Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 205 / Monday, October 26, 2009 / Notices 55067 

published pursuant to section 207.62 of 

the Commission’s rules. 

Issued: October 21, 2009. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–25675 Filed 10–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 332–507] 

Advice Concerning Possible 

Modifications to the U.S. Generalized 

System of Preferences, 2009 Review of 

Additions and Removals 

AGENCY: United States International 

Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Institution of investigation and 

scheduling of hearing. 

SUMMARY: Following receipt of a request 

on October 16, 2009 from the United 

States Trade Representative (USTR) 

under section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 

1930 (19 U.S.C. 1332 (g)), the U.S. 

International Trade Commission 

(Commission) instituted investigation 

No. 332–507, Advice Concerning 

Possible Modifications to the U.S. 

Generalized System of Preferences, 2009 

Review of Additions and Removals. 

DATES: November 4, 2009: Deadline for 

filing requests to appear at the public 

hearing. 

November 5, 2009: Deadline for filing 

pre-hearing briefs and statements. 

November 16, 2009: Public hearing. 

November 19, 2009: Deadline for 

filing post-hearing briefs and statements 

and other written submissions. 

January 21, 2010: Transmittal of 

report to the Office of the United States 

Trade Representative. 

ADDRESSES: All Commission offices, 

including the Commission’s hearing 

rooms, are located in the United States 

International Trade Commission 

Building, 500 E Street SW., Washington, 

DC. All written submissions should be 

addressed to the Secretary, United 

States International Trade Commission, 

500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 

20436. The public record for this 

investigation may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

at http://www.usitc.gov/secretary/ 

edis.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Information specific to this investigation 

may be obtained from Gail Burns, 

Project Leader, Office of Industries 

(202–205–2501 or gail.burns@usitc.gov) 

or Philip Stone, Deputy Project Leader, 

Office of Industries (202–205–3424 or 

philip.stone@usitc.gov). For information 

on the legal aspects of this investigation, 

contact William Gearhart of the 

Commission’s Office of the General 

Counsel (202–205–3091 or 

william.gearhart@usitc.gov). The media 

should contact Margaret O’Laughlin, 

Office of External Relations (202–205– 

1819 or margaret.olaughlin@usitc.gov). 

Hearing-impaired individuals may 

obtain information on this matter by 

contacting the Commission’s TDD 

terminal at 202–205–1810. General 

information concerning the Commission 

may also be obtained by accessing its 

Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov). 

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. 

Background: As requested by the 

USTR, in accordance with sections 

503(a)(1)(A), 503(e), and 131(a) of the 

Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 

U.S.C. 2463(a)(1)(A), 19 U.S.C. 2463(e), 

and 19 U.S.C. 2151(a)), and pursuant to 

the authority of the President delegated 

to the United States Trade 

Representative by sections 4(c) and 8(c) 

and (d) of Executive Order 11846 of 

March 31, 1975, as amended, and 

pursuant to section 332(g) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1332(g)), the 

Commission will provide advice as to 

the probable economic effect on U.S. 

industries producing like or directly 

competitive articles and on U.S. imports 

and consumers of the elimination of 

U.S. duties for all beneficiary 

developing countries under the GSP 

program on articles provided for in HTS 

subheadings 0710.22.40, 0710.90.91, 

2905.17.00, 3823.70.40, and 7614.10.10. 

Also, as requested by USTR, pursuant to 

section 332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930, 

the Commission will provide advice as 

to the probable economic effect on U.S. 

industries producing like or directly 

competitive articles, on U.S. imports, 

and on consumers of the removal of 

India from GSP eligibility for HTS 

subheadings 7113.19.21 and 7113.19.25. 

As requested by the USTR, the 

Commission will provide its advice by 

January 21, 2010. The USTR indicated 

that those sections of the Commission’s 

report and related working papers that 

contain the Commission’s advice will be 

classified as ‘‘confidential.’’ 

Public Hearing: A public hearing in 

connection with this investigation will 

be held at the U.S. International Trade 

Commission Building, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC, beginning at 9:30 a.m. 

on November 16, 2009. Requests to 

appear at the public hearing should be 

filed with the Secretary no later than 

5:15 p.m. November 4, 2009. Any prehearing briefs and other statements 

relating to the hearing should be filed 

with the Secretary not later than 5:15 

p.m. November 5, 2009, and all posthearing briefs and statements and any 

other written submissions should be 

filed with the Secretary not later than 

5:15 p.m. November 19, 2009. All 

requests to appear and pre- and posthearing briefs and statements must be 

filed in accordance with the 

requirements in the ‘‘Written 

Submissions’’ section below. In the 

event that, as of the close of business on 

November 4, 2009, no witnesses are 

scheduled to appear at the hearing, the 

hearing will be canceled. Persons 

interested in learning whether the 

hearing has been cancelled should call 

the Office of the Secretary after 

November 5, 2009, at 202–205–2000. 

Written Submissions: In lieu of or in 

addition to participating in the hearing, 

interested parties are invited to file 

written submissions concerning this 

investigation. All such submissions 

should be addressed to the Secretary 

and should be received not later than 

5:15 p.m. November 19, 2009 (see 

earlier dates for filing requests to appear 

and for filing pre-hearing briefs and 

statements). All written submissions 

must conform with the provisions of 

section 201.8 of the Commission’s Rules 

of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

201.8). Section 201.8 requires that a 

signed original (or a copy so designated) 

and fourteen (14) copies of each 

document be filed. In the event that 

confidential treatment of a document is 

requested, at least four (4) additional 

copies must be filed in which the 

confidential information must be 

deleted (see the following paragraph for 

further information regarding 

confidential business information). The 

Commission’s rules authorize filing 

submissions with the Secretary by 

facsimile or electronic means only to the 

extent permitted by section 201.8 of the 

rules (see Handbook for Electronic 

Filing Procedures, http://www.usitc.gov/ 

secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/ 

documents/ 

handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf). 

Persons with questions regarding 

electronic filing should contact the 

Secretary (202–205–2000). 

Any submissions that contain 

confidential business information must 

also conform with the requirements of 

section 201.6 of the Commission’s Rules 

of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

201.6). Section 201.6 of the rules 

requires that the cover of the document 

and the individual pages be clearly 

marked as to whether they are the 

‘‘confidential’’ or ‘‘non-confidential’’ 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

55068 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 205 / Monday, October 26, 2009 / Notices 

version, and that the confidential 

business information be clearly 

identified by means of brackets. All 

written submissions, except for 

confidential business information, will 

be made available in the Office of the 

Secretary to the Commission for 

inspection by interested parties. The 

Commission may include some or all of 

the confidential business information 

submitted in the course of the 

investigation in the report it sends to the 

USTR. 

As requested by the USTR, the 

Commission will publish a public 

version of the report, which will 

exclude portions of the report that the 

USTR has classified as well as any 

business confidential information. 

Issued: October 21, 2009. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–25669 Filed 10–23–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–613] 

In the Matter of: Certain 3G Mobile 

Handsets and Components Thereof; 

Notice of Commission Determination 

To Review in Part A Final 

Determination Finding No Violation of 

Section 337 and on Review To Affirm 

the Administrative Law Judge’s 

Determination of No Violation; 

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 to review 

in part the presiding administrative law 

judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) final initial 

determination (‘‘ID’’) issued on August 

31, 2009, finding no violation of Section 

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

1337) in the above-captioned 

investigation. Specifically, the 

Commission has determined to review 

portions of the ALJ’s claim construction 

and invalidity analysis, but to affirm the 

ALJ’s determination of no violation, and 

has terminated the investigation. 

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 Inv. No. 337– 

TA–613 on September 11, 2007, based 

on a complaint filed by InterDigital 

Communications Corp. of King of 

Prussia, Pennsylvania and InterDigital 

Technology Corp. of Wilmington, 

Delaware (collectively, ‘‘InterDigital’’) 

on August 7, 2007. The complaint, as 

amended, 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 3G mobile 

handsets and components by reason of 

infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patent Nos. 7,117,004 (‘‘the ‘004 

patent’’); 7,190,966 (‘‘the ‘966 patent’’); 

and 7,286,847 (‘‘the ‘847 patent’’) (‘‘the 

Power Ramp-Up Patents’’); and 

6,693,579 (‘‘the ‘579 patent’’). The 

notice of investigation named Nokia 

Corporation of Finland and Nokia Inc. 

of Irving, Texas (collectively, ‘‘Nokia’’) 

as respondents. 

On August 14, 2009, the ALJ issued 

his final ID, finding no violation of 

Section 337. In particular, he found that 

the asserted claims of the patents-in-suit 

are not infringed and that they are not 

invalid. The ALJ further found that a 

domestic industry exists with respect to 

the patents-in-suit. Additionally, the 

ALJ found that there is no prosecution 

laches relating to the ‘004, ‘966, and 

‘847 patents and that the ‘579 patent is 

enforceable. The ALJ further found that 

there is no waiver and patent misuse 

with respect to the patents-in-suit. The 

ALJ also issued a Recommended 

Determination on remedy and bonding, 

recommending that, in the event a 

violation of Section 337 is found, the 

appropriate remedy is a limited 

exclusion order barring entry of 

infringing 3G mobile handsets and 

components thereof and that it would 

also be appropriate to issue various 

cease and desist orders. The ALJ also 

recommended that there is no evidence 

to support the issuance of a bond during 

the period of Presidential review. 

On August 31, 2009, InterDigital filed 

a petition for review, challenging certain 

aspects of the final ID, and Nokia filed 

a contingent petition for review, 

challenging other aspects of the final ID. 

On September 8, 2009, Nokia filed a 

response to InterDigital’s petition for 

review, and InterDigital filed a response 

to Nokia’s contingent petition for 

review. The Commission investigative 

attorney filed a joint response to both 

InterDigital’s and Nokia’s petitions on 

September 8, 2009. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s final 

ID, the petitions for review, and the 

responses thereto, the Commission has 

determined to review the subject ID in 

part. Specifically, the Commission has 

determined to review the ALJ’s claim 

construction of the terms 

‘‘synchronize,’’ found in claims 5, 6, 9, 

and 11 of the ‘847 patent, and ‘‘access 

signal,’’ found in claim 59 of the ‘004 

patent and claims 6, 9, and 11 of the 

‘847 patent. The Commission has also 

determined to review the ALJ’s validity 

determinations with respect to the four 

asserted patents. On review, we affirm 

the ALJ’s determination of no violation, 

but take no position with regard to the 

term ‘‘synchronize’’ and validity. 

In addition, the Commission modifies 

the ALJ’s construction of ‘‘access signal’’ 

to clarify that his construction does not 

read out the situation where the ‘‘access 

signal’’ may continue to be transmitted 

after the power ramp-up procedure 

ends. The ID limits the transmission of 

the ‘‘access signal’’ to the power rampup procedure, finding the transmission 

does not continue during the remainder 

of the call setup process. The 

Commission agrees that the ‘‘access 

signal’’ is transmitted during the power 

ramp-up procedure and that the ‘‘access 

signal’’ is a separate transmission from 

any other call set up messages that a 

subscriber unit pursuant to the Power 

Ramp-Up Patents transmits to a base 

station during a communication event. 

The Commission finds, however, that 

the ‘004 and ‘847 patents do not require 

that the transmission of the ‘‘access 

signal’’ ends when the power ramp-up 

procedure ends. 

The Commission has determined not 

to review the remaining issues decided 

in 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 

section 210.42 of the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

210.42). 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES