UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`
`
`CERTAIN LOCATION-SHARING
`SYSTEMS, RELATED SOFTWARE,
`COMPONENTS THEREOF, AND
`PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-1347
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NOTICE OF COMMISSION DETERMINATION NOT TO REVIEW THREE INITIAL
`DETERMINATIONS TERMINATING THE INVESTIGATION AS TO CERTAIN
`RESPONDENTS AND IN ITS ENTIRETY; TERMINATION OF THE INVESTIGATION
`
` U.S. International Trade Commission.
`
`AGENCY:
`
`ACTION:
`
`SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has
`determined not to review three initial determinations (“IDs”) of the presiding administrative law
`judge (“ALJ”) that terminate the above-captioned investigation as to: (1) respondent OnePlus
`Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. based on settlement (Order No. 24); (2) respondents Xiaomi
`Corporation, Xiaomi H.K. Ltd., Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd., and Xiaomi Inc. based on
`settlement (Order No. 25); and (3) the remaining respondents based on withdrawal of the
`complaint (Order No. 26). The investigation is terminated.
`
`FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard P. Hadorn, Esq., Office of the
`General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.
`20436, telephone (202) 205-3179. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection
`with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at
`https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. General
`information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at
`https://www.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can
`be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal, telephone (202) 205-1810.
`
`SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation on
`December 30, 2022, based on a complaint filed by Advanced Ground Information Systems, Inc.
`of Jupiter, Florida and AGIS Software Development LLC of Marshall, Texas (collectively,
`“AGIS”). 87 FR 80568-69 (Dec. 30, 2022). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations
`of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, based on the importation
`into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after
`
`
` Notice.
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`importation of certain location-sharing systems, related software, components thereof, and
`products containing same by reason of the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos.
`8,213,970 (“the ’970 patent”); 9,445,251 (“the ’251 patent”); 9,467,838 (“the ’838 patent”);
`9,749,829 (“the ’829 patent”); and 9,820,123 (“the ’123 patent”). Id. at 80568. The complaint
`further alleges that a domestic industry exists. Id.
`
`The notice of investigation named 26 respondents: (1) Kyocera Corporation (“Kyocera”)
`of Kyoto, Japan; (2) OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (“OnePlus”) of Shenzhen,
`Guangdong, China; (3) Xiaomi Corporation of Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands; Xiaomi H.K.
`Ltd. of Kowloon City, Hong Kong; Xiaomi Communications Co., Ltd. of Beijing, China; and
`Xiaomi Inc. of Beijing, China (collectively, “Xiaomi”); and (4) Google LLC of Mountain View,
`California; Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd. of Suwon, Republic of Korea; Samsung Electronics
`America, Inc. of Ridgefield Park, New Jersey; TCL Technology Group Corporation of Huizhou,
`Guangdong, China; TCL Electronics Holdings Limited of Hong Kong Science Park, Hong Kong;
`TCL Communication Technology Holdings Limited of Hong Kong Science Park, Hong Kong;
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. of Irvine, California; Lenovo Group Ltd. of Beijing, China; Lenovo
`(United States) Inc. of Morrisville, North Carolina; Motorola Mobility LLC of Chicago, Illinois;
`HMD Global of Espoo, Finland; HMD Global OY of Espoo, Finland; HMD America, Inc. of
`Miami, Florida; Sony Corporation of Tokyo, Japan; Sony Mobile Communications, Inc. of
`Tokyo, Japan; ASUSTek Computer Inc. of Taipei, Taiwan; ASUS Computer International of
`Fremont, California; BLU Products of Doral, Florida; Panasonic Corporation of Osaka, Japan;
`Panasonic Corporation of North America of Secaucus, New Jersey (collectively, the “Remaining
`Respondents”). Id. at 80569. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (“OUII”) is also named
`as a party. Id.
`
`On February 17, 2023, the Commission amended the complaint and notice of
`investigation to substitute Panasonic Holdings Corporation of Osaka, Japan, in place of named
`respondent Panasonic Corporation. Order No. 7 (Feb. 1, 2023), unreviewed by 88 FR 11477
`(Feb. 23, 2023).
`
`On June 6, 2023, the Commission terminated the investigation as to the following
`asserted claims based on withdrawal: (i) claim 2 of the ’970 patent; (ii) claims 1-2, 7-8, 23, 25,
`29-30, and 35 of the ’251 patent; (iii) claims 3, 5-8, 10, 16, 19, 38, 40, 55-56, 61-64, 68, 71-72,
`80 and 84 of the ’838 patent; (iv) claims 1, 8, 34, and 41 of the ’829 patent; and (v) claim 14 of
`the ’123 patent. Order No. 16 (May 17, 2023), unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (June 6, 2023).
`
`On June 27, 2023, the Commission terminated the investigation as to Kyocera based on
`settlement. Order No. 19, unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (June 27, 2023).
`
`On June 14, 2023, AGIS and OnePlus filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation
`as to OnePlus based on a settlement agreement. On June 16, 2023, OUII filed a response
`supporting the motion. No other responses to the motion were filed.
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`On June 15, 2023, AGIS and Xiaomi filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation as
`to Xiaomi based on a settlement agreement. On June 16, 2023, OUII filed a response supporting
`the motion. No other responses to the motion were filed.
`
`On June 15, 2023, AGIS filed a motion to terminate the investigation as to the Remaining
`Respondents based on withdrawal of the complaint. On June 16, 2023, OUII filed a response
`supporting the motion. On June 20, 2023, the Remaining Respondents filed a response stating
`that they do not oppose the motion. No other responses to the motion were filed.
`
`On June 20, 2023, the ALJ issued all three subject IDs (Order Nos. 24, 25, and 26).
`Order Nos. 24 and 25 grant the unopposed joint motions to terminate the investigation as to
`OnePlus and Xiaomi, respectively, finding that the motions comply with the requirements of
`Commission Rule 210.21(b)(1) (19 CFR 210.21(b)(1)), and that the proposed settlements do not
`adversely affect the public interest in accordance with Commission Rule 210.50(b)(2) (19 CFR
`210.50(b)(2)). Order No. 24 at 2-3; Order No. 25 at 2-3. Order No. 26 grants the unopposed
`motion to terminate the investigation as to the Remaining Respondents and thus in its entirety,
`finding that the motion complies with the requirements of Commission Rule 210.21(a)(1) (19
`CFR 210.21(a)(1)), and that “no extraordinary circumstances exist that would prevent the
`requested termination of this Investigation.” Order No. 26 at 2-3. No petitions for review of the
`subject IDs were filed.
`
`The Commission has determined not to review the subject IDs. The investigation is
`terminated as to OnePlus, Xiaomi, and the Remaining Respondents and, thus, in its entirety.
`
`The Commission vote for this determination took place on July 7, 2023.
`
`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 Part 210 of the Commission’s Rules of
`Practice and Procedure (19 CFR Part 210).
`
`By order of the Commission.
`
`Issued: July 10, 2023
`
`
`
`Lisa R. Barton
`Secretary to the Commission
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`