[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 205 (Monday, October 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55068-55069]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25676]


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

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 ramp-up 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).


[[Page 55069]]


    Issued: October 16, 2009.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-25676 Filed 10-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P