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. 26:
`
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1347
`
`
`INITIAL DETERMINATION GRANTING COMPLAINANTS
`ADVANCED GROUND INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC. AND
`AGIS SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LLC’S MOTION TO
`TERMINATE THE INVESTIGATION AS TO THE REMAINING
`RESPONDENTS BASED ON WITHDRAWAL OF THE
`COMPLAINT
`
`(June 20, 2023)
`
`
`
`
`
`On June 15, 2023, Complainants AGIS Software Development LLC and Advanced Ground
`
`Information Systems, Inc. (collectively, “AGIS”) moved (1347-016) for termination of the
`
`investigation as to Respondents Google LLC (“Google”), Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and
`
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (collectively “Samsung”); TCL Technology Group
`
`Corporation, TCL Communication Technology Holdings Limited, TCL Electronics Holdings
`
`Limited, and TCT Mobile (US), Inc. (collectively “TCL”); Lenovo Group Ltd., Lenovo (United
`
`States) Inc., and Motorola Mobility LLC (collectively “Lenovo”); HMD Global, HMD Global Oy,
`
`and HMD America, Inc. (collectively “HMD”); Sony Corporation and Sony Mobile
`
`Communications, Inc. (collectively “Sony”); ASUSTek Computer Inc. and ASUS Computer
`
`International (collectively “ASUS”); BLU Products, Inc. (“BLU”); and Panasonic Holdings
`
`Corporation and Panasonic Corporation of North America (collectively “Panasonic”) (all
`
`Respondents, collectively, “Respondents”) based on withdrawal of the Complaint as to those
`
`

`

`Respondents.1 The motion states that Staff “will take a position on the Motion as filed as soon as
`
`possible[]” and that Google, Samsung, TCL, Lenovo, HMD, Sony, ASUS, BLU, and Panasonic
`
`“indicated that they will take a position on the Motion as filed as soon as possible.”
`
`On June 16, 2023, Staff filed a response supporting the motion. Staff’s brief indicated that
`
`it “inquired whether any Respondent opposes or will be filing a response having reviewed the
`
`motion as filed and was informed that no party opposes the Motion to Terminate.” Staff Br. at 3.
`
`Commission Rule 210.21(a) provides, in relevant part:
`
`Any party may move at any time prior to the issuance of an initial determination on
`violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 to terminate an investigation in
`whole or in part as to any or all respondents, on the basis of withdrawal of the
`complaint or certain allegations contained therein . . . . A motion for termination of
`an investigation based on withdrawal of the complaint shall contain a statement that
`there are no agreements, written or oral, express or implied between the parties
`concerning the subject matter of the investigation, or if there are any agreements
`concerning the subject matter of the investigation, all such agreements shall be
`identified, and if written, a copy shall be filed with the Commission along with the
`motion. . . . The presiding administrative law judge may grant the motion in an
`initial determination upon such terms and conditions as he deems proper.
`
`19 C.F.R. § 210.21(a). The Commission has further stated that “in the absence of extraordinary
`
`circumstances, termination of the investigation will be granted to a complainant during the
`
`prehearing stage of an investigation.” Certain Ultrafiltration Sys. and Components Thereof,
`
`Including Ultrafiltration Membranes, Inv. No. 337-TA-107, Comm’n Action and Order at 2 (Mar.
`
`11, 1982).
`
`Having reviewed the pleadings and arguments therein, I find that no extraordinary
`
`circumstances exist that would prevent the requested termination of this Investigation. I also find
`
`that AGIS has complied with the requirements of Commission Rule 210.21(a). See Mot. at 5
`
`(“AGIS identifies the settlement agreements with Respondents Kyocera, OnePlus, and Xiaomi as
`
`
`1 All other Respondents have been terminated based on settlement agreements. Order Nos. 19,
`24, 25.
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`

`

`the only agreements, written or oral, express or implied, between the parties concerning the subject
`
`matter of this Investigation.”); see also Order No. 16 at 2 (AGIS identifying no agreements other
`
`than stipulations between the parties).
`
`Accordingly, it is my initial determination that Complainants’ unopposed motion (1347-
`
`016) for termination of the Investigation as to the remaining Respondents (Google, Samsung, TCL,
`
`Lenovo, HMD, Sony, ASUS, BLU, and Panasonic) be granted. This initial determination 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 -
`
`
`
`