UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C.

In the Matter of Investigation No. 337-TA-619 CERTAIN r~ CONTROLLERS, DRIVES, MEMORY i CARDS, AND MEDIA PLAYERS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME

NOTICE OF COMMISSION DETERMINATION NOT TO REVIEW AN DETERMINATION PARTIALLY TERMINATING THE INVESTIGATION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS AND CONSENT ORDERS; ISSUANCE OF CONSENT ORDERS

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. 53) in the above-referenced investigation granting an unopposed motion to partially terminate the investigation based on settlement agreements and consent orders and to issue the subject consent orders.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Walters, Office of the General Counsel, US. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 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, US. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at htt~://~ww.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at http:L/edis.usitc. pov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on (202) 205-18 10. SUPPLEMENTARY INFO~TION:The Commission instituted this investigation on December 12,2007, based on a complaint filed by SanDisk Corporation (“SanDisk”). The complaint alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 0 1337) in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain flash memory controllers, drives, memory cards, media players, and products containing the same by reason of infringement of various claims of five United States patents. The number of patents and claims has since been amended. The complaint named nearly fifty respondents.

On October 14,2008, SanDisk moved to (1) terminate the investigation as to AFA Technologies and Chipsbrand Microelectronics (HK) Co., Ltd., Chipsbank Technologies (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Chipsbank Microelectronics Co., Ltd., Zhuhai Chipsbank Microelectronics Co., Ltd., and Chipsbrand Technologies (HK) Co., Ltd. based on settlement agreements; (2) terminate the investigation as to U.S. Patent No. 6,426,893 (“the ‘893 patent”) in light of certain respondents’ decision to stop importing the products accused of infringement; and (3) terminate U.S. Patent No. 7,137,011 and the ‘893 patent with respect to Power Quotient International (HK) Co. Ltd., Syscom Development Co. Ltd., and PQI Corporation based on a consent order. The Commission investigative attorney supported the motion.

On October 21,2008, the ALJ issued the subject ID granting the unopposed motion to partially terminate the investigation. The ALJ found that the motion complied with the requirements of Commission Rule 21 0.2 1 (1 9 C.F.R. 0 21 0.2 1) relating to settlement agreements and consent orders. The ALJ also concluded that, pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(b)(2) (19 C.F.R. 4 210.50(b)(2)), there is no evidence that termination of this investigation will prejudice the public interest. The ALJ issued an errata to the ID on October 30,2008. No petitions for review of this ID were filed.

The Commission has determined not to review the ID and to issue the subject consent orders.

The authority for the Commission’s determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 0 1337), n 21 0.42 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 C.F.R. 0 210.42

By order of the Commission.

Acting Secretary io the Commission

Issued: November 18,2008

-2- UNITED STATES ICNTERNATIONfi TWECOMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20436 Before the Honorable Charles E. Bullock Administrative Law Judge

In the Matter of CERTAIN FLASH MEMORY CONTROLLERS, DRIVES, MEMORY Investigation No. 337-TA-619 CARDS, AND MEDIA PLAYERS Am, PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME

CONSENT ORDER The U.S. fntemational Trade Commission (“Commission”) has instituted an investigation of Respondents Power Quotient International Co., Ltd., Power Quotient International (HK) Cu., Ltd., Syscom Development Co., Ltd., and PQI Corporation (collectively “PQI”)pursuant to 19 U.S.C. (s 1337 on a Complaint Under Section 337 ofthe Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, (“Complaint”) filed with the Commission by Complainant SanDisk Corporation (“SanDisk”)). The Complaint contains certain allegations of unfair acts by PQI in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation into the United States, and the sale or offer for sale in the United States after importation of certain flash memory controllers, drives, memory cards and media players, and products containing same, including flash USB dr?vesand CompactFIash and MMC memory cards, which are aIlegedIy covered by claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,426,893 (“‘893 patent”) and 7,137,011 (“‘01 1 patent”). SanDisk has moved for an initid determination partially terminating this investigation with respect to the PQI by entry of a consent order. Pursuant to I9 C.F.R. $210.21 (c), the motion is hereby GRANTED and the following SO ORDEWD: A. Effmtive immediately upon the entry of this Consent &der, PQI shall not import into the United States, sell for importation into the United States, or sell or offer for sell in the United States after importation without the consent or agreement of the Complainmt any flash USB drives, CompactFlash memory cards and MMC memory cards that have (i) multiple Bash memory dies and (ii) flash memory controllers operating in single channel mode and non- interleaved mode, which are alleged to practice claim 25 of the ‘893 patent. B. Effective immediately upon the entry of this Consent Order, PQX shall not import into the united States sell for importation into the unit& states, or sell or offer for sell in &e! United States after importation without the consent or agreement of the Complainant any flash memory product that has loaded thereon software applications that include encryptioddecryption algorithms, wherein the encxyptioddecryption algorithms (i) are stored in the flash memory dies of a PQI flash memory product, (5) are read from the PQI flash memory product by a host processor that is electrically coupfed to the PQI flash memory product, (iii) are stored in ftie host processor’s memory, and (iv) are executed &om the host processor’s memory, and is alleged to practice claim 8 of the ‘01 1patent. C. Effective immediately upon the mtry of this Consent Order, PQI shall also remove hrnits company websites for download any software applications that include encryptioddecryption algorithms, wherein the encryptioddecryption algorithms (i) are stored in the flash memory dies of a PQI flash memory product, (ii) are read &om the PQI flash memory product by a host processor that is electrically coupled to the PQI flash memory product, (iii) are stored in the host processor’s memory,and (iv) are executed from the host processor’s memory, and-is alleged to practice claim 8 ofthe ‘01 1 patent.

2 D. Effective immediately upon the entry of this Consent Order, PQI will cease distribution and support of the USB Notebook application. E. Notwithstanding the preceding paragraphs of this Consent Order, PQI shall be entitled to import into the United States the preceding products until November 30,2008. F. PQI shall not seek judicial review or otherwise chailenge or contest the validity of this Consent Order. G. SanDisk and PQI will cooperate with and will not seek to impede by litigation or other means, the Commission’s efforts to gather information under Subpart I of Part 210, Title 19 Code of Federal Regulations. H. PQI shall not challenge the validity of the ‘893 or ‘01 1 patents in any administrative or judicial proceeding to enforce this Consent Order. I. Upon expiration of the term of the ‘893 or ‘0 1 1 patents, the requirements of Paragraph A and Paragraph B of this Consent Order shall be of no further force and effect. J. The entry of this Consent Order does not constitute an admission by PQI that it has violated any of Complainant’s intellectual property rights, that any claim of the ‘893 or ‘01 1 patents is valid or enforceable or infringed, or that any unfair act has been committed, nor does it constitute a determination as to a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. K. This Consent Order does not prohibit PQI from continuing to manufacture and sell flash USB drives, CompactFIash memory cards and MMC memory cards that have (i) multiple flash memory dies and (ii) flash memory controllers operating in single channel mode and non-interleaved mode outside the United States. L. Enforcement, revocation, or modification of this Consent Order shall be carried out pursuant to Subpart I of Part 210 of Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations, and the

3 Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, which are hereby incorpordted by reference. In determining whether PQI is in violation of this Consent Order, the Commission may infer facts adverse to PQI if PQI fails to provide adequate or timely information. The Commission may impose upon any person who violates the Consent Order the penalties available in 19 U.S.C. Q 13 3 7(f)(2). M. The Consent Order shall not apply with respect to any claim of any intellectual property right that has been found or adjudicated invafid or unenforceable by the Commission or a court or agency of competent jurisdiction, provided that such kding or judgment has become final and nomeviewable. N. The Commission has in rem jurisdiction over the products that tire the subject of the Complaint in this investigation and the Commission has in personam jurisdiction over PQI for purposes of this Stipulation and Proposed Consent Order. 0. There are no other agreements, written or oral, express or implied, between PQI and Complainant concerning the subject matter of this

By order of the Commission.

Acting Secretary to the Commission

Issued: November 18, 2008

4 UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMLSSION WASHINGTON, DC

Before the Honorable Charles E. Bullock Administrative Law Judge

In the Matter of Investigation No. 3 3 7-TA-6 19

Certain Flash Memory Controllers, Drives, Memory Cards and Media Players and

CONSENT ORDER TERMINATING REMAINING CLAIMS 25 8t 27 OF US. PATENT NO. 6,426,893

The US.International Trade Commission (“Commission”) has instituted an investigation of respondents Apacer Technology Inc. and Apacer Memory America (collectively “Apacer”) pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 5 1337 on a Complaint Under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“Complaint”) filed with the C$hmission by Complainant SanDisk Corporation (C‘SanDisk”). SanDisk alleges, inter alia, that certain Apacer products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non- interleaved mode are covered by remaining claims 25 and 27 of US. Patent No. 6,426,893 ((‘the ‘893 patent”). Apacer denies that any of its products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non-interleaved mode are covered by remaining claims 25 and 27 of the ‘893 patent. Prior to August 1, 2008, Apacer discontinued the importation into the United States of all Apacer products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non-interleaved mode. SanDisk and Apacer have jointly moved for an initial determination to terminate this investigation as to remaining claims 25 and 27 of the ‘893 patent by entry of a consent order. SanDisk and Apacer have signed a Consent Order Stipulation, the contents of which are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. Now, therefore, the Commission issues the following Consent Order: A. Apacer represents that it does not now, and upon entry of this Order shall not, import into the United States, sell for importation into the United States, or sell or offer for sale in the Untied States after importation, or knowingly aid, abet, encourage, participate in, or induce importation into the United States, the sale for importation into the Untied States, or the safe, offer for sale, or use in the United States after importation of any Apacer products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non-interleaved mode. B. Neither SanDisk nor Apacer shall seek judicial review or otherwise challenge or contest the validity of this Order. C. SanDisk and Apacer will cooperate with and will not seek to impede, by litigation or other means, the Commission’s efforts to gather information under Subpart I of Part 210, Title 19 Code of Federal Regulation. D. Apacer shall not, in any administrative or judicial proceeding to enforce this Order, challenge the validity of remaining claims 25 or 27 of the ‘893 patent. E. Upon expiration of remaining claims 25 and 27 of the ‘893 patent, the requirements of Paragraph A of this Order shall be of no further force and effect. F. The entry of this Order does not constitute an admission by Apacer that claims 25 or 27 of the ‘893 are valid or enforceable, nor does it constitute an admission by Apacer that its products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non-interleaved mode are covered by remaining claims 25 or 27 of the ‘893 patent. G. The entry of this Order is not a determination that Apacer has violated section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as mended, or any other law of the United States. H. As to remaining claims 25 and 27 of the ‘893 patent, this investigation is temrinated against Apacer. I. Enforcement)revocation, or modification of this Order shall be carried out pursuant to Subpart I of Part 21 0 of Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations, and the Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure. The Commission may impose upon any person who violates this Order the penalties available in 19 U.S.C. $ 1337(f)(2). J. This Order shall not apply past the expiration of the ’893 patent or if claims 25 and 27 of the ‘893 patent are found or adjudicated by a court or agency of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, provided that such finding or judgment has become final and nonreviewable. K. This Order shall not apply if Apacer products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non-interleaved.rnode are found or adjudicated not to be covered by remaining claims 25 or 27 of the ‘893 patent, proi.ided that such finding or judgment has become final and nonreviewable.

L. The Commission has in rem jurisdiction over the products that are the subject of the Complaint in this investigation and the Commission has in persdnam jurisdiction over Apacer for purposes of this Stipulation Consent Order.

By order of the Commission.

IssuedL November 18, 2008 UNITED STATES INTERNATIONALTRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, DC

Before the Honorable Charles E. Bullock Administrative Law Judge

In the Matter of Investigation No. 337-TA-619

Certain Flash Memory Controllers, Drives, Memory Cards and Media Players and Products Containing: Same

CONSENT ORDER TERMINATING REMAINING CLAIMS 25 & 27 OF U.S. PATENT NO. 6,426,8513

The US. International Trade Commission (“C~mmission~~)has instituted an investigation of respondents Transcend Information Inc. (), Transcend Infomation Inc. (California) and Transcend Information Maryland, Inc. (collectively “Transcend”) pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 6 1337 on a Complaint Under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“Complaint”) filed with the Commission by Complainant SanDisk Corporation (“Sdisk”). SanDisk alleges, inter alia, that certain Transcend products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non-interleaved mode are covered by remaining claims 25 and 27 of U.S. Patent No. 6,426,893 (“the ‘893 patent”). Transcend denies that any of its products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non-interleaved mode are covered by remaining claims 25 and 27 of the ‘893 patent. Prior to July 1,2008, Transcend discontinued the importation into the United States of all Transcend products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non- interleaved mode. SanDisk and Transcend have jointly moved for an initial determination to terminate this investigation as to remaining claims 25 and 27 of the ‘893 patent by entry of a consent order. SanDisk and Transcend have signed a Consent Order Stipulation, the contents of which are incorporated by reference as though Mly set forth herein. Now, therefore, the Commission issues the following Consent Order: A. Transcend represents that it does not now, and upon entry of this Order shall not, import into the United States, sell for importation into the United States, or sell or offer for sale in the Untied States after importation, or knowingly aid, abet, encourage, participate in, or induce importation into the United States, the sale for importation into the Untied States, or the sale, offer for sale, or use in the United States after importation of any Transcend products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non-interleaved mode. B. Neither SanDisk nor Transcend shall seek judicial review or otherwise challenge or contest the validity of this Order. C. SanDisk and Transcend will cooperate with and will not seek to impede, by litigation or other means, the Commission’s efforts to gather information under Subpart I of Part 2 10, Title 19 Code of Federal Regulation. D. Transcend shall not, in any administrative or judicial proceeding to enforce this Order, challenge the validity of remaining claims 25 or 27 of the ‘893 patent. E. Upon expiration of remaining claims 25 and 27 of the ‘893 patent, the requirements of Paragraph A of this Order shall be of no further force and effect. F. The entry of this Order does not constitute an admission by Transcend that claims 25 or 27 of the ‘893 are valid or enforceable, nor does it constitute an admission by Transcend that its products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non-interleaved mode are covered by remaining claims 25 or 27 of the ‘893 patent. G. The entry of this Order is not a determination that Transcend has violated section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, or any other law of the United States. H. As to remaining claims 25 and 27 of the ‘893 patent, this investigation is terminated against Transcend. I. Enforcement, revocation, or modification of this Order shall be carried out pursuant to Subpart I of Part 2 10 of Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations, and the

-2- Commissions Rules of Practice and Procedure. The Commission may impose upon any person who violates this Order the penalties available in 19 U.S.C. 5 1337(f)(2). J. This Order shall not apply past the expiration of the ’893 patent or if claims 25 or 27 of the ‘893 patent are found or adjudicated by a court or agency of competent jurisdiction io be invalid or unenforceable, provided that such finding or judgment has become final and nonreviewable. K. This Order shall not apply if Transcend products that contain multiple flash die and operate on a single channel in a non-interleaved mode are found or adjudicated not to be covered by remaining claims 25 or 27 of the ‘893 patent, provided that such finding or judgment has become final and nonreviewable.

L. The Comrnission has in rem jurisdiction over the products that are the subject of the Complaint in this investigation and the Commission has in personam jurisdiction over Transcend for purposes of this Stipulation and Proposed Cons

Acting Secretary to the Conhission

Issued: November 18, 2008

-3- CERTAIN FLASH MEMORY CONTROLLERS, DRIVES, 337-TA-619 MEMORY CARDS, AND MEDIA PLAYERS AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME

PTiBLiC CERTIFICATE OF SERViCE

I, Marilyn R. Abbott, hereby certify that the attached NOTICE OF COMMISSION DETERMINATION NOT TO REVIEW AN INITIAL DETERMiNATION PARTIALLY TERMINATING THE INVESTIGATION BASED ON SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS AND CONSENT ORDERS; iSSUANCE OF CONSENT ORDERS has been served by hand upon the Commission Investigative Attorney, Christopher G. Paulraj, Esq., and the following parties as indicated, on

U.S. Interiktional Trade Commission 500 E Street, SW Washington, DC 20436

COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT SANDISK CORPORATION:

Steven E. Adkins, Esq. ( ) Via Hand Delivery JONES DAY ( ) Via Overnight Mail 5 1 Louisiana Avenue, NW (~3Via First Class Mail Washington, DC 2000 1-2113 (’) Other: P-202-879-3939 F-202-626- 1700

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS VERBATIM CORPORATION AND VERBATIM AMERICAS LLC:

Perry R. Clark, Esq. ( ) Via Hand Delivery KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP ( ) Via Overnight Mail 950 Page Mill Road e;) Via First Class Mail Palo Alto, CA 94303 ( )Other: P-650-859-7000 F-650-859-7500 ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS IMATION CORPORATION AND MEMOREX PRODUCTS, INCORPORATED:

Louis S. Mastriani, Esq. ( ) Via Hand Delivery ADDUCI MASTRIANI & SCHAUMBERG LLP ( ) Via Overnight Mail 1200 Seventeenth Street, NW - Fifth Floor Via First Class Mail Washington, DC 20036 ( )Other: P-202-467-6300 F-202-466-2006

(1 N I3 E €IA L F 0 F I< 1's I'ON I) I'N'IS I' H I SOS E:LE:("I'RONICS COKI'ORATION, KIN<;STON TEC'I INOLOGY COMPAN Y, I h' COlIPOlIATE I), K I N (; S'rON T EC I I iV 0LOG Y CO I< 1'0 RAT ION, AN I) M EM0 S 1;S I NCOIIPOKA'I'I.:I):

Jeffrey R. Whieldon, Esq. ( ) Via Hand Delivery FISH & RICHARDSON PC ( ) Via Overnight Mail 1425 K Street, NW - Suite 1100 ) Via First Class Mail Washington, DC 20005 ( ') Other: P-202-783-5070 F-202-783-233 1

ON I3EIIAI,F OF IIESPONI)I.:IVTS COIISAIR .MI1:NIOlIY, INC, SKIMEIII CORI'ORATION, AFA

TECH N o LOG I E S, I N c., IN ow c H Lo(; 1 s'r I ( 7 1, I ' , I'( )W E lI 0U 0-1I E: NT I N 'I' I< lIN [ITION A L ( '0., L'I' I)., 1'0 WE I< 0[JOT I E NT 1NT E IW AT IO N A I (I I K) co., L-rI)., 1'0I co RI'O RAT I on.,c I I I 1's 13 KAN I) .1/1 I C' It0 E LECT 120IV I C: S C O., LT1). , C I I I PS I3A N K 'I' EC H N 0LA)(; Y (SI I ENZ1 I EN ) CO., LT D., C I I I 1's IL4 N K MIC KOE L EC'I It0I!' I C3( H K) CO., L'ID., SYSCOM DEVELOPMENT CO., LTI).l Zl I I1 13 A I C: H I PS13A N K MICRO EL E C:T ROXI CS, CO., L-r11. , ANI) c H IPSI< RAN 11 T E c H N o LOG I KS H K ), CO., LTD.:

Sturgis Sobin, Esq. ( ) Via Hand Delivery COVINGTON & BURLING LLP ( ) Via Overnight Mail 120 1 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Via First Class Mail Washington, DC 20004-2401 ( )Other: P-202-662-5 195 ON BEHALF OF liESPONI)EN‘IS SII,ICON MOTION, IKCOHPOI~ATEI~(A TAIWAN C 011 1’0 I< AT I (1 N ), SI IdI C 0 N M OT I ON I NCOliPOIi ATE: 1) (A CALI FO liN1 A CORI’ORATION), APACER TECIINOLOGY, I NCO RI’O RAT 1; I), A PAC I< li M EM0 KY AM E I< I CAI INCO IiPO IU‘I’K I), ‘I’RAN SC E N I) I N FO liM AT IO N INCORPOIiA’I’EI) (TAIWAN), TRANSCEND I N FO IiM A’I‘ION, I N CO K 1’0 RAT E 1) ( C A 1, I FO liNI A ), -4ND TRANSCEND INFORMATION, MARY LAND I N CO liPO I< A‘l’l

Elaine Chow, Esq. ( ) Via Hand Delivery K & L GATES ( ) Via Overnight Mail 55 Second Street - Suite 1700 Via First Class Mail San Francisco, CA 94105 ( )Other: P-415-882-8200 F-415-882-8220

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS LG ELECTRONICS, INCORPORATED AND LG ELECTRONICS USA, INCOFWORATED:

Brian Koo, Esq. ( ) Via Hand Delivery SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP ( ) Via Overnight Mail 1501 K Street, NW ) Via First Class Mail Washington, DC 20005 ( )Other: P-202-736-847 1 F-202-736-8711

ON BEHALF OF FUBPONDENTS DANE ELEC CORPORATION USA, DANE-MEMORY, S.A., AND DEANTUSAIOCHT DANE-ELEC TEO:

Charles C.H. Wu, Esq. ( ) Via Hand Delivery WU & CHEUNG LLP ( ) Via Overnight Mail 98 Discovery ) Via First Class Mail Irvine, CA 926 18-3 105 ( )Other: P-949-25 1-0 11 1 P-949-25 1-1588