Ca|A|G“, Lo'7
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
S N R D E N N in SNRDemonUSLLP1301 K Street, NW MarkL.HoggePartner Suite 600, East Tower 1nark.hogge@sm'denton.com Washington, DC 20005-3364 USA D +1 202 408 6443 T -1-1202 408 6400 F +1 202 408 6399 snrdcnton com ca|A|g“,_lO'7 December 21, 2012 DCCK? NJVEER BY HAND DELIVERY HonorableLisaR. Barton q 17 Acting Secretary ________________________________ United States International Trade Commission Officeofthe 500 E Street s.w. -‘*<l'*'<'*'v ’ lntl lmdc Comrmssson Washington, D.C. 20436 Re: Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices Dear Secretary Barton: Enclosed for filing on behalf of Complainant Speculative Product Design, LLC (“Speck”) are the following documents in support of Speck’s request that the Commission commence an investigation under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended. A request for confidential treatment of Confidential Exhibit 35 is included with this filing. Accordingly, Speck submits the following documents: 1. An original and twelve (12) copies of the verified Complaint pursuant to 19 C.F.R. §§ 201.6 and 210.8(a) (original and one (1) copy unbound, without tabs pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 201.8(d)); 2. An original and eight (8) copies of the confidential version of the exhibits to the Complaint pursuant to 19 C.F.R. §§ 201.6(c) and 210.8(a) (original and one (1) copy unbound, without tabs pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 201 .8(d)); 3. An original and eight (8) copies of the nonconfidential version of the exhibits to the Complaint pursuant to 19 C.F.R. §§ 2l0.4(f)(3)(i) and 21O.8(a) (original and one (1) copy unbound, without tabs pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 201.8(d)); 4. Seven (7) additional copies of the Complaint and the accompanying nonconfidential exhibits for service upon the proposed respondents; and seven (7) additional copies of the confidential exhibits for service upon counsel for the respondents once appropriate subscriptions to a protective order have been filed, pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 2l0.8(a); December 21, 2012 Page 2 . 5. One additional copy of the Complaint for service on the Embassy of China, pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 2lO.8(a); 6. One additional copy of the Complaint for service on the Embassy of Taiwan, pursuant to l9 C.F.R. § 2l0.8(a); 7. One (1) certified copy of U.S. Patent No. 8,204,561 (“the ‘S61 patent”) is included as Exhibit 1 to the Complaint; 8. Copies of the certified assignment for the ‘S61patent are included as Exhibit 2 to the Complaint; 9. Four (4) copies (on CDs) containing Appendix A, which is the certified prosecution history for the ‘S61 patent; Sincerely, %/5%24%;” S N R D E N N SNRDentonUSLLP1301 K Street, NW ll:/lazjiir.Hogge Suite 600, East Tower [email protected] Washington, DC 200053364 USA D +1 202 408 6443 T +1 202 408 6400 F +1 Z02 403 6399 snrdentoncom December 21, 2012 BY HAND DELIVERY Honorable Lisa R. Barton Acting Secretary United States International Trade Commission 500 E Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20436 Re: Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices Dear Secretary Barton: Dear Secretary Abbott: In accordance with 19 C.F.R §§ 201.8(g) and 210.5, Speculative Product Design, LLC (“Speck”) request confidential treatment for the business information contained in Confidential Exhibits 4 and 25. The information for which confidential treatment is sought is proprietary commercial information not otherwise publicly available. Specifically, Confidential Exhibit 35 contains confidential information regarding Speck’s domestic industry. The information described above qualifies as confidential business infonnation pursuant to Rule 201.6(a) because: 1. It is not publicly available; 2. Unauthorized disclosure of such information could cause substantial harm to the competitive position of Speck; and 3. The disclosure of such information could impair the C0mmission’s ability to obtain information necessary to perform its statutory function. December 21, 2012 Page 2 Please contact me if you have any questions about this request, or if this request is not granted in full. Respectfully submitted, %/Mzyégg Mark L. Hogge Partner UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. In the Matter of Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices Investigation No. STATEMENT OF PUBLIC INTEREST In support of its complaint filed on December 21, 2012, titled “Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices”, Complainant Speculative Product Design, LLC (“Speck”) respectfully submits this separate statement of public interest, as required by Commission Rule 2l0.8(b). l9 CFR § 2l0.8(b). As discussed below, exclusion of the infringing portable electronic device cases identified in Speck’s Complaint would not have an adverse effect on public health and Welfare in the United States, competitive conditions in the United States economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United States, or United States consumers. (1) Explanation of how the articles potentially subject to the orders are used in the United States. The articles potentially subject to exclusion and cease and desist orders are specialized cases for portable electronic devices, such as mobile phones and tablets. Proposed Respondents En Jinn Industrial Co. Ltd., Shengda Huanqiu Shijie, Global Digital Star Industry, Ltd., JWIN Electronics Corp., d/b/a iLuv, Jie Sheng Technology, Project Horizon, Inc. d/b/a/ InMotion Entertainment, Superior Communications, d/b/a/ PureGear (collectively referred to as “Resp0ndents”) either manufacture the accused products outside of the United States for importation and sale in the United States, provide them to third parties, including certain other Respondents, which sell and distribute them in the United States, or manufacture, import, and sell the accused products in the United States to the public. (2) Identification of any public health, safety, or welfare concerns in the United States relating to the requested remedial orders. The issuance of exclusion and cease and desist orders in this matter would have no adverse impact upon the public health, safety, or welfare of the United States. The accused articles are accessory items used as cases for portable electronic devices, such as mobile phone and tablets, and are not the type of products that have raised concerns by the Commission about public health, safety, or Welfare.See, e.g., Certain Toothbrushes and the Packaging Thereofi Inv. No. 337-TA-391, Commission Opinion on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding, 1996 WL 1056217, at *5 (Oct. 15, 1996). In addition, the Commission has initiated an investigation into the infringing sales of similar products by other case manufacturers. See, e.g., Certain Protective Cases and Components Thereofi Inv. No. 337-TA-780. Respondents accused products represent a small portion of the case marketplace, and Speck and other competitors have the capacity to replace the volume of the infringing cases. The issuance of the requested orders would thus implicate no public health, safety, or wellness concerns, and the requested orders would serve the public interest of protecting United States intellectual property rights. See Certain Toothbrushes and the Packaging Thereof at *5. (3) Identification of like or directly competitive articles that complainant, its licensees,or third parties make that would replace the subject articles if they were to be excluded. Speck itself designs, manufactures and sells numerous types of cases and covers that are directly competitive to the proposed Respondents infringing cases. Moreover, Speck and the proposed Respondents are only some amongst numerous companies that produce cases and covers. -2 Even if the accused products in this matter are excluded, consumers and other purchasers of cases would still have a wealth of products to choose from that will continue to be made by Speck and other non-infringing competitors. (4) Indication whether the complainant, its licensees, and/or third parties have the capacity to replace the volume of articles subject to the requested remedial orders in a commercially reasonable time in the US. The infringing products of the proposed Respondents have minimal impact on the overall growing case marketplace in the United States. As set forth above, Speck and other manufacturers account for the majority of the cases sold in the United States. Speck and other legitimate case manufacturers and sellers have ample capacity to provide the United States market with cases sufficient to replace the infringing sales by the proposed Respondents that may become subject to an exclusion order in this matter. (5) Statement of how the requested remedial order would impact consumers The issuance of exclusion and cease and desist orders in this investigation would not adversely impact customers or materially limit customer choice. The accused products comprise only a small portion of the case market Speck and competitive manufacturers of non-infringing cases will continue to adequately service the U.S. market, without disruption, upon the exclusion of the infringing products from the U.S.. -3 Dated: December 21, 2012 Respectfully submitted, 5//I 4 / ('g,,¢_,_ Christian E. Samay SNR Denton US LLP 101 John F. Kennedy Pkwy Short Hills, New Jersey 07078 973-912-7180 Mark Hogge Shailendra Maheshwari SNR Denton US LLP 1301 K St., N.W. , Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20005-3364 202-408-6400 UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. I In the Matter of Certain Cases For Portable Electronic Devices Investigation No. COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 337 OF THE TARIFF ACT OF 1930 COMPLAINANT Global Digital Star Industry, Ltd. Speculative Product Design, LLC 22F, Hong Ling Building 303 Bryant Street Hong Ling South Road Mountain View, California 94041 Futian District 650-681-8060 Shenzhen City 5181 12, China COUNSEL FOR COMPLAINANT JWIN Electronics Corp., dba iLuv 2 Harbor Park Drive Christian E.