AUTHENTICATED
`US, GOVERNMENT
`INFORMATION
`GPa,
`
`Federal Register/Vol. 88, No. 210/Wednesday, November 1, 2023/ Notices
`
`the information, on an aggregate basis,
`for the firms which are membersof your
`association.
`(a) Production (quantity) and,if
`known,an estimate of the percentage of
`total production of Subject Merchandise
`in each Subject Country accounted for
`by yourfirm’s(s’) production;
`(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s)
`to produce the Subject Merchandise in
`each Subject Country (that is, the level
`of production that your establishment(s)
`could reasonably have expected to
`attain during the year, assuming normal
`operating conditions (using equipment
`and machinery in place and ready to
`operate), normal operating levels (hours
`per week/weeksperyear), time for
`downtime, maintenance,repair, and
`cleanup,and a typical or representative
`product mix); and
`(c) the quantity and value of your
`firm’s(s’) exports to the United States of
`Subject Merchandise and, if known,an
`estimate of the percentageof total
`exports to the United States of Subject
`Merchandise from each Subject Country
`accounted for by your firm’s(s’) exports.
`(12) Identify significant changes,if
`any, in the supply and demand
`conditions or business cycle for the
`Domestic Like Product that have
`occurred in the United States or in the
`marketfor the Subject Merchandise in
`each Subject Country after 2017, and
`significant changes, if any, that are
`likely to occur within a reasonably
`foreseeable time. Supply conditions to
`consider include technology;
`production methods; development
`efforts; ability to increase production
`(including the shift of production
`facilities used for other products and the
`use, cost, or availability of major inputs
`into production); and factors related to
`the ability to shift supply among
`different national markets (including
`barriers to importation in foreign
`markets or changes in market demand
`abroad). Demand conditions to consider
`include enduses and applications; the
`existence andavailability of substitute
`products; and the level of competition
`among the Domestic Like Product
`produced in the United States, Subject
`Merchandise produced in each Subject
`Couniry, and such merchandise from
`other countzries.
`(13) (OPTIONAL) A statement of
`whether you agree with the above
`definitions of the Domestic Like Product
`and Domestic Industry; if you disagree
`with either or both of these definitions,
`please explain why and provide
`alternative definitions.
`Authority: This proceeding is being
`conducted underauthority of title VII of
`the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is
`
`published pursuant to § 207.61 of the
`Commission’s rules.
`
`Byorderof the Commission.
`Issued: October 26, 2023.
`Katherine Hiner,
`Supervisory Attorney.
`[FR Doc. 2023-24018 Filed 10-31-23; 8:45 am]
`BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
`
`INTERNATIONAL TRADE
`COMMISSION
`
`[Investigation No. 337-TA—1276]
`
`Certain Light-Based Physiological
`Measurement Devices and
`Components Thereof; Notice of the
`Commission’s Final Determination
`Finding a Violation of Section 337;
`Issuanceof a Limited Exclusion Order
`and a Cease and Desisi Order;
`Termination of the Investigation
`AGENCY: U.S. International Trade
`Commission.
`ACTION: Notice.
`
`SUMMARY:Notice is hereby given that
`the U.S. International Trade
`Commission has found a violation of
`section 337 in the above-captioned
`investigation. The Commission has
`determined to issue: a limited exclusion
`order (“LEO”) prohibiting the
`unlicensed entry of infringing wearable
`electronic devices with light-based
`pulse oximetry functionality and
`components thereof covered by certain
`claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 10,912,502 or
`10,945,648 that are manufactured by or
`on behalf of, or imported by or on behalf
`of, respondent Apple,Inc. (“‘Apple’’) or
`anyof its affiliated companies, parents,
`subsidiaries, or other related business
`entities, or its successors or assigns; and
`a cease and desist order (‘““CDO”’)
`directed against Apple and anyofits
`affiliated companies, parents,
`subsidiaries, or other related business
`entities, or its successors or assigns.
`This investigation is terminated.
`FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
`Ronald A. Traud, Esq., Office of the
`General Counsel, U.S. International
`Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW,
`Washington, DC 20436,telephone (202)
`205-3427. Copies of non-confidential
`documents filed in connection with this
`investigation may be viewed on the
`Comunission’s electronic docket (EDIS)
`at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help
`accessing EDIS, please email
`EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. General
`information concerning the Commission
`may also be obtained by accessingits
`internet server at hitps://www.usitc.gov.
`Hearing-impaired persons are advised
`that information on this matter can be
`
`obtained by contacting the
`Commission’s TDD terminal on (202)
`205-1810.
`
`SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION: The
`Commission instituted this investigation
`on August 18, 2021, based on a
`complaintfiled on behalf of Masimo
`Corporation and Cercacor Laboratories,
`Inc., both ofIrvine, CA (collectively,
`“Complainants”). 86 FR 46275 (Aug. 18,
`2021). The complaint, as amended,
`alleged 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 light-based physiological
`measurement devices and components
`thereof by reason of infringementof
`certain claims of U.S. Patent No.
`10,912,501 (“the 501 patent’’); U.S.
`Patent No. 10,912,502 (“the 502
`patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 10,945,648
`(“the ’648 patent”); U.S. Patent No.
`10,687,745 (“the ’745 patent”); and U.S.
`Patent No. 7,761,127 (“the ’127 patent”’).
`Id. The amended complaintfurther
`alleged that an industry in the United
`States exists and/oris in the process of
`being established as required by section
`337. Id. The notice of investigation
`named Apple of Cupertino, California as
`the sole respondent. Id. at 46276. The
`Office of Unfair Import Investigationsis
`not participating in this investigation.
`
`Complainants previously withdrew
`certain asserted claims pursuant to
`Order No. 25 (Mar. 23, 2022),
`unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (Apr. 12,
`2022), and Order No. 33 (May 20, 2022),
`unreviewed by Comm’n Notice (June 10,
`2022). Only claim 12 of the ’501 patent,
`claims 22 and 28 of the ’502 patent,
`claims 12, 24, and 30 of the ’648 patent,
`claims 9, 18, and 27 of the ’745 patent,
`and claim 9 of the 127 patent remain in
`the investigation. Claim 18 of the ’745
`patentis still at issue for purposes of the
`domestic industry only.
`On January 10, 2023, the presiding
`administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) issued
`the final initial determination (‘‘Final
`ID’’), which found that Apple violated
`section 337 as to claims 24 and 30 of the
`’648 patent, but not as to claim 12 of the
`’501 patent, claims 22 and 28 of the ’502
`patent, claim 12 of the ’648 patent,
`claims 9 and 27 of the ’745 patent, and
`claim 9 of the ‘127 patent. See Final ID
`at 335-36. On January 24, 2023, the ALJ
`issued a Recommended Determination
`on remedy and bonding(“‘RD”) should
`a violation be found in the above-
`captionedinvestigation. The RD
`recommendedthat, if the Commission
`finds a violation, it should issue an LEO
`
`

`

`75033
`Federal Register/Vol. 88, No. 210/Wednesday, November 1, 2023/ Notices
`
`directed to certain wearable electronic
`devices with light-based pulse oximetry
`functionality and components thereof
`that are imported, sold for importation,
`and/or sold after importation by Apple;
`and a CDOdirected to Apple. RD at2,
`5. The RD additionally recommended
`that the Commission set a zero percent
`(0%) bond(i.e., no bond) during the
`sixty-day period of Presidential review.
`Id.at 6. In its notice instituting this
`investigation, the Commission did not
`instruct the ALJ to makefindings and
`recommendations concerning the public
`interest. See 86 FR at 46275-76.
`On January 23, 2023, Complainants
`and Appleeachfiled a petition for
`review. On January 31, 2023,
`Complainants and Apple eachfiled
`responsesto the other party’s petitions.
`On February 23, 2023, the parties
`filed their public interest statements
`pursuant to 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4). The
`Commission received numerous
`comments on the public interest from
`non-parties.
`On May15, 2023, after considering
`the parties’ petitions and responses
`thereto, the Commission determined to
`review the FinalID in part. See 88 FR
`32243, 32243-46 (May 19, 2023). In
`particular, the Commission determined
`to review the following findings of the
`Final ID:
`(1) the domestic industry with regard
`to the ’501 patent, the ’502 patent, the
`648 patent, and the ’745 patent;
`(2) obviousness with regard to the
`’501 patent, the ’502 patent, the 648
`patent, and the ’745 patent;
`(3) written description with regard to
`claim 28 of the ’502 patent and claim 12
`of the ’648 patent;
`(4) claim construction and
`infringement with regard to the ’745
`patent; and
`(5) subject matter jurisdiction.
`Id. The Commission requested
`briefing on certain issues under review
`and on remedy,the public interest, and
`bonding. Seeid.
`On June 5, 2023, the partiesfiled their
`written submissions on the issues under
`review and on remedy,public interest,
`and bonding, and on June 12, 2023, the
`parties filed their reply submissions.
`The Commission also received
`numerous comments on the public
`interest from non-parties.
`Having reviewedthe record in this
`investigation, including the written
`submissionsof the parties, the
`Commission affirms with modifications
`the Final ID’s domestic industry
`findings (both economic and technical
`prong) as to the ’501, ’502, ’648, and
`’745 patents. The Commission
`additionally affirms with modifications
`the Final ID’s conclusion that the
`
`asserted claims of the ’501 patent are
`obvious, but the asserted claims of the
`*502, ’648, and ’745 patents are not
`obvious. The Commission has
`determinedto reverse the Final ID’s
`finding that Apple proved by clear and
`convincing evidence that claim 28 of the
`’502 patent and claim 12 of the ’648
`patent are invalid for lack of written
`description. Furthermore, the
`Commission affirms the Final ID’s claim
`construction related to the recited term
`“first shape” and the related conclusion
`that the Accused Products do notsatisfy
`elements [1B] and [20B] of the ’745
`patent. The Commission additionally
`vacates the Final ID’s finding that the
`Commission has subject matter
`jurisdiction overthe investigation and
`instead finds that the Commission has
`statutory authority over the
`investigation. The Commission affirms
`the remainderofthe FinalID that is not
`inconsistent with the Commission’s
`opinion issued concurrently herewith.
`As aresult, the Commission findsthat
`Apple has violated section 337 as to
`claims 22 and 28 of the ’502 patent and
`claims 12, 24, and 30 of the ’648 patent.
`The Commission has determined that
`the appropriate form ofrelief is an LEO
`prohibiting (1) the unlicensed entry of
`infringing wearable electronic devices
`with light-based pulse oximetry
`functionality and components thereof
`manufactured by or on behalf of Apple
`or any ofits affiliated companies,
`parents, subsidiaries, or other related
`business entities, or its successors or
`assigns. The Commissionhasalso
`determinedto issue a CDOagainst
`Apple. The Commission has determined
`to include an exemption to the remedial
`orders for service or repair or, under
`warranty terms, replacementof products
`purchasedprior to the endof the period
`of Presidential review.
`The Commission has further
`determinedthat the public interest
`factors enumerated in subsections (d)(1)
`and (f)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(1), (f)(1)) do
`not preclude issuance of the above-
`referenced remedial orders.
`Additionally, the Commission has
`determinedto impose a bondof zero
`(0%) (i.e., no bond) of entered value of
`the covered products during the period
`of Presidential review (19 U.S.C.
`1337(j)). This investigation is
`terminated.
`The Commission votefor this
`determination took place on October 26,
`2023.
`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: October 26, 2023.
`Katherine Hiner,
`SupervisoryAttorney.
`[FR Doc. 2023-24071 Filed 10-31-23; 8:45 am]
`BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
`
`INTERNATIONAL TRADE
`COMMISSION
`
`[Investigation Nos. 731-TA-873-875, 878—
`880, and 882 (Fourth Review)]
`
`Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar From
`Belarus,China,Indonesia, Latvia,
`Moldova, Poland, and Ukraine;
`Institution of Five-Year Reviews
`
`AGENCY: United States International
`Trade Commission.
`ACTION: Notice.
`
`SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives
`notice that it has instituted reviews
`pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the
`Act”), as amended, to determine
`whether revocation of the antidumping
`duty orders on steel concrete reinforcing
`bar from Belarus, China, Indonesia,
`Latvia, Moldova, Poland, and Ukraine
`would be likely to lead to continuation
`or recurrence of material injury.
`Pursuantto the Act, interested parties
`are requested to respondto this notice
`by submitting the information specified
`below to the Commission.
`DATES:Instituted November1, 2023. To
`be assured of consideration, the
`deadline for responses is December1,
`2023. Comments on the adequacy of
`responses maybefiled with the
`Commission by January 11, 2024.
`FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
`LawrenceJones (202-205-3358), Office
`of Investigations, U.S. International
`Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW,
`Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-
`impaired persons can obtain
`information on this matter by contacting
`the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202—
`205-1810. Persons with mobility
`impairments who will need special
`assistance in gaining access to the
`Commission should contact the Office
`of the Secretary at 202-205-2000.
`General information concerning the
`Commission may also be obtained by
`accessing its internet server(hitps://
`www.usitc.gov). The public record for
`this proceeding may be viewed on the
`Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS)
`at https://edis.usitc.gov.
`SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION:
`Background.—On September7, 2001,
`the Department of Commerce
`(“Commerce”’) issued antidumping duty
`
`