82 FR 30901 - Certain Beverage Brewing Capsules, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Commission Determination Finding No Violation of the Remedial Orders; Determination Not To Rescind the Remedial Orders; Termination of the Consolidated Enforcement and Rescission Proceeding

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 126 (July 3, 2017)

Page Range		30901-30902
FR Document		2017-13909

Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined that enforcement complainants Adrian Rivera and Adrian Rivera Maynez Enterprises, Inc. (collectively, ``ARM'') have not shown that respondents Eko Brands, LLC, and Espresso Supply, Inc., violated a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order (together, ``remedial orders''). The Commission has also determined not to rescind the remedial orders. The consolidated enforcement and rescission proceeding is hereby terminated.

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 126 (Monday, July 3, 2017)

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 126 (Monday, July 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30901-30902]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13909]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-929 (Enforcement and Rescission Proceeding)]

Certain Beverage Brewing Capsules, Components Thereof, and
Products Containing the Same; Commission Determination Finding No
Violation of the Remedial Orders; Determination Not To Rescind the
Remedial Orders; Termination of the Consolidated Enforcement and
Rescission Proceeding

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined that enforcement complainants Adrian Rivera
and Adrian Rivera Maynez Enterprises, Inc. (collectively, ``ARM'') have
not shown that respondents Eko Brands, LLC, and Espresso Supply, Inc.,
violated a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order
(together, ``remedial orders''). The Commission has also determined not
to rescind the remedial orders. The consolidated enforcement and
rescission proceeding is hereby terminated.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert J. Needham, Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3438. Copies of non-
confidential 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 (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed
on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted the original
investigation on September 9, 2014, based on a complaint filed by ARM.
79 FR 53445-46 (Sept. 9, 2014). The complaint alleged violations of
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in
the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and
the sale within the United States after importation of certain beverage
brewing capsules, components thereof, and products containing the same,
by reason of infringement of claims 5-8 and 18-20 of U.S. Patent No.
8,720,320 (``the '320 patent''). Id. The notice of institution of the
investigation named as respondents Solofill, LLC (``Solofill'');
DongGuan Hai Rui Precision Mould Co., Ltd. (``DongGuan''); Eko Brands,
LLC (``Eko''); Evermuch Technology Co., Ltd. and Ever Much Company Ltd.
(together, ``Evermuch''); and several additional respondents that were
terminated by reason of consent order or settlement. 79 FR 53445. The
Office of Unfair Import Investigations (``OUII'') was also named as a
party to the investigation. Id. The Commission found Eko and Evermuch
in default for failure to respond to the complaint and notice of
investigation. Notice (May 18, 2015).
On March 17, 2016, the Commission found no violation of section 337
by Solofill and DongGuan because claims 5-7, 18, and 20 of the '320
patent were invalid for a lack of written description and claims 5 and
6 were invalid as anticipated. 81 FR 15742-43 (Mar. 24, 2016). The
Commission, however, presumed that the allegations in the complaint
were true with respect to the defaulted parties Eko Brands and
Evermuch, and thus concluded that they violated section 337 with
respect to claims 8 and 19. Id. at 15743. The Commission issued a
limited exclusion order prohibiting Eko Brands and Evermuch from
importing certain beverage brewing capsules, components thereof, and
products containing the same that infringed claims 8 or 19 of the '320
patent. Id. The Commission also issued cease and desist orders against
Eko Brands and Evermuch prohibiting the sale and distribution within
the United States of articles that infringe claims 8 or 19. Id.
On June 1, 2016, ARM filed a complaint requesting that the
Commission institute a formal enforcement proceeding under Commission
Rule 210.75(b) to investigate alleged violations of the March 17, 2016,
remedial orders by Eko and its purchaser, Espresso Supply, Inc.
(collectively, ``Eko''). The Commission instituted a formal enforcement
proceeding on July 1, 2016. 81 FR 43242-43.
On September 12, 2016, Eko file a second petition requesting the
Commission to rescind its remedial orders, and to terminate the
enforcement proceeding. On November 25, 2016, the Commission instituted
a rescission proceeding, and consolidated

[[Page 30902]]

it with the enforcement proceeding. 81 FR 85264-65.
On January 31, 2017, Eko petitioned the Commission to rescind the
remedial orders based on a lack of a domestic industry. The Commission
denied the petition on June 8, 2017, because Eko failed to show changed
circumstances with respect to the domestic industry. Notice of
Commission Determination to Deny a Petition Requesting the Rescission
of Remedial Orders (June 8, 2017).
On March 27, 2017, the presiding ALJ issued the subject enforcement
initial determination (``EID''), which found that the remedial orders
cannot be enforced due to a lack of domestic industry, and issued a
recommended determination that the remedial orders be rescinded due to
an intervening district court summary judgment of noninfringement. OUII
petitioned for review of the EID on April 6, 2017, and ARM petitioned
for review on April 7, 2017. On April 13, 2017, ARM and Eko filed a
response to OUII's petition, and OUII filed a response to ARM's
petition. On April 14, 2017, Eko filed a response to ARM's petition. On
May 11, 2017, the Commission determined to review the EID.
The Commission has determined that ARM has not shown that Eko
violated the remedial orders. The Commission reverses the EID's finding
that the remedial orders cannot be enforced against Eko due to a lack
of domestic industry, but finds that ARM has failed to show that Eko
had the intent necessary to induce or contribute to the infringement of
claims 8 and 19 of the '320 patent. The Commission has also determined
not to rescind the remedial orders. This consolidated enforcement and
rescission proceeding is hereby terminated, and a Commission opinion
will issue shortly.
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: June 27, 2017.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2017-13909 Filed 6-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2017 / Notices 30901

Subject Merchandise and, if known, an INTERNATIONAL TRADE sale for importation, and the sale within
estimate of the percentage of total COMMISSION the United States after importation of
exports to the United States of Subject certain beverage brewing capsules,
[Investigation No. 337–TA–929 components thereof, and products
Merchandise from the Subject Country (Enforcement and Rescission Proceeding)]
accounted for by your firm’s(s’) exports. containing the same, by reason of
Certain Beverage Brewing Capsules, infringement of claims 5–8 and 18–20 of
(12) Identify significant changes, if
Components Thereof, and Products U.S. Patent No. 8,720,320 (‘‘the ’320
any, in the supply and demand patent’’). Id. The notice of institution of
conditions or business cycle for the Containing the Same; Commission
Determination Finding No Violation of the investigation named as respondents
Domestic Like Product that have Solofill, LLC (‘‘Solofill’’); DongGuan Hai
occurred in the United States or in the the Remedial Orders; Determination
Not To Rescind the Remedial Orders; Rui Precision Mould Co., Ltd.
market for the Subject Merchandise in (‘‘DongGuan’’); Eko Brands, LLC
Termination of the Consolidated
the Subject Country after 2011, and (‘‘Eko’’); Evermuch Technology Co., Ltd.
Enforcement and Rescission
significant changes, if any, that are and Ever Much Company Ltd. (together,
Proceeding
likely to occur within a reasonably ‘‘Evermuch’’); and several additional
foreseeable time. Supply conditions to AGENCY: U.S. International Trade respondents that were terminated by
consider include technology; Commission. reason of consent order or settlement. 79
production methods; development ACTION: Notice. FR 53445. The Office of Unfair Import
efforts; ability to increase production Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) was also named
(including the shift of production SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that as a party to the investigation. Id. The
facilities used for other products and the the U.S. International Trade Commission found Eko and Evermuch
use, cost, or availability of major inputs Commission has determined that in default for failure to respond to the
into production); and factors related to enforcement complainants Adrian complaint and notice of investigation.
the ability to shift supply among Rivera and Adrian Rivera Maynez Notice (May 18, 2015).
Enterprises, Inc. (collectively, ‘‘ARM’’) On March 17, 2016, the Commission
different national markets (including
have not shown that respondents Eko found no violation of section 337 by
barriers to importation in foreign Solofill and DongGuan because claims
Brands, LLC, and Espresso Supply, Inc.,
markets or changes in market demand 5–7, 18, and 20 of the ’320 patent were
violated a limited exclusion order and a
abroad). Demand conditions to consider invalid for a lack of written description
cease and desist order (together,
include end uses and applications; the ‘‘remedial orders’’). The Commission and claims 5 and 6 were invalid as
existence and availability of substitute has also determined not to rescind the anticipated. 81 FR 15742–43 (Mar. 24,
products; and the level of competition remedial orders. The consolidated 2016). The Commission, however,
among the Domestic Like Product enforcement and rescission proceeding presumed that the allegations in the
produced in the United States, Subject is hereby terminated. complaint were true with respect to the
Merchandise produced in the Subject FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
defaulted parties Eko Brands and
Country, and such merchandise from Robert J. Needham, Office of the General Evermuch, and thus concluded that they
other countries. Counsel, U.S. International Trade violated section 337 with respect to
(13) (OPTIONAL) A statement of Commission, 500 E Street SW., claims 8 and 19. Id. at 15743. The
whether you agree with the above Commission issued a limited exclusion
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
order prohibiting Eko Brands and
definitions of the Domestic Like Product 205–3438. Copies of non-confidential
Evermuch from importing certain
and Domestic Industry; if you disagree documents filed in connection with this
beverage brewing capsules, components
with either or both of these definitions, investigation are or will be available for
thereof, and products containing the
please explain why and provide inspection during official business
same that infringed claims 8 or 19 of the
alternative definitions. hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the
’320 patent. Id. The Commission also
Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Authority: This proceeding is being issued cease and desist orders against
International Trade Commission, 500 E
conducted under authority of title VII of the Eko Brands and Evermuch prohibiting
Street SW., Washington, DC 20436,
Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published the sale and distribution within the
telephone (202) 205–2000. General
pursuant to section 207.61 of the United States of articles that infringe
information concerning the Commission claims 8 or 19. Id.
Commission’s rules.
may also be obtained by accessing its On June 1, 2016, ARM filed a
By order of the Commission. Internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). complaint requesting that the
Issued: June 26, 2017. The public record for this investigation Commission institute a formal
Lisa R. Barton, may be viewed on the Commission’s enforcement proceeding under
Secretary to the Commission.
electronic docket (EDIS) at https:// Commission Rule 210.75(b) to
edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired investigate alleged violations of the
[FR Doc. 2017–13713 Filed 6–30–17; 8:45 am]
persons are advised that information on March 17, 2016, remedial orders by Eko
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P this matter can be obtained by and its purchaser, Espresso Supply, Inc.
contacting the Commission’s TDD (collectively, ‘‘Eko’’). The Commission
terminal on (202) 205–1810. instituted a formal enforcement
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The proceeding on July 1, 2016. 81 FR
Commission instituted the original
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

43242–43.
investigation on September 9, 2014, On September 12, 2016, Eko file a
based on a complaint filed by ARM. 79 second petition requesting the
FR 53445–46 (Sept. 9, 2014). The Commission to rescind its remedial
complaint alleged violations of section orders, and to terminate the
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as enforcement proceeding. On November
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the 25, 2016, the Commission instituted a
importation into the United States, the rescission proceeding, and consolidated

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:53 Jun 30, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM 03JYN1

30902 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 126 / Monday, July 3, 2017 / Notices

it with the enforcement proceeding. 81 INTERNATIONAL TRADE effective August 31, 2012, Commerce
FR 85264–65. COMMISSION issued a continuation of the
On January 31, 2017, Eko petitioned countervailing duty order on imports of
[Investigation Nos. 701–TA–442 and 731–
the Commission to rescind the remedial certain lined paper school supplies from
TA–1095–1096 (Second Review)]
India and the antidumping duty orders
orders based on a lack of a domestic
Certain Lined Paper School Supplies on imports of certain lined paper school
industry. The Commission denied the
From China and India; Institution of supplies from China and India (77 FR
petition on June 8, 2017, because Eko 53172). The Commission is now
failed to show changed circumstances Five-Year Reviews
conducting second five-year reviews
with respect to the domestic industry. AGENCY: United States International pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, as
Notice of Commission Determination to Trade Commission. amended (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), to
Deny a Petition Requesting the ACTION: Notice. determine whether revocation of the
Rescission of Remedial Orders (June 8, orders would be likely to lead to
2017). SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives continuation or recurrence of material
On March 27, 2017, the presiding ALJ notice that it has instituted reviews injury to the domestic industry within
issued the subject enforcement initial pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the a reasonably foreseeable time.
Act’’), as amended, to determine Provisions concerning the conduct of
determination (‘‘EID’’), which found
whether revocation of the this proceeding may be found in the
that the remedial orders cannot be
countervailing duty order on certain Commission’s Rules of Practice and
enforced due to a lack of domestic lined paper school supplies from India Procedure at 19 CFR parts 201, subparts
industry, and issued a recommended and the antidumping duty orders on A and B and 19 CFR part 207, subparts
determination that the remedial orders certain lined paper school supplies from A and F. The Commission will assess
be rescinded due to an intervening China and India would be likely to lead the adequacy of interested party
district court summary judgment of to continuation or recurrence of material responses to this notice of institution to
noninfringement. OUII petitioned for injury. Pursuant to the Act, interested determine whether to conduct full or
review of the EID on April 6, 2017, and parties are requested to respond to this expedited reviews. The Commission’s
ARM petitioned for review on April 7, notice by submitting the information determinations in any expedited
2017. On April 13, 2017, ARM and Eko specified below to the Commission. reviews will be based on the facts
filed a response to OUII’s petition, and DATES: Effective July 3, 2017. To be available, which may include
OUII filed a response to ARM’s petition. assured of consideration, the deadline information provided in response to this
On April 14, 2017, Eko filed a response for responses is August 2, 2017. notice.
to ARM’s petition. On May 11, 2017, the Comments on the adequacy of responses Definitions.—The following
Commission determined to review the may be filed with the Commission by definitions apply to these reviews:
EID. September 14, 2017. (1) Subject Merchandise is the class or
kind of merchandise that is within the
The Commission has determined that FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
scope of the five-year reviews, as
ARM has not shown that Eko violated Mary Messer (202–205–3193), Office of
defined by Commerce.
the remedial orders. The Commission Investigations, U.S. International Trade (2) The Subject Countries in these
reverses the EID’s finding that the Commission, 500 E Street SW., reviews are China and India.
remedial orders cannot be enforced Washington, DC 20436. Hearing- (3) The Domestic Like Product is the
against Eko due to a lack of domestic impaired persons can obtain domestically produced product or
industry, but finds that ARM has failed information on this matter by contacting products which are like, or in the
to show that Eko had the intent the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– absence of like, most similar in
necessary to induce or contribute to the 205–1810. Persons with mobility characteristics and uses with, the
infringement of claims 8 and 19 of the impairments who will need special Subject Merchandise. In its original
assistance in gaining access to the determinations and its full first five-year
’320 patent. The Commission has also
Commission should contact the Office reviews, the Commission found one
determined not to rescind the remedial
of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. Domestic Like Product consisting of all
orders. This consolidated enforcement General information concerning the
and rescission proceeding is hereby lined paper products, regardless of
Commission may also be obtained by dimension.
terminated, and a Commission opinion accessing its internet server (https:// (4) The Domestic Industry is the U.S.
will issue shortly. www.usitc.gov). The public record for producers as a whole of the Domestic
The authority for the Commission’s this proceeding may be viewed on the Like Product, or those producers whose
determination is contained in section Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) collective output of the Domestic Like
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as at https://edis.usitc.gov. Product constitutes a major proportion
amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in part SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: of the total domestic production of the
210 of the Commission’s Rules of Background.—On September 28, product. In its original determinations
Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part 2006, the Department of Commerce and full first five-year reviews, the
210). (‘‘Commerce’’) issued a countervailing Commission found one Domestic
duty order on certain lined paper school Industry consisting of all domestic
By order of the Commission.
supplies from India and antidumping producers of lined paper products. The
Issued: June 27, 2017. duty orders on certain lined paper Commission also found during the
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES

Lisa R. Barton, school supplies from China and India original investigations that
Secretary to the Commission. (71 FR 56949). On April 14, 2011, circumstances were appropriate to
[FR Doc. 2017–13909 Filed 6–30–17; 8:45 am] Commerce amended in part the exclude two domestic producers,
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P antidumping duty order on subject American Scholar and CPP, from the
imports from India (76 FR 20954). Domestic Industry under the related
Following the first five-year reviews by parties provision. In the full first five-
Commerce and the Commission, year reviews, the Commission found

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:53 Jun 30, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM 03JYN1

Document Created: 2018-11-14 10:19:27
Document Modified: 2018-11-14 10:19:27

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Notice.
Contact		Robert J. Needham, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3438. Copies of non- confidential 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 (https:// www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.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.
FR Citation		82 FR 30901