Source: https://regulations.justia.com/regulations/fedreg/2017/03/27/2017-05999.html
Timestamp: 2020-05-30 08:53:49
Document Index: 274555185

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 201', 'art 210', 'art 210', 'art 210', 'art 210', 'art 210', 'art 210']

Certain Single-Molecule Nucleic Acid Sequencing Systems and Reagents, Consumables, and Software for Use With Same Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting an Unopposed Motion To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation, 15236-15237 [2017-05999] :: International Trade Commission :: Agencies And Commissions :: Regulation Tracker :: Justia
Justia Regulation Tracker Agencies And Commissions International Trade Commission Certain Single-Molecule Nucleic Acid Sequencing Systems and Reagents, Consumables, and Software for Use With Same Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting an Unopposed Motion To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation, 15236-15237 [2017-05999]
Certain Single-Molecule Nucleic Acid Sequencing Systems and Reagents, Consumables, and Software for Use With Same Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting an Unopposed Motion To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation, 15236-15237 [2017-05999]
Download as PDF 15236 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 57 / Monday, March 27, 2017 / Notices questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202–205–2000). Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract personnel,2 solely for cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.3 This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and of §§ 201.10 and 210.8(c) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)). By order of the Commission. Issued: March 21, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2017–05936 Filed 3–24–17; 8:45 am] asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 2 All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements. 3 Electronic Document Information System (EDIS): https://edis.usitc.gov. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:02 Mar 24, 2017 Jkt 241001 INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–1032] Certain Single-Molecule Nucleic Acid Sequencing Systems and Reagents, Consumables, and Software for Use With Same Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting an Unopposed Motion To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 6) granting an unopposed motion to add allegations of violation of section 337 through the sale for importation, importation, or sale after importation into the United States of articles that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,542,527. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lucy Grace D. Noyola, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202– 205–3438. 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 (https:// www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. Hearingimpaired 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 December 8, 2016, based on a complaint filed by Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc. of Menlo Park, California (‘‘PacBio’’). 81 FR 88703–04 (Dec. 8, 2016). 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 single-molecule nucleic acid sequencing systems and reagents, SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 consumables, and software for use with same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,404,146 (‘‘the ’146 patent’’). Id. at 88704. The notice of investigation named as respondents Oxford Nanopore Technologies Ltd. of Oxford, United Kingdom; Oxford Nanopore Technologies, Inc. of Cambridge, Massachusetts; and Metrichor, Ltd. of Oxford, United Kingdom (collectively, ‘‘Respondents’’). Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) also was named as a party to the investigation. Id. On February 3, 2017, PacBio filed a motion to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to add allegations of violation of section 337 through the sale for importation, importation, or sale after importation into the United States of articles that infringe claims 1 and 3– 11 of U.S. Patent No. 9,542,527 (‘‘the ’527 patent’’). Specifically, PacBio sought to add allegations that Respondents directly infringe, contributorily infringe, and/or induce the infringement of the asserted claims of the ’527 patent. Respondents and OUII did not oppose the motion. On February 21, 2017, the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) issued an ID, Order No. 6, granting the motion to amend the complaint and notice of investigation. The ALJ found good cause for the amendment. The ALJ found that PacBio could not have asserted the ’527 patent when it filed the original complaint because the ’527 patent was issued after institution of the investigation, and that PacBio sought to add the allegations relating to the ’527 patent soon after its issuance. The ALJ also found that the amendment would not prejudice the public interest or the parties. The ALJ found that (1) the ’527 patent involves the same technology as the ’146 patent; (2) the ’527 and ’146 patents are related, claim priority to the same provisional application, name the same inventors, and share a substantially identical specification; and (3) PacBio represents that the accused products and domestic industry products for the ’527 and ’146 patents are identical, obviating the need for excessive additional discovery. The ALJ also found that the amendment was in the public interest because litigating the ’527 and ’146 patents in separate investigations would waste judicial and public resources. 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 E:\FR\FM\27MRN1.SGM 27MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 57 / Monday, March 27, 2017 / Notices Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210). By order of the Commission. Issued: March 22, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2017–05999 Filed 3–24–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–1014] Certain Composite Intermediate Bulk Containers; Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Terminating the Investigation Based on the Withdrawal of the Complaint; Termination of the Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (the ‘‘Commission’’) has determined not to review a February 22, 2017, initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 13) granting an unopposed motion to terminate the investigation based on the withdrawal of the complaint. This investigation is terminated. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron Traud, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–3427. 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 (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s Electronic Docket Information System (‘‘EDIS’’) (https://edis.usitc.gov). Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal, telephone (202) 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 27, 2016, the Commission instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed ¨ by Schutz Container Systems Inc. ¨ (‘‘Schutz’’) of North Branch, New Jersey. 81 FR 49265. The complaint alleges asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:02 Mar 24, 2017 Jkt 241001 violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section 337’’) based upon the importation into the United States or sale of certain composite intermediate bulk containers by reason of infringement of certain trade dress, the threat or effect of which is to substantially destroy or injure a domestic industry. Id. The Commission’s Notice of Investigation named as the sole respondent Zhenjiang Runzhou Jinshan Packaging Factory (‘‘Zhenjiang’’) of Hengshun Zhenjiang, China. Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations was also named as a party to this investigation. Id. On February 22, 2017, the administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) issued Order No. 13, the subject ID, which granted an unopposed motion filed by ¨ Schutz to terminate the investigation based on the withdrawal of the complaint. The ALJ found that the motion complied with the Commission’s rules for the termination of investigations, that no extraordinary circumstances prevented the termination of the investigation, and that termination of the investigation is in the public interest. No party filed a petition seeking review of the subject ID. The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID. This investigation is terminated. 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: March 22, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2017–05955 Filed 3–24–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 332–560] Generalized System of Preferences: Possible Modifications, 2016 Review United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Change in scope of investigation following withdrawal of several requests for competitive need waivers. AGENCY: Following receipt of a letter on behalf of the Acting United States Trade Representative (USTR) dated February 17, 2017, advising that several SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 15237 petitioners have withdrawn requests for waivers of the competitive need limitation under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program and that USTR accordingly was withdrawing its request for advice regarding such petitions, the U.S. International Trade Commission (Commission) has amended the scope of its investigation and will not provide advice regarding the withdrawn petitions. 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 https://edis.usitc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Information specific to this investigation may be obtained from Renee Berry, Project Leader, Office of Industries (202–205–3498 or renee.berry@ usitc.gov), Sabina Neumann, Deputy Project Leader, Office of Industries (202–205–3000 or sabina.neuman@ usitc.gov), or Marin Weaver, Technical Advisor, Office of Industries (202–205– 3461 or marin.weaver@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 Web site (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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background: The February 17, 2017, letter from USTR advised the Commission that several petitioners have withdrawn requests for waivers of the competitive need limitation (CNL) under the GSP program, and that in view of the withdrawals, USTR was withdrawing its request for Commission advice as to whether any industry in the United States is likely to be adversely affected by the waiver of the CNLs, whether like or directly competitive products were being produced in the E:\FR\FM\27MRN1.SGM 27MRN1
[Pages 15236-15237]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05999]
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1032]
Certain Single-Molecule Nucleic Acid Sequencing Systems and
Reagents, Consumables, and Software for Use With Same Commission
Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination Granting an
Unopposed Motion To Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation
(``ID'') (Order No. 6) granting an unopposed motion to add allegations
of violation of section 337 through the sale for importation,
importation, or sale after importation into the United States of
articles that infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,542,527.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lucy Grace D. Noyola, Office of the
Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-3438. Copies of non-
on December 8, 2016, based on a complaint filed by Pacific Biosciences
of California, Inc. of Menlo Park, California (``PacBio''). 81 FR
88703-04 (Dec. 8, 2016). The complaint alleges violations of section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the
sale within the United States after importation of certain single-
molecule nucleic acid sequencing systems and reagents, consumables, and
software for use with same by reason of infringement of certain claims
of U.S. Patent No. 9,404,146 (``the '146 patent''). Id. at 88704. The
notice of investigation named as respondents Oxford Nanopore
Technologies Ltd. of Oxford, United Kingdom; Oxford Nanopore
Technologies, Inc. of Cambridge, Massachusetts; and Metrichor, Ltd. of
Oxford, United Kingdom (collectively, ``Respondents''). Id. The Office
of Unfair Import Investigations (``OUII'') also was named as a party to
the investigation. Id.
On February 3, 2017, PacBio filed a motion to amend the complaint
and notice of investigation to add allegations of violation of section
337 through the sale for importation, importation, or sale after
importation into the United States of articles that infringe claims 1
and 3-11 of U.S. Patent No. 9,542,527 (``the '527 patent'').
Specifically, PacBio sought to add allegations that Respondents
directly infringe, contributorily infringe, and/or induce the
infringement of the asserted claims of the '527 patent. Respondents and
On February 21, 2017, the presiding administrative law judge
(``ALJ'') issued an ID, Order No. 6, granting the motion to amend the
complaint and notice of investigation. The ALJ found good cause for the
amendment. The ALJ found that PacBio could not have asserted the '527
patent when it filed the original complaint because the '527 patent was
issued after institution of the investigation, and that PacBio sought
to add the allegations relating to the '527 patent soon after its
issuance. The ALJ also found that the amendment would not prejudice the
public interest or the parties. The ALJ found that (1) the '527 patent
involves the same technology as the '146 patent; (2) the '527 and '146
patents are related, claim priority to the same provisional
application, name the same inventors, and share a substantially
identical specification; and (3) PacBio represents that the accused
products and domestic industry products for the '527 and '146 patents
are identical, obviating the need for excessive additional discovery.
The ALJ also found that the amendment was in the public interest
because litigating the '527 and '146 patents in separate investigations
would waste judicial and public resources. No petitions for review of
the ID were filed.
in part 210 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 210).
[FR Doc. 2017-05999 Filed 3-24-17; 8:45 am]