinent to 

the subject of the reviews on or before 

Monday, March 23, 2015. On Monday, 

May 4, 2015, the Commission will make 

available to parties all information on 

which they have not had an opportunity 

to comment. Parties may submit final 

comments on this information on or 

before Wednesday, May 6, 2015, but 

such final comments must not contain 

new factual information and must 

otherwise comply with section 207.68 of 

the Commission’s rules. All written 

submissions must conform with the 

provisions of section 201.8 of the 

Commission’s rules; any submissions 

that contain BPI must also conform with 

the requirements of sections 201.6, 

207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission’s 

rules. The Commission’s Handbook on 

E-Filing, available on the Commission’s 

Web site at http://edis.usitc.gov, 

elaborates upon the Commission’s rules 

with respect to electronic filing. 

Additional written submissions to the 

Commission, including requests 

pursuant to section 201.12 of the 

Commission’s rules, shall not be 

accepted unless good cause is shown for 

accepting such submissions, or unless 

the submission is pursuant to a specific 

request by a Commissioner or 

Commission staff. 

In accordance with sections 201.16(c) 

and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, 

each document filed by a party to the 

reviews must be served on all other 

parties to the reviews (as identified by 

either the public or BPI service list), and 

a certificate of service must be timely 

filed. The Secretary will not accept a 

document for filing without a certificate 

of service. 

Authority: These reviews are being 

conducted under authority of title VII of the 

Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published 

pursuant to section 207.62 of the 

Commission’s rules. 

Issued: November 17, 2014. 

By order of the Commission. 

Lisa R. Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27474 Filed 11–19–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

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 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Notices 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 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–927] 

Certain Noise Cancelling Headphones 

and Components Thereof; 

Commission Determination Not To 

Review an Initial Determination 

Granting a Joint Motion To Terminate 

the Investigation Based on a 

Settlement Agreement 

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. 7) issued by the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) 

granting a joint motion to terminate the 

investigation based on a settlement 

agreement. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–3115. 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 

under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 

1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on September 2, 

2014, based on a complaint filed by 

Bose Corporation of Framingham, 

Massachusetts (‘‘Bose’’). See 79 FR 

52041 (Sep. 2, 2014). 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 noise 

cancelling headphones and components 

thereof by reason of infringement of 

certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 

6,717,537; 8,073,150; 8,073,151; 

8,054,992; and 8,345,888. The 

respondents named in the Commission’s 

notice of investigation are Beats 

Electronics, LLC of Culver City, 

California; Beats Electronics 

International Ltd. of Dublin, Ireland; 

Fugang Electronic (Dong Guan) Co. Ltd. 

of Guang-Dong, China; and PCH 

International Ltd. of Blackrock, Cork, 

Ireland (collectively, ‘‘Beats’’). A 

Commission investigative attorney (‘‘the 

IA’’) is participating in the investigation. 

On October 10, 2014, complainant 

Bose and respondents Beats filed a joint 

motion to terminate this investigation in 

its entirety based on a settlement 

agreement, and a memorandum in 

support thereof. The IA filed a response 

supporting the motion. 

On October 15, 2014, the ALJ issued 

the subject ID finding that the joint 

motion complies with the Commission 

Rules. The ALJ found that termination 

of the investigation is in the public 

interest inasmuch as termination would 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES