20048 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 3, 2012 / Notices Corporation of Japan; Shuttle Inc. of fed_reg_notices/rules/ Office of the Secretary, U.S. Taiwan; and Systemax Inc. of NY. handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf). International Trade Commission, 500 E Proposed respondents, other Persons with questions regarding filing Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, interested parties, and members of the should contact the Secretary (202–205– telephone (202) 205–2000. General public are invited to file comments, not 2000). information concerning the Commission to exceed five (5) pages in length, Any person desiring to submit a may also be obtained by accessing its inclusive of attachments, on any public document to the Commission in Internet server at http://www.usitc.gov. interest issues raised by the complaint confidence must request confidential The public record for this investigation or section 210.8(b) filing. Comments treatment. All such requests should be may be viewed on the Commission’s should address whether issuance of the directed to the Secretary to the electronic docket (EDIS) at http:// relief specifically requested by the Commission and must include a full edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired complainant in this investigation would statement of the reasons why the persons are advised that information on affect the public health and welfare in Commission should grant such this matter can be obtained by the United States, competitive treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents contacting the Commission’s TDD conditions in the United States for which confidential treatment by the terminal on (202) 205–1810. economy, the production of like or Commission is properly sought will be SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The directly competitive articles in the treated accordingly. All nonconfidential Commission instituted Inv. No. 337– United States, or United States written submissions will be available for TA–741 on October 18, 2010, based on consumers. public inspection at the Office of the a complaint filed by Thomson Licensing In particular, the Commission is Secretary and on EDIS. SAS of France and Thomson Licensing interested in comments that: This action is taken under the LLC of Princeton, New Jersey (i) Explain how the articles authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act (collectively ‘‘Thomson’’). 75 FR 63856 potentially subject to the requested of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), (Oct. 18, 2010). The complaint alleged remedial orders are used in the United and of sections 201.10 and 210.8(c) of violations of section 337 of the Tariff States; the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Act of 1930, as amended 19 U.S.C. 1337, (ii) identify any public health, safety, Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.8(c)). or welfare concerns in the United States by reason of infringement of various relating to the requested remedial Issued: March 29, 2012. claims of United States Patent Nos. By order of the Commission. orders; 6,121,941 (‘‘the ’941 patent’’); 5,978,063 (iii) identify like or directly James R. Holbein, (‘‘the ’063 patent’’); 5,648,674 (‘‘the ’674 competitive articles that complainant, Secretary to the Commission. patent’’); 5,621,556 (‘‘the ’556 patent’’); its licensees, or third parties make in the [FR Doc. 2012–7936 Filed 4–2–12; 8:45 am] and 5,375,006 (‘‘the ’006 patent’’). The United States which could replace the BILLING CODE 7020–02–P Commission instituted Inv. No. 337– subject articles if they were to be TA–749 on November 30, 2010, based excluded; on a complaint filed by Thomson. 75 FR (iv) indicate whether complainant, INTERNATIONAL TRADE 74080 (Nov. 30, 2010). The complaint complainant’s licensees, and/or third COMMISSION alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 by reason of party suppliers have the capacity to [Investigation No. 337–TA–741/749] replace the volume of articles infringement of various claims of the potentially subject to the requested Certain Liquid Crystal Display Devices, ’063, ’556, and ’006 patents. On January exclusion order and/or a cease and Including Monitors, Televisions, 5, 2011, the Commission consolidated desist order within a commercially Modules, and Components Thereof; the two investigations. The respondents reasonable time; and Notice of Commission Determination are Chimei InnoLux Corporation of (v) explain how the requested To Review-In-Part a Final Miaoli County, Taiwan and InnoLux remedial orders would impact United Determination; Schedule for Filing Corportation of Austin, Texas States consumers. Written Submissions (collectively, ‘‘CMI’’); MStar Written submissions must be filed no Semiconductor Inc. of ChuPei, Taiwan later than by close of business, eight AGENCY: U.S. International Trade (‘‘MStar’’); Qisda Corporation of calendar days after the date of Commission. Taoyuan, Taiwan and Qisda America publication of this notice in the Federal ACTION: Notice. Corporation of Irvine, California Register. There will be further (collectively, ‘‘Qisda’’); BenQ opportunities for comment on the SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Corporation of Taipei, Taiwan, BenQ public interest after the issuance of any the U.S. International Trade America Corporation of Irvine, final initial determination in this Commission has determined to review California, and BenQ Latin America investigation. certain portions of the final initial Corporation of Miami, Florida Persons filing written submissions determination (‘‘ID’’) issued by the (collectively ‘‘BenQ’’); Realtek must file the original document presiding administrative law judge Semicondustor Corp. of Hsinchu, electronically on or before the deadlines (‘‘ALJ’’) on January 12, 2012 in the Taiwan (‘‘Realtek’’); and AU Optronics stated above and submit 8 true paper above-captioned investigation. Corp. of Hsinchu, Taiwan and AU copies to the Office of the Secretary by FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jia Optronics Corp. America of Houston, noon the next day pursuant to section Chen, Office of the General Counsel, Texas (collectively ‘‘AUO’’). 210.4(f) of the Commission’s Rules of U.S. International Trade Commission, On January 12, 2012, the ALJ issued Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC the subject ID finding a violation of 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to 20436, telephone (202) 708–4737. Section 337 with respect to the ’674 the docket number (‘‘Docket No. 2889’’) Copies of non-confidential documents patent. The ALJ found that the CMI in a prominent place on the cover page filed in connection with this accused products including the Type 2 and/or the first page. (See Handbook for investigation are or will be available for Array Circuitry and any Qisda or BenQ Electronic Filing Procedures, http:// inspection during official business accused products incorporating these www.usitc.gov/secretary/ hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the CMI accused products infringe the VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:19 Apr 02, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03APN1.SGM 03APN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 64 / Tuesday, April 3, 2012 / Notices 20049 asserted claims of the ’674 patent. The economic prong of the domestic there any secondary considerations such as ALJ found that no other accused industry requirement. commercial success that would be probative products infringe the ’674 patent. The The Commission has also determined of non-obviousness? Please cite evidence in the record as support. ALJ also found that no accused products to review and to take no position on the claim construction of the terms ‘‘drain Question 6: Has Thomson produced infringe the asserted claims of the ’063 sufficient independent corroborating patent, the ’006 patent, the ’556 patent, electrodes’’ and ‘‘source electrodes’’ of evidence showing that the inventions of each or the ’941 patent. The ALJ also found the ’556 patent. of the asserted claims of the ’063 patent have that claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 11, 12, 14, and The parties should brief their been reduced to practice before the filing 18 of the ’063 patent are invalid for positions on the issues on review with dates of Lowe and Miyazaki? In particular, obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103, and reference to the applicable law and the please discuss whether the evidence shows that display cells embodying the inventions that claims 4 and 14 of the ’006 patent evidentiary record. In connection with its review, the Commission is have been tested and shown to work for their are invalid as anticipated under 35 intended purposes. U.S.C. 102. The ALJ further found that particularly interested in responses to the following questions: Question 7: Does the intrinsic evidence claim 17 of the ’063 patent, claim 7 of support the construction of the term ‘‘plate’’ the ’006 patent, and the asserted claims Question 1: The ALJ construed the term ‘‘a recited in claim 3 of the ’006 patent to of the ’556 patent, the ’674 patent, and plurality of spacing elements’’ of claims 1 require a solid and not liquid material? ID at the ’941 patent are not invalid. The ALJ and 11 of the ’063 patent as ‘‘two or more 220. Can the term ‘‘plate’’ include a liquid structures, not physically connected to one compensation layer sealed between two glass concluded that a domestic industry another, which structures serve to substrates? See CMI Petition at 31. Please cite exists in the United States that exploits substantially uniformly separate two to the evidence of the record as support. the asserted patents as required by 19 substrates, said structures formed on one of Under the proper construction of the term U.S.C. 1337(a)(2). On January 25, 2011, said two substrates and contacting the second ‘‘plate,’’ does Scheuble anticipate claims 4 Thomson, CMI, MStar, Realtek, and substrate.’’ ID at 43. Does the proper and 7 of the ’006 patent? AUO each filed a petition for review of construction require that the ‘‘spacing Question 8: With respect to infringement of the ID.