March 17,2000 Jan Horbaly, Clerk U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 7 17 Madison Place, NW Washington, DC 20439 Re: 99-1431, 1504,4595, -1596, -1601 Jazz Photo Corporation, Dynatech International, Inc., and Opticolor, Inc. United States International Trade Commission and Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd. Inv. No. 337-TA-406 Dear Mr. Horbaly: Pursuant to the courts order dated February 28,2000, I hereby transmit the requested exhibits in the above investigation.

The Secretary’s office is unable to locate exhibit CPX306C, and will continue to search for it and transmit it to the court once it has been found.

Any questions, please do not hestiate io call.

337 TA-4136 v3 u3 a 7 On October 21, 1999 the administrative law jiedgc receiva a lener from intervenor Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland (F&Il) requcsiing thar: Order No. 52 be revised to: (1) delete from die list of facts not in dispute the assertion that the F&l> hond was "issn&(1 to protect Fuji from any injury due to PSI'r sale or disll ibul ian of "Covered product" during the Presidential t-eview periaL.. '"; and 12 1 provide that the submissions due on Dttcarnbor 9.

While the original and six copies of the 1c tter were fikd u it I the Secretary by F&D, the letter should have been filed in the form of a tnction putmaat to Commiwion rule 210.15.

Admi ~tfa rative Law ludge Issued: October 22, 1999 2This Notice is being served only on complainants, F&D arid the staff.

OF SFr;i:VOZE I, Donna R. Koehnke, hereby certify tktt the att&ch@d PWic Notice was served by hand upon Anne M. Goalwin, Esq., and upon the following panics via first class mail, and air mail where necessary, on October 22, 1999. , Donna R. Koehnk;, Secretary U.S. International Tradc C( mniss*s i 500 E Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20439 RE: 99-1 601 Opticolor, Inc. United States International Trade Commission Investigation No. 3 3 7-TA-406 Dear Mr. Horbaly: Pursuant to rule 11 (a) of the rules of this Court, and rule 17(b) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, w e hereby transmit a certified list of the agency record in investigation No. 337-TA- 406, Certain Lens-Fitted Film Packages.

This list is filed in connection with the above referenced appeal.

Advisory Attorney Office of the General Counsel 500 E Street, S.W., Rm.

Heller, Ehrman, White and McAuliffe 6 100 Columbia Center 701 Fifth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98 104-7098

Notice is hereby given that, as of this date, Anne M. Goalwin, Esq.

of the Office of Unfair Import Investigations is designated as the Comissron investigative attorney in the above-captioned proceeding.

Levine, Director Office of Unfair Import hivestigations 500 E Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20436 Dated: September 15, 1999

3 In holding respondents to the standard of clear and convincing evidence in order to show permissible repair, the ALJ relied on two cases, RCA Corp. and Symbols Tachs, that involved the affirmative defense of patent invalidity.

We adopt that recommendation.“ The Commission has long held that a general exclusion order is appropriate when there is proof of (1) a widespread pattern of unauthorized use of the patented invention, and (2) certain business conditions from which one might reasonably infer that foreign manufacturers other than respondents to the investigation may attempt to enter the U.

The cease and desist orders prohibit the twenty domestic respondents from importing, selling, marketing, advertising, distributing, offering for sale, transferring (except for exportation), or soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for certain LFFPs, in violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 6 1337.

The arguments of Argus, China Film, and Sakar on remedy, the public interest, and bonding are based upon the proposition that the Commission erred in adopting the AW’s determination that the respondent remanufacturers’ activities constituted impermissible reconstruction rather than permissible repair.

-_- - LJN~TED STATES INTERNATIONAV TRADE cormissm - / The President The White House Washington, D.C. 20500 Inv. No. 337-TA-406, Certain LeG-Fitted Film Packages.

Dear Mr. Prdsident: Re: On June 2, 1999, a general exclusion order and twenty cease and desist orders granting relief under section 337 of the Tatiff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 0 1337) in the above-referenced investigation were forwarded to you for your consideration.

Enclosed herewith is the Commisskm's Opinion in support of those orders.

Enclosure Sinceiely , r7 Chairinan cc: ~ The Honorable Charlene Barshefslry United States Trade Reprcsentative Geralyn R. Ritter, Esq.

.- @) “Person’3.mll mean an individual, or any nongovernmental partnership, firm, association, corporation, or other legal or business entity other than the Respondent or its majority owned or controlled subsidiaries, their successors, or assigns.

The provisions of this Cease and Desist Order shall apply to Respondent and any of its principals, stockholders, oficers, directors, employees, agents, licenses, distributors, controlled (whether by stock ownership or otherwise) and/or majority owned business entities, successors, and assigns, and to each of them, insofar as they are engaging in conduct prohibited by Section

other purpose, and subject to any privilege recognized by the federal courts of the United States, duly authorized representatives of the Commission upon reasonable written notice by tlie Commission or its staff, shall 0e permitted access and the right to inspect and copy in Respondent’s principal offices during office hours, and in the presence of counsel or other - .- representatives if Respondent so chooses, all books, ledgers, accounts, correspondence, memoranda, and other records and documents, both in detail and in summary form as are required to be retained by subsection VI(A) of this Order.

- (60) day period in which this Order is under review by the President pursuant to section 337(j) of the Tariff Act of 1930,19 U.S.C. §1337(j), subject to Respondent posting a bond in the amount of one hundred (100) percent of the entered value of the articles in question.

TMDE CouMlSsm~ On June 2, 1999, the United States International Trade Commission determined to issue a Cease and Desist Order directed to your company in connection with the above- referenced investigation.

(D) “Person” shall mean an individual, or any nongovernmental partnership, firm, association, corporation, or other legal or business entity other than the Respondent or its majority owned or controlled subsidiaries, their successors, or assigns.

(Applicability) The provisions of this Cease and Desist Order shall apply to Respondent and any of its principals, stockholders, officers, directors, employees, agents, licenses, distributors, controlled (whether by stock ownership or otherwise) and/or majority owned business entities, successors, and assigns, and to each of them, insofar as they are engaging in conduct prohibited by Section

other purpose, and subject to any privilege recognized by the federal courts of the United States, duly authorized representatives of the Commission upon reasonable written notice by the

Boecks Camera LLC 9229 West Sunset Boulevard Suite 101 Los Angeles, CA 90069 Re: Certain Lens-Fitted Film Packages, Inv. No. 337-TA-406 Dear Sir or Madam: On June 2, 1999, the United States International Trade Commission determined to issue a Cease and Desist Order directed to your company in connection with the above- referenced investigation.

(D) “Person” shall mean an individual, or any nongovernmental partnership, firm, association, corporation, or other legal or business entity other than the Respondent or its majority owned or controlled subsidiaries, their successors, or assigns.

(Applicability) The provisions of this Cease and Desist Order shall apply to Respondent and any of its principals, stockholders, officers, directors, employees, agents, licenses, distributors, controlled (whether by stock ownership or otherwise) andor majority owned business entities, successors, and assigns, and to each of them, insofar as they are engaging in conduct prohibitell by Section

The bond is to be forfeited in the event that thc President approves, or does riot disapprove within the Presidential review period, this Order, unless the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a final judgment, reverses the Commission final determination and order as to Respondent on appeal, or unless Respondent exports the products subject to this bond or destroys them and provides certification to that effect satisfactory to the Commission.

Re: Certain Lens-Fitted Film Packages, Inv. No. 337-TA-406 Dear Sir or Madam: On June 2, 1999, the United States International Trade Commission determincd to issue a Cease and Desist Order directed to your company in connection with the above- referenced investigation.

(Applicability) The provisions of this Cease and Desist Order shall apply to Respondent and any of its principals, stockholders, officers, directors, employees, agents, licenses, distributors, controlled (whether by stock ownership or otherwise) andor majority owned business entities, successors, and assigns, and to cach of them, insofar as they are engaging in conduct prohibited by Section

other purpose, and subject to any privilege recognized by the federal courts of the United States, duly authorized representatives ofthe Commission upon reasonable written notice by tlie Commission or its staff, shall be permitted access and the right to inspect and copy in Respondent’s principal offices during office hours, and in the presence of counsel or other representatives if Respondent so chooses, all books, ledgers, accounts, correspondence, memoranda, and other records and documents, both in detail and in summary form as are required to be retained by subsection VI(A) of this Order.

(60) day period in which'this Order is under review by the President pursuant to section 337Q) of the Tariff Act of 1930,19 U.S.C. $1337(j), subject to Respondent posting a bond in the amount of one hundred (1 00) percent of the entered value of the articles in question.

On October 23, 1998, the Commission determined not to review two IDS finding a total of eight respondents, viz., Boshi Teclmology Ltd., Fast Shot, Haichi International, Innovative Trading Company, Labelle Time, Inc., Linfa Photographic Ind.

Industries, and Sakar International, Inc. On December 4, 1998, the Commission determined not to review an ID granting complainant’s oral motion to withdraw cl. single claim of one patent from the investigation.

Ten respondents that had filed responses to the complaint and notice of investigation failed to appear at the hearing, viz., Ad-Tek Specialties Inc., AmerImage, Inc. d/b/a/ Rainbow Products, Boecks Camera LLC, BPS Marketing, E.T.

Tradiig Corp., Vantage Sales, Inc. and Vivitar Corp. On February 24,1999, the ALJ issued his final ID, finding a violation of section 337 by 26 of 27 named respondents.

On February 24, 1999, the administrative law judge filed his confidential "Final Initial and Recommended Determinations" in this investigation finding a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Aqt of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 6 1337).

The administrative law judge has been informed by the Secretary's Office that his €iling will be available for pick up from the Secretary's office at 1O:OO AM (EST) on Thursday February 25, 1999.

However, any party who desires to pick up said filing should telephone the Secretary's Office on February 25 to verify with that office that said filing will be ready for pick up.

On February 24, 1999 the parties, who appeared at the hearing, and the staff were notified about the issuance of this notice.

The Commission’s new schedule for these investigations is as follows: requests to appear at the hearing must be filed with the Secretary to the Commission not later than February 22, 1999; the prehearing staff report will be placed in the nonpublic record on March 31,1999; the prehearing conference will be held at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building at 9:30 a.m. on April 1, 1999; the deadline for filing prehearing briefs is April 7,1999; the hearing will be held at the U.S. International Trade Commission Building at 9:30 a.m. on April 13, 1999; the deadline for filing posthearing briefs is April 20,1999; the Commission will make its final release of information on May 14,1999; and final party comments are due on May 18, 1999.

On November 7, 1998, the sixth day of the evidentiary hearing, complainant Fuji orally moved to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to withdraw claim 16 of U.S.

In view of the nature of the motion, the support of the IA, Achiever, and PSI, and the lack of objection by the other respondents present at the presiding ALJ Luckern issued an ID (Order NO. 47) on November 9, 1998, granting Fuji’s oral motion, This action is taken under the authority Of section 337 ofthe Tariff Act of 1930,19 U.S.C. 1337, and Commission rule 210.42.

(Final] undt;r section 7356) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d6)) to determine whether an industry in the United States is materially injured or threatened with material injury, or the establishment of an industry in the United States is materially retarded, by reason of subsidized imports from Belgium, Italy, and South Africa and by reason of less-than-fair-value imports from Belgium, Canada, Italy, the Republic of Korea (Korea], South Africa, and Taiwan of certain stainless steel plate in coils, provided for in subheadings 7219.1 1.00, 7219.12.00, 7219.31.00, 7219.90.00, 7220.11.00, 7220.20.10, 7220.20.60, and 7220.90.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States.’ Section 207.21(b) of 1 For purposes of these investigations.

on October 15, 1998 I received from Mr, Maxfield, Vice President of Heritage, a fax (copy attached to this letter) inquiring whether we would be ordering any type of expedited reporting services in connection with the hearing.

further note, however, that that representation is directly contrary to what Mr. Vanwinkle stated to my associate, Ms. Luera, as set forth of paragraph 3 of her sworn declaration submitted with opticolor's motion far extension of time.

- Richard L- Gaff @c: Donna Kaehnke Secretary, International Trade Cotmimaion James waxfield, V i c e President Heritage Reporting Corporation

International Trade Commission, scheduling a hearing fn the Certain Lens-Fitted Film Packages matter, to r m frm Nowtanbar 2, 1998, to Navmber 13, 1998- Ear the ITC, 5 am A8 the crauvt eepakting Pi- contacting y o u office, as counsaZ of reEQEd, to see if yau require any type oE -edited transcript