555 South Flower Street Fiftieth Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071-2300 Re: Request for Physical Exhibits Regarding Certain Digital Satellite System (DSS) Receivers and Components Thereof, Investigation No. 337-TA-392 Dear Mr. Touton: The Commission is in receipt of your letter dated August 7, 2012 requesting the return of all physical exhibits relating to Investigation No. 337-TA-392.

Sincerely, ~~~ Lisa R. Barton Acting Secretary to the Commission

... extent that Sony has a license{ context of remedy, we are not-seekine an order that would be d irected o r interfere with the sienals being sent to the Sow receive€, and we made that clear, and I believe 12 Complainant argued that none ...

The parties have made no distinction between said two plirases and the administrative law judge finds none.

Hdwever, the specification also teaches that this usage of “frequency” is distinct from the “carrier frequency” or “channel” of a given program.4s The plain language of claim 6 requires a “predetermined signal in a television program transmission” with said “predetermined signal” being transmitted in a varying location within that transmission, and beirig detected based on its specific location within that 45 Complainant’s expert Williams testified that none of the digital detectors disclosed in the ‘277 specification Figure 2A have a multichainel television transmission input. Thus, no “digital detector” shown in the ‘277 patent would detect a “predetermined signal“ based on ‘its “carrier ...

Action No. C-96-20957) and Certain Digital Satellite System (DSS) Receivers and Components Thereof (ITC Inv. No. 337-TA-392) Dear Mr. Robertson: The Commission is in receipt of your letter dated October 24, 2000, which seeks to include additional outside counsel under the District Court discovery order and the ITC administrative protective order issued in the above-referenced proceedings.

You state that “restrictions imposed by the ITC protective order on use of and access to confidential information and documents shall remain in effect and apply in the District Court action.” The Commission wishes to remind you that paragraph 5 of the ITC administrative protective order issued in Digital Satellite System investigation states as follows: 5.

Thus, counsel in the District Court case should take care to obtain the consent of the supplier of any confidential business information from the ITC investigation before using such information in the District Court case.

Woodard, Emhardt, Naughton, Moriarity & McNett Bank One Center/Tower 11 1 Monument Circle Suite 3700 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204-5 137

SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives notice that it will proceed with full reviews pursuant to section 751[c)(5) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 16 75 (c) (5)) to determine whether revocation of the countervailing duty md antidumping duty orders on certain :ooking ware from China, Korea, Mexico, and Taiwan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably Foreseeable time.

The complaint alleges, inter alia, that respondents engaged in unlawful activities in violation of section 337 through the unlicensed importation and sale of goods inhinging claim 1-7 of U.S.

The final phase of these investigations was scheduled by the Commission following notification of preliminary determinations by the Department of Commerce that imports of certain emulsion styrene-butadiene rubber from Brazil, Korea, and Mexico were being sold at LTFV within the meaning of section 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)).

The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 3190 (May 1999), entitled Certain Emulsion Styrene-butadiene Rubber from Brazil, Korea, and Mexico: Investigations Nos. (Final).