Certain Nasal Devices and Components Thereof; Notice of a Commission Determination To Reconsider an Earlier Decision; Issue a Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of Investigation
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.
Issuing agencies
Abstract
Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission ("Commission") has determined to reconsider in part its prior affirmance of an initial determination ("ID") (Order No. 27) of the presiding administrative law judge ("ALJ"). The Commission has also determined to issue: (1) a limited exclusion order ("LEO") barring entry of certain nasal devices and components thereof by or on behalf of the defaulting respondents; and (2) cease and desist orders ("CDOs") against each of the defaulting respondents. The investigation is terminated.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 47 (Wednesday, March 11, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 47 (Wednesday, March 11, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11989-11990]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-04769]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1444]
Certain Nasal Devices and Components Thereof; Notice of a
Commission Determination To Reconsider an Earlier Decision; Issue a
Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of
Investigation
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission (``Commission'') has determined to reconsider in part its
prior affirmance of an initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 27) of
the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ''). The Commission has
also determined to issue: (1) a limited exclusion order (``LEO'')
barring entry of certain nasal devices and components thereof by or on
behalf of the defaulting respondents; and (2) cease and desist orders
(``CDOs'') against each of the defaulting respondents. The
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 Commission's electronic docket (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#5c1918150f6f1439302c1c292f35283f723b332a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3376777a60007b565f437346405a47501d545c45">[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
on (202) 205-1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation
on March 26, 2025, based on a complaint filed by Aardvark Medical Inc.
of Denton, Texas. 90 FR 13781-82 (Mar. 26, 2025). The complaint, as
later amended and supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of
the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (``section 337''),
in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or
the sale within the United States after importation of certain nasal
devices and components thereof by reason of infringement of claims 1-5,
7-14, and 16-19 of U.S. Patent No. 9,750,856 (``the '856 patent'');
claims 1-4, 6, 8-12, 14-17, 21-24, 27, and 28 of U.S. Patent No.
11,318,234 (``the '234 patent''); claims 1-3, 6-8, 10-12, 16-18, 21-22,
and 28 of U.S. Patent No. 11,883,009 (``the '009 patent''); claims 1-7,
10-14, and 17-21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,883,010 (``the '010 patent'');
and claims 13-21 and 26 of U.S. Patent No. 11,889,995 (``the '995
patent'') (collectively, the ``Asserted Patents''). Id. The complaint
further alleges that a domestic industry exists. Id. The Commission's
notice of investigation named as respondents: (1) Xiamenximier
Electronic Commerce Co., Ltd (d/b/a Cenny) of Fujian, China
(``Cenny''); (2) Xia Men Deng Jia E-Commerce Co., Ltd. (d/b/a Ronfnea)
of Fujian, China (``Ronfnea''); (3) Chongqing Moffy Innovation
Technology Co., Ltd. of Chongqing City, China (``Moffy''); (4)
Guangdong XINRUNTAO Technology Co., Ltd. of Shenzhen, China
(``Xinruntao''); and (5) Shenzhen Jun&Liang Media Tech Limited of
Shenzhen, China (``Jun&Liang,'' and together with the aforementioned
respondents, ``Defaulting Respondents''), as well as RhinoSystems of
Brooklyn, Ohio; and Spa Sciences LP of Port St. Lucie, Florida. Id. The
Office of Unfair Import Investigations is not participating in the
investigation. Id.
On June 17, 2025, the Commission determined not to review an
initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 9) granting Complainant's
motion for leave to amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation to
substitute and correct the appropriate entity from named respondent
``Spa Sciences LP'' to ``Michael Todd Beauty LP d/b/a Spa Sciences.''
Order No. 9 (May 22, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (June 17,
2025).
The following respondents have been terminated from the
investigation: RhinoSystems and Michael Todd Beauty LP d/b/a Spa
Sciences. Order No. 14 (July 14, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice
(Aug. 6, 2025); Order No. 28 (Dec. 4, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n
Notice (Dec. 22, 2025).
The Commission previously found Defaulting Respondents to be in
default. Order No. 27 (Sept. 22, 2025), reviewed in part and aff'd by
Comm'n Notice (Dec. 4, 2025) (affirming the ALJ's finding of Cenny,
Ronfnea, Moffy, and Jun&Liang in default under Commission Rule
210.16(a)(1) (19 CFR 210.16(a)(1)) for failing to respond to the
complaint and notice of investigation; and modifying the ALJ's finding
that Xinruntao was in default under Commission Rule 210.16(a)(1) with a
finding that Xinruntao was in default under Commission Rule
210.16(a)(2) (19 CFR 210.16(a)(2)) for failing to cooperate with
discovery).
The Commission hereby reconsiders its decision affirming Order No.
27 as to Xinruntao. See Commission Rule 210.47 (19 CFR 210.47).
Xinruntao's answer to the complaint and notice of investigation was
untimely, and Xinruntao failed to show cause justifying its late
response (see Order No. 2 (Mar. 24, 2025) (ALJ's Ground Rules)) or
otherwise respond to the ALJ's order instructing it to show good cause
why it should not be found in default (see Order No. 25 (Sept. 8,
2025)). In reconsideration, the Commission now finds Xinruntao to be in
default under Commission Rule 210.16(a)(1). An unexcused, untimely
response to the complaint and notice of investigation is insufficient
to avoid a finding of default under the Commission Rule 210.16(a)(1),
and accordingly, a finding of default under that rule is appropriate.
In sum, all remaining respondents have been found in default under
Commission Rule 210.16(a)(1).
On January 15, 2026, the Commission issued a notice asking the
parties to the investigation, interested government agencies, and any
other interested parties to file written submissions on the issues of
remedy, the public interest,
[[Page 11990]]
and bonding. 91 FR 2367 (Jan. 20, 2026) (``the Remedy Notice'').
On January 29, 2026, Complainant filed a submission to the Remedy
Notice. No other responses were received.
When the conditions in section 337(g)(1)(A)-(E) (19 U.S.C.
1337(g)(1)(A)-(E)) have been satisfied, section 337(g)(1) and
Commission Rule 210.16(c) (19 CFR 210.16(c)) direct the Commission,
upon request, to issue a limited exclusion order or a cease and desist
order or both against a respondent found in default, based on the
allegations regarding a violation of section 337 in the complaint,
which are presumed to be true, unless after consideration of the public
interest factors in section 337(g)(1), it finds that such relief should
not issue.
Having examined the record of this investigation, including
Complainant's submission in response to the Remedy Notice, the
Commission has determined, pursuant to section 337(g)(1) (19 U.S.C.
1337(g)(1)), that the appropriate remedy in this investigation is: (1)
an LEO prohibiting the unlicensed entry of certain nasal devices and
components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of
claims 1-5, 7-14, and 16-19 of the '856 patent; claims 1-4, 6, 8-12,
14-17, 21-24, 27, and 28 of the '234 patent; claims 1-3, 6-8, 10-12,
16-18, 21-22, and 28 of the '009 patent; claims 1-7, 10-14, and 17-21
of the '010 patent; and claims 13-21 and 26 of the '995 patent by
Defaulting Respondents and (2) CDOs directed to Defaulting Respondents.
The Commission has determined that the public interest factors
enumerated in subsection 337(g)(1) do not preclude the issuance of the
LEO and CDOs. The Commission has further determined that the bond
during the period of Presidential review pursuant to section 337(j) (19
U.S.C. 1337(j)) shall be in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of
the entered value of the imported articles that are subject to the LEO.
The investigation is hereby terminated.
The Commission vote for this determination took place on March 9,
2026.
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: March 9, 2026.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2026-04769 Filed 3-10-26; 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>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.