Notice2021-19977
Certain Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Components Thereof; Commission Determination To Institute a Rescission Proceeding and Rescind Permanently a Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of Rescission Proceeding
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
September 16, 2021
Issuing agencies
International Trade Commission
Abstract
Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (the ``Commission'') has determined to institute a rescission proceeding and rescind the remedial orders issued in the underlying investigation. This rescission proceeding is hereby terminated.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 177 (Thursday, September 16, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 177 (Thursday, September 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51676-51677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19977]
[[Page 51676]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1133 (Rescission)]
Certain Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Components Thereof;
Commission Determination To Institute a Rescission Proceeding and
Rescind Permanently a Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist
Orders; Termination of Rescission Proceeding
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission (the ``Commission'') has determined to institute a
rescission proceeding and rescind the remedial orders issued in the
underlying investigation. This rescission proceeding is hereby
terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl P. Bretscher, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2382. Copies of non-
confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may
be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket system (``EDIS'') at
<a href="https://edis.usitc.gov">https://edis.usitc.gov</a>. For help accessing EDIS, please email
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3277767b61017a575e427247415b46511c555d44"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e9acada0badaa18c8599a99c9a809d8ac78e869f">[email protected]</span></a>. General information concerning the Commission may
also be obtained by accessing its internet server at <a href="https://www.usitc.gov">https://www.usitc.gov</a>. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on
this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD
terminal, telephone (202) 205-1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation
on October 2, 2018, based on a complaint filed by Autel Robotics USA,
Inc. (``Autel'') of Bothell, Washington. 83 FR 49575-76 (Oct. 2, 2018).
The complaint accuses respondents of violating 19 U.S.C. 1337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``Section 337'') by importing into the
United States, selling for importation, or selling in the United States
after importation certain unmanned aerial vehicles (``UAVs'') and
components thereof that infringe one or more of the asserted claims of
U.S. Patent Nos. 9,260,184 (``the '184 patent''); 7,979,174 (``the '174
patent''); and 10,044,013 (``the '013 patent''). Id. The complaint also
alleges the existence of a domestic industry. Id. The notice of
investigation named the following respondents: SZ DJI Technology Co.
Ltd. of Shenzhen, China; DJI Europe B.V. of Barendrecht, Netherlands;
DJI Technology Inc. of Burbank, California; iFlight Technology Co.,
Ltd. (``iFlight'') of Hong Kong; DJI Baiwang Technology Co. Ltd. of
Shenzhen, China; DJI Research LLC of Palo Alto, California; DJI Service
LLC (``DJI Service'') of Cerritos, California; and DJI Creative Studio
LLC of Burbank, California (collectively, ``DJI''). Id. The Office of
Unfair Import Investigations is not a party to this investigation. Id.
On March 2, 2020, the presiding Chief Administrative Law Judge
(``CALJ'') issued a combined Initial Determination on Violation of
Section 337 (``ID'') and Recommended Determination (``RD'') on Remedy
and Bonding, finding a violation of Section 337 by way of infringement
of the '184 patent but no violation with respect to the '174 patent or
'013 patent.
On May 29, 2020, while the parties' petitions for review were still
pending before the Commission, respondents' counsel filed a letter with
the Commission attaching four recent Final Written Decisions by the
Patent Trial and Appeal Board (``PTAB'') of the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office, finding the challenged claims of the '184, '174, and
'013 patents, including the claims asserted in this investigation, to
be unpatentable. See, e.g., SZ DJI Technology Co. v. Autel Robotics USA
LLC, Case IPR2019-00343, Final Written Decision Finding All Challenged
Claims Unpatentable (PTAB May 21, 2020), on appeal sub. nom., Autel
Robotics USA LLC v. SZ DJI Technology Co., Appeal No. 20-1987 (Fed.
Cir.) (``Appeal No. 20-1987'').
On June 8, 2020, the Commission issued a notice stating that it had
determined to partially review certain findings relating to the '184
patent, including the impact, if any, of the PTAB's Final Written
Decision finding the '184 patent claims unpatentable. Comm'n Notice at
2-3 (June 9, 2020). The Commission determined not to review the ID's
findings that there is no violation with respect to the '174 patent
or'013 patent. Id.
On August 20, 2020, the Commission affirmed that DJI violated
Section 337 by way of infringing claims 1 and 2 of the '184 patent.
Comm'n Notice at 3 (Aug. 20, 2020) (``Comm'n Notice''); Comm'n Op. at
8-21 (Aug. 20, 2020) (``Comm'n Op.''). Having found a violation of
Section 337, the Commission determined that the appropriate remedy is:
(a) A limited exclusion order prohibiting the importation of UAVs and
components thereof that are covered by claims 1 or 2 of the '184
patent; (b) cease and desist orders against respondents iFlight and DJI
Service; and (c) set a bond in the amount of 11.5 percent of the
entered value of the excluded products imported during the period of
Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)). See Comm'n Notice at 3; Comm'n
Op. at 26-34. The Commission determined that the public interest
factors enumerated in Section 337(d)(1) and (f)(1) do not preclude
issuance of the limited exclusion order or cease and desist orders. Id.
The Commission, however, determined to suspend enforcement of the
limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders, and bond provision
pending final resolution of the PTAB's Final Written Decision regarding
the '184 patent. See Comm'n Notice at 4; Comm'n Op. at 35-38.
On October 16, 2020, Autel filed a notice of appeal of the
Commission's final determination, including its determination to
suspend enforcement of its remedial orders. See Robotics USA, LLC v.
ITC, Appeal No. 21-1082 (``Appeal No. 21-1082''). On November 25, 2020,
DJI filed a notice of a cross-appeal of the Commission's final
determination. See SZ DJI Technology Co. Ltd. v. ITC, Appeal No. 21-
1363 (``Appeal No. 21-1363''). On December 16, 2020, the Federal
Circuit consolidated the appeals, designating Appeal No. 21-1082 as the
lead case.
On August 16, 2021, Autel and DJI filed a joint motion to
voluntarily dismiss their appeal and cross-appeal. See Autel Robotics
USA LLC v. Int'l Trade Comm'n LLC, Appeal Nos. 2021-1082, -1363, Joint
Stipulation to Dismiss Appeals (Aug. 16, 2021). The Federal Circuit
granted the motion and dismissed the appeals the following day. See
Autel Robotics USA LLC v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, Appeal Nos. 21-1082, -
1363, Order (Fed. Cir. Aug. 17, 2021).
On August 16, 2021, Autel and DJI filed a Joint Petition to Rescind
the Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders (``Joint
Petition'') that the Commission issued in this investigation, pursuant
to 19 U.S.C. 1337(k) and Commission Rule 210.76(a) (19 CFR 210.76(a)).
The parties filed both confidential and public versions of the
settlement agreements.
Upon consideration of the parties' joint petition, the Commission
has determined that the petition complies with Commission rules, see 19
CFR 210.76(a)(3), and that there are no extraordinary reasons to deny
rescission of the remedial orders. Accordingly, the Commission has
determined to institute a rescission proceeding and to permanently
rescind the LEO and the CDOs. This rescission proceeding is hereby
terminated.
[[Page 51677]]
The Commission voted to approve these determinations on September
10, 2021.
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: September 10, 2021.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021-19977 Filed 9-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on September 16, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.