UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN LOCATION-SHARING
`SYSTEMS, RELATED SOFTWARE,
`COMPONENTS THEREOF, AND
`PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME
`
`
`ORDER NO. 24:
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1347
`
`
`INITIAL DETERMINATION GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO
`TERMINATE ONEPLUS ON THE BASIS OF A SETTLEMENT
`AGREEMENT AND TO LIMIT SERVICE
`
`(June 20, 2023)
`
`
`
`
`
`On June 14, 2023, Complainants AGIS Software Development LLC and Advanced Ground
`
`Information Systems, Inc. (collectively, “AGIS”) and Respondent OnePlus Technology
`
`(Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (“OnePlus”) jointly moved (1347-014) for termination of the investigation
`
`as to OnePlus based on a settlement agreement attached to the motion. The motion states that the
`
`other Respondents “did not provide a position at the time of the filing of this Motion. Staff
`
`indicated that it will respond to this Motion as filed.” Mot. at 2. On June 16, 2023, Staff filed a
`
`brief supporting AGIS’s and OnePlus’s motion.1
`
`The Commission’s Rules provide that “[a]ny party may move at any time for an order to
`
`terminate an investigation in whole or in part as to any or all respondents on the basis of settlement,
`
`a licensing or other agreement . . . .” 19 C.F.R. § 210.21(a)(2); see also Certain Child Carriers
`
`& Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1154, Order No. 11 at 1-2 (May 23, 2019). The joint
`
`motion as to OnePlus is based on a settlement agreement, which completely resolves the dispute
`
`
`1 Motions to terminate as to the other Respondents were filed before the time for them to
`respond. See Motions 1347-015, 1347-016. And no other Respondent has indicated it will be
`filing a response.
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`
`
`as to AGIS and OnePlus. Mot. at 2. Further, as required by Commission Rule 210.21(b)(1), AGIS
`
`and OnePlus state that there are no other agreements, written or oral, express or implied, between
`
`AGIS and OnePlus concerning the subject matter of this Investigation. Mot. at 2.
`
`Commission Rule 210.21(b) further requires that a copy of any settlement agreement
`
`serving as the basis of a requested termination be filed with the motion for termination. 19 C.F.R.
`
`§ 210.21(b)(1). If the agreement contains confidential business information within the meaning of
`
`Commission Rule 201.6(a), a public version of the agreement with such confidential business
`
`information redacted must also be attached to the motion. Id. AGIS and OnePlus provided both
`
`confidential and redacted public copies of the relevant settlement agreement as required by the
`
`Commission Rules. The confidential version of the settlement agreement is attached hereto as
`
`Exhibit A and the public version is attached as Exhibit B.
`
`Having reviewed the public version of the settlement agreement, I find that it complies
`
`with Commission Rule 210.21(b)(1) as it contains redactions only for information that qualifies as
`
`confidential business information under Commission Rule 201.6(a). See 19 C.F.R. § 210.21(b)(1)
`
`and 201.6(a).
`
`In any initial determination terminating an investigation by settlement agreement or
`
`consent order, the administrative law judge is directed to consider and make appropriate findings
`
`regarding the effect of the proposed settlement on the public health and welfare, competitive
`
`conditions in the United States economy, production of like or directly competitive articles in the
`
`United States, and United States consumers. 19 C.F.R. § 210.50(b)(2). AGIS and OnePlus explain
`
`that “granting this Motion to Terminate will not adversely affect the public health and welfare,
`
`competitive conditions in the United States economy, production of like or directly competitive
`
`articles in the United States, or U.S. consumers.” Mot. at 3. AGIS and OnePlus further explain that
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`
`
`granting this motion is in the public interest: “Commission policy and the public interest generally
`
`favor termination by settlement, which conserves resources for both the Commission and the
`
`private parties, and termination based on a settlement is routinely granted.” Mot. at 3–4 (citing
`
`cases). Staff “is likewise of the view that the public interest favors settlement to avoid needless
`
`litigation and to conserve public resources.” Staff Resp. at 4.
`
`Accordingly, it is my initial determination that the motion to terminate the Investigation as
`
`to OnePlus (Motion 1347-014) be GRANTED. AGIS and OnePlus also request that service of the
`
`unredacted version of the settlement agreement be limited to the ALJ and Staff, asserting that good
`
`cause exists because this advances the Commission’s policies of protecting competitive
`
`information and promoting settlement. Mot. at 2–3. No party opposed this request, and therefore
`
`it is granted. This initial determination, along with supporting documentation, is hereby certified
`
`to the Commission.
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 210.42(h), this Initial Determination shall be the determination of
`
`the Commission unless a party files a petition for review of the Initial Determination pursuant to
`
`19 C.F.R. § 210.43(a), or the Commission, pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 210.44, orders, on its own
`
`motion, a review of the Initial Determination or certain issues herein.
`
`
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`