[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 238 (Thursday, December 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 65285]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32333]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Inv. No. 337-TA-392]
In the Matter of Certain Digital Satellite System (DSS) Receivers
and Components Thereof; Notice of Final Commission Determination of No
Violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has made a final determination of no violation of section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, in the above-captioned
investigation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl P. Bretscher, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street,
S.W., Washington, D.C. 20436, telephone (202) 205-3107.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 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 210.45 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 C.F.R. 210.45).
The Commission instituted this patent-based section 337
investigation on December 11, 1996, based on a complaint filed by
Personalized Media Communications (``PMC'') of New York, New
York.1 PMC's complaint named seven respondents: DIRECTV,
Inc., United States Satellite Broadcasting Company (``USSB''); Hughes
Network Systems (``HNS''); Hitachi Home Electronics (America) Inc.
(``Hitachi''); Thomson Consumer Electronics, Inc. (``Thomson'');
Toshiba America Consumer Productions, Inc. (``Toshiba''); and
Matsushita Electric Corporation of America (``Matsushita''). DIRECTV,
USSB, HNS, and Hitachi will be collectively referred to as the
``broadcaster respondents'' or ``broadcasters,'' while Thomson,
Toshiba, and Matsushita will be collectively referred to as the
``manufacturing respondents.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Notice of Investigation, 61 F.R. 66,695-96 (Dec. 18, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At issue are PMC's allegations that the broadcaster and
manufacturing respondents violated section 337 by importing into the
United States, selling for importation, and/or selling within the
United States after importation certain digital satellite system
(``DSS'') receivers and components thereof that infringe claims 6, 7,
and/or 44 of U.S. Letters Patent 5,335,277 (``the `277 patent''), owned
by PMC. Other claims originally asserted by PMC were either withdrawn
(claims 3, 12, and 15) or were found to be invalid as anticipated under
35 U.S.C. 102, on respondents' motion for summary judgment (claim 35).
The presiding administrative law judge (ALJ) held an evidentiary
hearing from June 30, 1997, to July 12, 1997. On October 20, 1997, the
ALJ issued his final initial determination (``ID''), in which he
concluded that there was no violation of section 337, based on his
findings that: (a) each of claims 6, 7, and 44 is invalid as indefinite
under 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 2; (b) each of claims 6, 7, and 44 is
invalid as non-enabled under 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 1; (c) claim 7 is
invalid as anticipated under 35 U.S.C. 102; and (d) PMC failed to show
that the accused receivers and components infringed any of claims 6, 7,
or 44, either directly or through contributory or induced infringement.
The ALJ rejected other invalidity and unenforceability defenses raised
by respondents and found that PMC satisfied the domestic industry
requirement.
On October 31, 1997, PMC filed a petition for review of the ID,
arguing that the ALJ erred in finding that each of claims 6, 7, and 44
is invalid as indefinite and non-enabled, and further erred in finding
that the accused receivers and components do not infringe any of the
claims at issue. The manufacturing and broadcaster respondents filed
separate contingent petitions for review, asserting that the Commission
should also review the ALJ's findings rejecting certain invalidity and
inequitable conduct arguments, provided the Commission grants PMC's
petition for review. The broadcaster respondents also requested that
the Commission reverse the ALJ's refusal to allow the testimony of
their expert witness David Stewart and his rejection of their offer of
proof. The Commission investigative attorney did not file a petition
for review and, in his response to the petitions for review, generally
supported the major findings in the ID.
Having reviewed the record in this investigation, including the
parties' written submissions, the Commission determined not to review,
and thereby adopted, the ALJ's construction of each of the claims at
issue, and his findings that: (1) Each of claims 6, 7, and 44 is
invalid as indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 2; (2) the accused
receivers and components do not infringe any of the three claims at
issue, either directly or through contributory or induced infringement;
and (3) there is consequently no violation of section 337. The
Commission took no position on the remaining issues addressed in the
ID. Finally, the Commission affirmed the decision of the ALJ to refuse
to allow the Stewart testimony and to reject the broadcaster
respondents' offer of proof.
Copies of all nonconfidential 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, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. Hearing impaired
persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by
contacting the Commission's TDD terminal at (202) 205-1810.
Issued: December 4, 1997.
By order of the Commission.
Donna R. Koehnke,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-32333 Filed 12-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
