UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`Washington, D.C.
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN GRAPHICS SYSTEMS,
`COMPONENTS THEREOF, AND
`CONSUMER PRODUCTS
`CONTAINING THE SAME
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-1044
`
`NOTICE OF COMMISSION DETERMINATION TO REVIEW IN PART A FINAL
`INITIAL DETERMINATION FINDING A SECTION 337 VIOLATION; TARGET DATE
`EXTENSION AND SCHEDULE FOR FILING WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
`
`AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
`
`ACTION: Notice.
`
`SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has
`determined to: (1) review in part a final initial determination ("FID") of the presiding
`administrative law judge ("AU") finding a violation of section 337 the Tariff Act of 1930, as
`amended; and (2) extend the target date by five business days from August 15, 2018, to August
`22, 2018.
`
`FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Houda Morad, Office of the General
`Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436,
`telephone (202) 708-4716. Copies of non-confidential 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
`SW., Washington, D.C. 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. General information concerning the
` The
`Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server at htips://www.usitc.gov.
`public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket
`(EDIS) at hups://edis.usitcgov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this
`matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on (202) 205-1810.
`
`SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted Investigation No. 337-
`TA-1044 on March 22, 2017, based on a complaint filed by Complainants Advanced Micro
`Devices, Inc. of Sunnyvale, California and ATI Technologies ULC of Canada (collectively,
`"AMD" or "Complainants"). See 82 FR 14748 (Mar. 22, 2017). The complaint, as amended,
`alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), based
`upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the
`United States after importation of certain graphics systems, components thereof, and consumer
`products containing the same, by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No.
`
`1
`
`ARM, Ex. 1012, Page 1
`
`

`

`7,633,506 ("the '506 patent"); U.S. Patent No. 7,796,133 ("the '133 patent"); U.S. Patent No.
`8,760,454 ("the '454 patent"); and U.S. Patent No. 9,582,846 ("the '846 patent"). Id. The notice
`of investigation identified LG Electronics, Inc. of Seoul, Republic of Korea, LG Electronics
`U.S.A., Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, and LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A. Inc. of
`San Diego, California (collectively, "LG"), VIZIO, Inc. ("VIZIO") of Irvine, California,
`MediaTek Inc. of Hsinchu City, Taiwan and Media Tek USA Inc. of San Jose, California
`(collectively, "MediaTek"), and Sigma Designs, Inc. ("SDI") of Fremont, California, as
`respondents in this investigation. See id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (OUII) is
`also a party to the investigation.
`
`On October 20, 2017, the All issued an initial determination terminating the
`investigation as to LG based on settlement. See Order No. 48 (Oct. 20, 2017), unreviewed,
`Comm'n Notice (Nov. 13, 2017). The remaining respondents in this investigation are VIZIO,
`MediaTek, and SDI (hereinafter, "the Remaining Respondents"). The All also terminated the
`investigation with respect to all asserted claims of the '454 and '846 patents; claims 6, 7, and 9
`of the '506 patent; and claims 2,4-13, and 40 of the '133 patent. See Order No. 33 (Aug. 15,
`2017), unreviewed, Comm'n Notice (Sept. 5,2017); Order No. 43 (Oct. 5,2017), unreviewed,
`Comm'n Notice (Oct. 31, 2017); Order No. 49 (Oct. 20, 2017), unreviewed, Comm'n Notice
`(Nov. 13, 2017); Order No. 53 (Oct. 31, 2017), unreviewed, Comm'n Notice (Nov. 28, 2017).
`Claims 1-5 and 8 of the '506 patent and claims 1 and 3 of the '133 patent (hereinafter, "the
`asserted claims") remain pending in this investigation.
`
`On April 13, 2018, the All issued her FID finding a violation of section 337 with respect
`to the '506 patent but not the '133 patent. Specifically, the FID finds that: (1) certain accused
`products infringe the asserted claims of the '506 patent but not the '133 patent; (2) the asserted
`claims are not invalid; and (3) Complainants satisfy the economic and technical prongs of the
`domestic industry requirement with respect to both asserted patents. In addition, the AUJ
`recommended that the Commission issue: (1) a Limited Exclusion Order against the infringing
`accused products; and (2) Cease and Desist Orders against Respondents VIZIO and SDI. The
`AU J further recommended against setting a bond during Presidential review.
`
`The Commission has determined to review the FID in part. In particular, the
`Commission has determined to review the claim constructions of the terms: "unified shader"
`(recited in the '506 and '133 patent claims), "packet" (recited in the '133 patent claims), and
`"ALU/memory pair" (recited in the '133 patent claims). In view of the Commission's claim
`construction review, the Commission will also review the relevant FID' s findings with respect to
`infringement, validity, and technical prong of the domestic industry requirement. Furthermore,
`the Commission has determined to review whether the importation requirement is satisfied with
`respect to Respondents MediaTek and SDI. The Commission has determined not to review the
`remainder of the FID. The Commission has also determined to extend the target date by five
`business days from August 15, 2018, to August 22, 2018.
`
`In connection with the review, the parties are requested to brief their positions with
`reference to the applicable law and the evidentiary record regarding the questions provided
`below:
`
`2
`
`ARM, Ex. 1012, Page 2
`
`

`

`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Consistent with the specification of the '506 patent (JX-1) and with
`the patentee's statements during the prosecution of the '506 patent
`(JX-2) distinguishing Zhu U.S. Patent No. 6,697,063 at JX-2.387-
`388, the Commission proposes to construe the term "unified shader"
`to mean "a single shader circuit capable of performing color shading
`and texture coordinate shading, wherein the single shader circuit
`may not include separate dedicated hardware blocks that perform
`separate color and texture operations, and wherein texture
`coordinate shading may include texture address operations, indirect
`texturing, and bump mapping performed by the unified shader to
`modify texture coordinates." In view of the Commission's proposed
`construction, please explain: (1) whether and why you agree or
`disagree with the Commission's proposed construction; and (2)
`whether and why the Commission's proposed construction affects
`the FID' s infringement and invalidity analyses with respect to
`the '506 patent.
`
`Consistent with the specification of the '133 patent (JX-2) and with
`the patentee's statements during the prosecution of the '133 patent
`(JX-4) distinguishing Donham U.S. Patent No. 6,980,209 at JX-
`4.240-41 and JX-4.272, the Commission proposes to construe the
`term "unified shader" to mean "a single shader circuit capable of
`performing color shading and texture coordinate shading, wherein
`the single shader circuit may not include separate dedicated
`hardware blocks that perform separate color and texture operations,
`and wherein texture coordinate shading may include texture address
`operations, indirect texturing, and bump mapping performed by the
`In view of the
`unified shader to modify texture coordinates."
`Commission's proposed construction, please explain: (1) whether
`and why you agree or disagree with the Commission's proposed
`construction; and (2) whether and why the Commission's proposed
`construction affects the FID' s infringement and invalidity analyses
`with respect to the '133 patent.
`
`Consistent with the specification of the '133 patent (JX-3) and with
`the patentee's statements during the prosecution of the '133 patent
`(JX-4) distinguishing Morgan U.S. Patent No. 6,384,824 at JX-4.89,
`the Commission proposes to construe the term "packet" to mean
`"data bundle containing texture coordinate and color value
`information for one or more pixels, wherein said information is
`received simultaneously by the unified shader," i.e., in the same
`packet rather than serially as suggested by Complainants. In view
`(1)
`of the Commission's proposed construction, please explain:
`whether and why you agree or disagree with the Commission's
`proposed construction; and (2) whether and why the Commission's
`
`3
`
`ARM, Ex. 1012, Page 3
`
`

`

`proposed construction affects the FID's infringement and invalidity
`analyses with respect to the '133 patent.
`
`4.
`
`Consistent with the specification of the '133 patent (JX-3), the
`Commission proposes to modify the FID's interpretation with
`respect to the scope of the term "ALU/memory pair" to clarify that
`In view of the
`it does not exclude control logic or circuitry.
`Commission's proposed interpretation, please explain: (1) whether
`and why you agree or disagree with the Commission's proposed
`interpretation; and (2) whether and why the Commission's proposed
`interpretation affects the FID's infringement and invalidity analyses
`with respect to the '133 patent.
`
`In addition, in connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the Commission
`may (1) issue an order that could result in the exclusion of the subject articles from entry into the
`United States, and/or (2) issue one or more cease and desist orders that could result in the
`respondent(s) being required to cease and desist from engaging in unfair acts in the importation
`and sale of such articles. Accordingly, the Commission is interested in receiving written
`submissions that address the form of remedy, if any, that should be ordered. If a party seeks
`exclusion of an article from entry into the United States for purposes other than entry for
`consumption, the party should so indicate and provide information establishing that activities
`involving other types of entry either are adversely affecting it or likely to do so. For background,
`see Certain Devices for Connecting Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337-TA-360,
`USITC Pub. No. 2843 (Dec. 1994) (Comm'n Op.).
`
`If the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must consider the effects of that
`remedy upon the public interest. The factors the Commission will consider include the effect
`that an exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders would have on (1) the public health and
`welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S.,production of articles that are
`like or directly competitive with those that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. consumers.
`The Commission is therefore interested in receiving written submissions that address the
`aforementioned public interest factors in the context of this investigation.
`
`If the Commission orders some form of remedy, the U.S. Trade Representative, as
`delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve or disapprove the Commission's action. See
`Presidential Memorandum of July 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period,
`the subject articles would be entitled to enter the United States under bond, in an amount
`determined by the Commission and prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. The
`Commission is therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of the bond
`that should be imposed if a remedy is ordered.
`
`WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: The parties to the investigation are requested to file written
`submissions on the questions identified in this notice. Parties to the investigation, interested
`government agencies, and any other interested parties are encouraged to file written submissions
`on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Such submissions should address the
`recommended determination by the AU J on remedy and bonding. Complainants and OUII are
`
`4
`
`ARM, Ex. 1012, Page 4
`
`

`

`also requested to submit proposed remedial orders for the Commission's consideration.
`Complainants are also requested to state the date that the asserted patents expire and the HTSUS
`numbers under which the accused products are imported. Complainants are further requested to
`supply the names of known importers of the products at issue in this investigation.
`
`Written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later than close of
`business on June 28, 2018. Reply submissions must be filed no later than the close of business
`on July 6, 2018. Initial written submissions may not exceed 50 pages in length, exclusive of any
`exhibits, while reply submissions may not exceed 25 pages in length, exclusive of any exhibits.
`No further submissions on any of these issues will be permitted unless otherwise ordered by the
`Commission.
`
`Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or
`before the deadlines stated above and submit eight (8) true paper copies to the Office of the
`Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to section 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of
`Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the investigation number
`("Inv. No. 337-TA-1044") in a prominent place on the cover page and/or the first page. (See
`Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/secretary/documents/
` Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the
`handbook on_filing_procedures.pdf).
`Secretary (202-205-2000).
`
`Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request
`confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission
`and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such
`treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission
`is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business
`information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the
`Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) by the
`Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or
`maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits,
`reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission
`including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S. government employees and contract
`personnel[11, solely for cybersecurity purposes. All non-confidential written submissions will be
`available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.
`
`[1] All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure agreements.
`
`5
`
`ARM, Ex. 1012, Page 5
`
`

`

`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: June 14, 2018
`
`Lisa R. Barton
`Secretary to the Commission
`
`6
`
`ARM, Ex. 1012, Page 6
`
`

`

`CERTAIN GRAPHICS SYSTEMS, COMPONENTS
`THEREOF, AND CONSUMER PRODUCTS CONTAINING
`THE SAME
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1044
`
`PUBLIC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I, Lisa R. Barton, hereby certify that the attached NOTICE has been served by hand
`upon the Commission Investigative Attorney, Yoncha L. Kundupoglu, Esq., and the following
`parties as indicated, on 6/14/2018
`
`Lisa R. Barton, Secretary
`U.S. International Trade Commission
`500 E Street, SW, Room 112
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`On Behalf of Complainants:
`
`Michael T. Renaud, Esq.
`MINTZ LEVIN COHN FERRIS GLOVSKY AND POPEO PC
`One Financial Center
`Boston, MA 02111
`
`O Via Hand Delivery
`O Via Express Delivery
`X Via First Class Mail
`O Other:
`
`On Behalf of Respondents VIZIO, Inc.:
`
`Cono A. Carrano, Esq.
`AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP
`Robert S. Strauss Building
`1333New Hampshire Avenue, NW
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`On Behalf of Respondents MediaTek, Inc., MediaTek USA
`Inc., and Sigma Designs, Inc.:
`
`Tyler T. VanHoutan, Esq.
`MCGUIRE WOODS LLP
`600 Travis Street, Suite 7500
`Houston, TX 77002
`
`O Via Hand Delivery
`10 Via Express Delivery
`O Via First Class Mail
`0 Other:
`
`0 Via Hand Delivery
`10 Via Express Delivery
`X Via First Class Mail
`O Other:
`
`ARM, Ex. 1012, Page 7
`
`