[Federal Register: September 27, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 188)]
[Notices]
[Page 61152-61153]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27se02-132]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-406]
Certain Lens-Fitted Film Packages; Completion of Remand; Notice
of Institution of Further Enforcement Proceedings
AGENCY: International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has completed its proceedings in response to the remand from
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Jazz Photo
Corporation et al. v. U.S. International Trade Commission, 264 F.3d
1094 (Fed. Cir. 2001), and has determined to institute further
enforcement proceedings as to Jazz Photo Corp. (Jazz) and two
individuals associated with Jazz.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean Jackson, Esq., telephone 202-205-
3104, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Copies of all
nonconfidential documents filed in connection with this investigation
are or will be available for inspection during official business hours
(8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436,
telephone 202-205-2000. General information concerning the Commission
may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (http://
www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed
on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS-ON-LINE) at http://
dockets.usitc.gov/eol.public. Hearing-impaired persons are advised
[[Page 61153]]
that information on the matter can be obtained by contacting the
Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This investigation was instituted on March
25, 1998, based on a complaint by Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd. (Fuji) of
Tokyo, Japan, alleging unfair acts in violation of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930 by several respondents in the importation and sale
of certain lens-fitted film packages (i.e., disposable cameras) that
infringed one or more claims of 15 patents held by complainant Fuji. 63
FR 14474 (March 25, 1998). On June 2, 1999, the Commission terminated
the investigation, finding a violation of section 337 by all the
respondents by reason of infringement of various claims of all 15
patents. 64 FR 30541 (June 8, 1999). The Commission issued a general
exclusion order prohibiting the importation of LFFPs that infringe any
of the claims of the patents at issue, and issued twenty cease and
desist orders to domestic respondents.
Respondents Jazz, OptiColor Inc., and Dynatec International Inc.
(Dynatec) appealed the portion of the Commission's determination that
concerned refurbished LFFPs that were sold by or under license from
Fuji, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal
Circuit). The portion of the Commission's determination that concerned
newly-manufactured LFFPs was not appealed. On August 21, 2001, the
Federal Circuit issued its opinion, affirming-in-part, reversing-in-
part, and remanding the Commission's determination. Jazz Photo
Corporation et al. v. U.S. International Trade Commission, 264 F.3d
1094 (Fed. Cir. 2001).
On November 21, 2001, the Federal Circuit issued its mandate in the
investigation, thereby returning jurisdiction over the investigation to
the Commission. The Commission solicited comments from the parties
concerning the action that the Commission should take on remand. On
January 11, 2002, Jazz, Fuji, Grandway USA, the successor in interests
to Dynatec, and the Commission investigative attorney (IA) filed
comments. Fuji filed amended comments on January 16, 2002. Fuji, Jazz,
Grandway, and the IA filed response comments on January 25, 2002. On
February 6, 2002 Jazz filed a petition to the Supreme Court for a writ
of certiorari of a portion of the Jazz decision. On March 13, 2002,
Fuji filed a cross petition for a writ of certiorari. On June 24, 2002,
the Supreme Court denied both petitions. The Federal Circuit's remand
to the Commission concerned a motion filed by Fuji with the Federal
Circuit on May 4, 2001. In that motion Fuji requested: (1) A
modification of the stay orders to increase the bonds imposed on
Dynatec and Jazz (an issue that became moot when the court lifted the
stays that it had put in place pending appeal), and (2) an order
prohibiting circumvention of Commission's orders by Grandway.\1\ Fuji
raised the same issues that it raised in the May 4, 2001 motion to the
Federal Circuit in a complaint for enforcement proceedings that it
filed with the Commission on June 27, 2001. After negotiations, Fuji
and Grandway entered a Stipulated Agreement (SA) on July 19, 2001,
which Fuji filed with the Commission on July 20, 2001. In filing the SA
with the Commission, Fuji stated that it was withdrawing the
allegations that it made against Grandway because the matters
complained of in the enforcement complaint were now moot. In view of
the SA between Fuji and Grandway and Fuji's statement to the Commission
in withdrawing its enforcement complaint against Grandway, the
Commission determined that the issues remanded to the Commission by the
Federal Circuit in the Jazz decision are moot. Fuji also requested that
the Commission consider its amended ``Response to the Commission's
Notice of Request for Comments,'' dated January 16, 2002, as an
enforcement complaint against Jazz and two individuals associated with
Jazz. The Commission having found that Fuji's filing complies with the
requirements for institution of a formal enforcement proceeding,
determined to institute formal enforcement proceedings to determine
whether Jazz and the two named individuals are in violation of the
Commission's general exclusion order and/or cease and desist order
issued in the investigation, and what if any enforcement measures are
appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As noted, Grandway is the successor in interest to Dynatec.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following were named as parties to the formal enforcement
proceeding: (1) Complainant Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd; (2) Jazz Photo
Film Co., (3) Jack Benun, Principal Consultant of Jazz (4) Anthony
Cossentino, President of Jazz, (5) and a Commission investigative
attorney to be designated by the Director, Office of Unfair Import
Investigations.
This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337 and Commission rule 210.75, 19 CFR
210.75.
Issued: September 24, 2002.
By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 02-24661 Filed 9-26-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P