UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`
`CERTAIN POINT-TO-POINT NETWORK
`COMMUNICATION DEVICES AND
`
`PRODUCTS CONTAINING THE SAME
`
`
`
`
`Inv. N 0. 337-TA-892
`
`Order No. 37: INITIAL DETERMINATION
`
`Terminating the Investigation
`
`Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 210.21(a), complainant Straight Path IP Group, Inc. (“Straight
`
`Path”) filed a motion to terminate this investigation in its entirety based on withdrawal of the
`
`complaint, and a memorandum in support thereof. Motion Docket No. 892-59. The
`
`Commission Investigative Stafi‘ filed a response supporting the motion. Respondents Toshiba,
`
`Vizio, and LG1 filed a response stating that they do not oppose the motion.2
`
`Commission Rule 210.21(a)(l), which permits temlination of an investigation based on
`
`withdrawal of a complaint or certain allegations contained in the complaint, provides in 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
`
`' “Toshiba” refers collectively to Toshiba Corporation; Toshiba America Inc.; and Toshiba
`America Information Systems, Inc.
`
`“Vizio” refers to Vizio, Inc.
`
`“LG” refers collectively to LG Electronics Inc.; LG Electronics USA, Inc.; and LG Electronics
`MobileComm USA, Inc.
`
`2 Straight Path filed a motion for leave to reply, and a reply. Motion Docket No. 892-63.
`Straight Path’s Motion No. 892-63 is granted.
`
`Page 1 of 5
`
`LG Electronics Exhibit 1037
`
`LGE, et a1. V. Straight Path IP
`IPR2015-00198
`
`
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`In the Matter of
`
`
`CERTAIN POINT-TO-POINT NETWORK
`COMMUNICATION DEVICES AND
`
`PRODUCTS CONTAINING THE SAME
`
`
`
`
`Inv. N 0. 337-TA-892
`
`Order No. 37: INITIAL DETERMINATION
`
`Terminating the Investigation
`
`Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 210.21(a), complainant Straight Path IP Group, Inc. (“Straight
`
`Path”) filed a motion to terminate this investigation in its entirety based on withdrawal of the
`
`complaint, and a memorandum in support thereof. Motion Docket No. 892-59. The
`
`Commission Investigative Stafi‘ filed a response supporting the motion. Respondents Toshiba,
`
`Vizio, and LG1 filed a response stating that they do not oppose the motion.2
`
`Commission Rule 210.21(a)(l), which permits temlination of an investigation based on
`
`withdrawal of a complaint or certain allegations contained in the complaint, provides in 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
`
`' “Toshiba” refers collectively to Toshiba Corporation; Toshiba America Inc.; and Toshiba
`America Information Systems, Inc.
`
`“Vizio” refers to Vizio, Inc.
`
`“LG” refers collectively to LG Electronics Inc.; LG Electronics USA, Inc.; and LG Electronics
`MobileComm USA, Inc.
`
`2 Straight Path filed a motion for leave to reply, and a reply. Motion Docket No. 892-63.
`Straight Path’s Motion No. 892-63 is granted.
`
`Page 1 of 5
`
`LG Electronics Exhibit 1037
`
`LGE, et a1. V. Straight Path IP
`IPR2015-00198
`
`
`
`contained therein, or for good cause other than the grounds listed in
`paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
`
`19 C.F.R. § 210.21(a)(1).
`
`Granting the motion to terminate would avoid trial and post-trial procedures, as well as
`
`conserVe public and private resources. See Mem. at 5. Further, pursuant to Commission Rule
`
`210.21(a)(1), Straight Path states that “there are no agreements, written or oral, express or
`
`implied between the Complainant and the remaining Respondents concerning the subject matter
`
`of this investigation.” Id. The administrative law judge has no evidence that any extraordinary
`
`circumstance exists to warrant denying the motion to terminate. No party has contested the fact
`
`that the motion may be granted under the Commission’s rules and precedent.
`
`Nevertheless, Toshiba, Vizio, and LG argue that if Straight Path files a new complaint
`
`against them concerning the same devices or certain functionalities, Straight Path’s conduct
`
`should be investigated before institution. See Resps. Resp. at 7-8. On the other hand, Straight
`
`Path argues in its reply that it had difficulties obtaining third-party discovery. See Reply at 1-4.
`
`The fact that the Commission may consider these or other factors upon the filing of any
`
`subsequent complaint does not bar termination on the basis of Straight Path’s unopposed
`
`motion.3
`
`Accordingly, it is the initial determination of the undersigned that Motion No. 892-59 is
`
`granted. This investigation is terminated in its entirety.
`
`Pursuant to 19 CPR. § 210.42(h), this initial determination shall become the
`
`determination of the Commission unless a party files a petition for review of the initial
`
`3 See Certain Devices with Secure Commc ’n Capabilities, Components Thereof and Products
`Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-858, Order No. 20 at 7-8 (Apr. 22, 2013), afl’d, Comm’n
`Deter. Not to Review (May 15, 2013); see also 78 Fed. Reg. 29776 (May 21, 2013) (affirming
`Order No. 20).
`
`Page 2 of 5
`
`
`
`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
`
`contained herein.
`
`W
`
`David P. Shaw
`
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`Issued: May 12, 2014
`
`Page 3 of 5
`
`
`
`CERTAIN POINT-TO-POINT NETWORK COMMUNICATION DEVICES AND
`
`PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME
`
`INV. NO. 337-TA-892
`
`PUBLIC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I, Lisa R. Barton, hereby certify that the attached Order No. 37 (Initial Determination) has
`been served by hand upon the Commission Investigative Attorney, James Wiley, Esq., and the
`following parties as indicated, on
`
`MAY 1 3 2014 W
`
`Lisa R. Barton, Secretary
`US. International Trade Commission
`
`500 E Street SW, Room 112A
`
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`FOR COMPLAINANT STRAIGHT PATH IP GROUP, INC.:
`
`Michael T. Renaud, Esq.
`MINTZ, LEVIN, COHN, FERRIS
`GLOVSKY AND POPEO, P.C.
`One Financial Center
`
`Boston, MA 021 1 1
`
`
`) Via Hand Delivery
`(
`64 Express Delivery
`
`(
`) Via First Class Mail
`
`(
`) Other:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FOR RESPONDENTS AMTRAN TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD. AND AMTRAN
`LOGISTICS, INC.:
`
`Christopher R. Bymes, Esq.
`ALSTON & BIRD, LLP
`950 F Street, NW
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Washington, DC 20004
`
`) Via Hand Delivery
`(
`
`
`60 Express Delivery
`
`
`(
`) Via First Class Mail
`
`
`(
`) Other:
`
`
`
`AND LG ELECTRONICS MOBILECOMM U.S.A., INC. :
`
` FOR RESPONDENTS LG ELECTRONICS, INC. LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`) Via Hand Delivery
`(
`
`fl Express Delivery
`
`) Via First Class Mail
`(
`
`
`
`) Other:
`(
`
`
`
`
`
`Smith R. Brittingham IV, Esq.
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
`GARRETT & DUNNER L.L.P.
`901 New York Avenue, NW
`Washington, DC 20001
`
`Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`) Via Hand Delivery
`(
`Steven J. Routh, Esq.
`
`
`(x) Express Delivery
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE, LLP
`
`
`
`(
`) Via First Class Mail
`1152 15th Street, NW
`
`
`
`(
`) Other:
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`(
`) Via Hand Delivery
`James B. Altman, Esq.
`
`M Express Delivery
`FOSTER, MURPHY, ALTMAN & NICKEL, PC
`(
`) Via First Class Mail
`1899 L Street, NW, Suite 1150
`(
`) Other:
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTAIN POINT-TO-POINT NETWORK COMMUNICATION DEVICES AND
`
`PRODUCTS CONTAINING SAME
`
`INV. NO. 337-TA-892
`
`FOR RESPONDENTS PANASONIC CORP. AND PANASONIC CORP. OF NORTH
`AMERICA:
`
`
`
`FOR RESPONDENTS SONY CORP. , SONY CORP. OF AMERICA, SONY
`ELECTRONICS INC., SONY MOBILE COMNIUNICATIONS AB, SONY MOBILE
`COMMUNICATIONS (USA) INC., SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT, INC.,
`AND SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA LLC:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FOR RESPONDENTS TOSHIBA CORP., TOSHIBA AMERICA INC., AND TOSHIBA
`AMERICA INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC.:
`
`Paul T. Meiklejohn, Esq.
`DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP
`
`701 Fifih Avenue, Suite 6100
`
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`) Via Hand Delivery
`(
`6Q Express Delivery
`(
`) Via First Class Mail
`Other:
`(
`)
`
`
`
`
`
`FOR RESPONDENT VIZIO, INC:
`
`'
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Kevin O’Brien, Esq.
`BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP
`
`
`
`) Via Hand Delivery
`(
`NExpress Delivery
`
`
`(
`) Via First Class Mail
`815 Connecticut Ave., NW
`
`
`
`(
`) Other:
`Washington, DC 20006
`
`
`
`
`Page 5 of 5
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
