`
`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN ELECTRICAL
`
`CONNECTORS, COMPONENTS
`
`THEREOF, AND PRODUCTS
`CONTAINING THE SAME
`
`
`
`Inv. N0. 337-TA-1043
`
`ORDER NO. 52:
`
`ORDERING COMPLAINANT TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE
`
`INVESTIGATION SHOULD PROCEED
`
`(October 30, 2018)
`
`On October 5, 2018, Complainant J.S.T. Corporation (“JST”) submitted its pre-trial brief.
`
`In this brief, JST alleges that the Accused Products are “Bosch’s Global A Body Control
`
`Modules (“BCM”), which includes at least part numbers 13594564 and 13594587,” which
`
`incorporate “either a Foxconn 183-Way [BCM] header connector (‘Header’) (Foxconn Part No.
`
`3CC7I38-8801-6F; Bosch Part Nos. 6002JE0900, 6002JE1055, and 6002JE1289) or a TB
`
`Connectivity (“TEC’) 183—Way BCM Header (Bosch Part No. 6002JE1235).” (CPB at 10.) In
`
`their pre-hearing brief, Respondents Robert Bosch GmbH, Bosch Automotive Products (Suzhou)
`
`Co., Ltd, Robert Bosch LLC, Robert Bosch, Sistemas Automotrices, SA. de C.V., Robert Bosch
`
`Ltda. (collectively, “‘Respondents”) assert that they “are no longer marking or importing the
`
`Original Design .
`
`(RPHB at 3.) Instead, Respondents assert that they are making and importing
`
`39
`
`only a re-designed product. (161.)
`
`JST asserts that the re—designed product should not be part of this Investigation. (See,
`
`e. g., CPHB at 15 (“JST contends that any part having this so-called ‘redesigned’ tine plate is not
`
`part of this investigation.”).) If the undersigned were to agree with JST, then it is unclear why
`
`1 Respondents do not specifically state which parts numbers correspond to the “Original Design,” but it appears that
`Respondents have stopped importing all products accused of infringement by JST in this Investigation.
`
`
`
`this Investigation should proceed. The remedy that JST seeks — a limited exclusion order — would
`
`be unnecessary if Respondents are no longer importing the accused products into the United
`
`States.2
`
`Accordingly, IST is ordered to show cause no later than noon on November 2, 2018 why
`
`this Investigation should proceed.
`
`Within seven days of the date of this document, the paities shall submit to the Office of
`
`the Administrative Law Judges a joint statement as to whether or not they seek to have any
`
`portion of this document deleted from the public version. If the parties do seek to have p01tions
`
`of this document deleted from the public version, they must submit to this office a copy of this
`
`document with red brackets indicating the portion or portions asserted to contain confidential
`
`business information. 'The submission may be made by email and/or hard copy by the
`
`aforementioned date and need not be filed with the Commission Secretary.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`harles E. Bullock
`
`Chief Administrative Law Judge
`
`
`
`2 Indeed, Respondents could move to terminate based on a Consent Order Stipulation and Consent Order. See 19
`C.F.R. § 210.21(c).
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`CERTAIN ELECTRICAL CONNECTORS, COMPONENTS
`
`Inv. No. 337-TA-1043
`
`THEREOF, AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING THE SAME
`
`PUBLIC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`1, Lisa R. Barton, hereby certify that the attached PUBLIC VERSION ORDER NO. 52
`has been served upon the following parties as indicated, on 2/19/2019.
`
`
`
`Lisa R. Barton, Secretary
`US. International Trade Commission
`
`500 E Street, SW, Room 112
`Washington, DC 20436
`
`On Behalf of Complainants J.S.T. Corporation:
`
`Timothy K. Sendek, Esq.
`AKERMAN LLP
`71 S. Wacker Drive, 47th Floor
`Chicago, IL 60606
`
`1:! Via Hand Delivery
`D V'a Express Delivery
`Ma First Class Mail
`1:! Other:
`
`On Behalf of Respondents Robert Bosch GmbH, Bosch
`Automotive Products gSuzhouz Co., Ltd., Robert Bosch LLC,
`Robert Bosch, Sistemas Automotrices, SA. de C.V., Hon Hai
`Precision Industry Co., Ltd., and Foxconn Interconnect
`Technology1 Ltd.:
`
`Bas de Blank, Esq.
`ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
`1000 Marsh Road
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`
`El Via Hand Delivery
`D ia Express Delivery
`myVia First Class Mail
`D Other:
`
`
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
