PUBLIC VERSION
`
`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN GLASS SUBSTRATES FOR LIQUID Inv. No. 337-TA-1433
`CRYSTAL DISPLAYS, PRODUCTS
`CONTAINING THE SAME, AND METHODS
`FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
`
`ORDER NO. 50: REGARDING PARTIES’ AUGUST 22, 2025 JOINT STATUS
`REPORT
`
`(August 26, 2025)
`
`On August 22, 2025, Complainant Corning Incorporated (“Corning”), Respondents
`Caihong Display Devices Co., Ltd. and Xianyang CaiHong Optoelectronics Technology Co.,
`Ltd. (collectively, “Respondents”), and the Commission Investigative Staff (“Staff”)
`(together, with Corning and Respondents, “the Parties™) jointly filed a Joint Status Report
`regarding fact discovery issues raised during a teleconference held on August 13, 2025 and
`addressed in Order Nos. 47 and 48. See Joint Report, EDIS Doc. ID 860262. Order No. 47
`adopted a proposed stipulated discovery order submitted by the parties regarding certain
`agreed-upon discovery issues. See Order No. 47. Order No. 48 required the parties to meet
`and confer regarding certain disputed discovery issues and to provide a joint status report by
`
`August 22, 2025 identifying remaining disputes on those issues. See Order No. 48.!
`
`! The specific issues on which Order No. 48 ordered a further meet and confer and a joint status report
`concerned Caihong’s manufacturing facilities and the identification of Caihong worldwide
`expenditures in the Display business. See Order No. 48 at 2, 5. Order No. 48 also directed a further
`meet and confer regarding time records data, and ordered that to the extent disputes remain, a motion
`to compel could be filed by August 22, 2025. See id. at 6.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`The Parties submit that with respect to certain issues addressed in Order Nos. 47 and
`48, Respondents and Corning are continuing to discuss a few remaining requests and/or are
`considering certain proposals. Joint Report at 1. Thus, the Parties propose to “submit a further
`status report regarding their discussions including, if necessary, a description of any
`remaining disputes, on Friday, August 29, 2025.” Id. at 2.
`
`The Parties are encouraged to reach agreement on the proposals and to jointly move
`for any limited modifications of the procedural schedule that they believe are appropriate to
`take into account additional agreed-upon discovery. However, Order No. 48 provided a
`deadline for identification of remaining disputes regarding certain issues by August 22, 2025.?
`The parties should be aware that the absence of any specifically-identified remaining disputes
`in the August 22, 2025 joint status report may weigh against granting leave for any additional
`
`motions to compel.’
`skskok
`
`This order has been issued with a confidential designation, and within seven days of
`the date of this document, the parties shall submit 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 portions of this document deleted from the public version, they must submit a
`
`single proposed public version of this order with any proposed redactions in the manner
`
`2 With certain limited exceptions, fact discovery has closed and the deadline for opening expert reports
`has passed. See Order No. 9; Order No. 47. The August 22 deadline ensured that any remaining
`disputes regarding the issues covered in Order No. 48 could be promptly addressed by the undersigned
`in view of other deadlines in the procedural schedule.
`
`3 Any motion to compel requires leave. See Ground Rule 3.4.1. At this time leave has not been granted
`for any additional motions to compel. Although Order No. 48 granted leave for a motion to compel
`regarding time records data if disputes remained, no motion on that issue was filed by the August 22
`deadline.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`specified by Ground Rule 1.9. To the extent possible, the proposed redacting should be made
`electronically, in a PDF of the issued order, using the “Redact Tool” within Adobe Acrobat,
`wherein the proposed redactions are submitted as “marked” but not yet “applied.” The
`submission shall be made by email to Bhattacharyya337@usitc.gov and need not be filed with
`the Commission Secretary.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`WH
`
`Monica Bhattacharyya
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`