SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Commission instituted this investigation on August 7, 2025, based on a complaint filed by Pantech Corporation of the Republic of Korea (“Pantech”). 90 FR 38177 (Aug. 7, 2025). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain mobile cellular communications devices by reason of the infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,548,839; 11,659,503; 11,051,344; and 12,267,876. Id. The complaint further alleges that a domestic industry exists. Id.

The notice of investigation names the following respondents: (1) OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. of Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, China; (2) OnePlus USA Corp. of Irving, Texas; (3) Lenovo Group Ltd. of Beijing, China; (4) Lenovo (United States) Inc. of Morrisville, North Carolina; (5) Motorola Mobility LLC of Libertyville, Illinois; (6) TCL Industries Holdings Co., Ltd. of Huizhou City, Guangdong Province, China; (7) TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd. of Hong Kong; (8) TCL Communication Ltd. of Hong Kong; (9) TCL Communication Technology Holdings Ltd. of Huizhou City, Guangdong Province, China; (10) TCL Mobile International Ltd. of Hong Kong; (11) Huizhou TCL Mobile Communication Co., Ltd. of Huizhou City, Guangdong Province, China; (12) TCL Mobile Communication (HK) Company Ltd. of Hong Kong; (13) Tinno ( printed page 49442) USA, Inc. of Plano, Texas; (14) Shenzhen Tinno Mobile Technology Corp. of Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, China; (15) HMD Global of Espoo, Finland; (16) HMD Global Oy of Espoo, Finland; and (17) HMD America, Inc. of Miami, Florida. Id. at 38177-78. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (“OUII”) is also named as a party to this investigation. Id. at 38178.

On September 30, 2025, the Commission terminated the investigation with respect to respondent HMD Global. Order No. 7 (Sept. 10, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Sept. 30, 2025).

On May 22, 2026, respondents HMD Global Oy and HMD America, Inc. (collectively, “HMD”) moved to terminate the investigation as to HMD based on a consent order stipulation and proposed consent order. Pantech did not oppose the motion. On June 2, 2026, OUII filed a response in support of HMD's motion.

On May 26, 2026, Pantech and respondents OnePlus Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., and OnePlus USA Corp. (collectively, “OnePlus”) filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation as to OnePlus based on a settlement agreement. On June 4, 2026, OUII filed a response in support of the motion as to OnePlus.

On June 4, 2026, Pantech and respondents Lenovo Group Limited, Lenovo (United States) Inc., and Motorola Mobility LLC (collectively, “Lenovo”) filed a joint motion to termination the investigation as to Lenovo based on a settlement agreement. On June 15, 2026, OUII filed a motion in support of the motion as to Lenovo.

On June 15, 2026, Pantech and respondents Tinno USA, Inc. and Shenzhen Tinno Mobioe Technology Corp. (collectively, “Tinno”) filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation as to Tinno based on a settlement agreement. On June 25, 2026, OUII filed a response in support of the motion as to Tinno.

On June 22, 2026, Pantech and respondents TCL Industries Holdings Co., Ltd., TCL Electronics Holdings Ltd., TCL Communication Ltd., TCL Communication Technology Holdings Ltd., TCL Mobile International Ltd., Huizhou TCL Mobile Communication Co., Ltd., and TCL Mobile Communication (HK) Company Ltd., (collectively, “TCL”) filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation as to TCL based on a settlement agreement. On June 25, 2026, OUII filed a response in support of the motion as to TCL.

On June 30, 2026, the ALJ issued the five subject IDs, terminating HMD, OnePlus, Lenovo, Tinno, and TCL from the investigation. Order No. 25 (as to HMD); Order No. 26 (as to OnePlus); Order No. 27 (as to Lenovo); Order No. 28 (as to Tinno), and Order No. 29 (as to TCL). Order No. 25 confirms that HMD's consent order stipulation and proposed consent orders satisfy the requirements of Commission Rules 210.2(c)(3) and (c)(4) (19 CFR 210.21(c)(3), (c)(4)). Order No. 25 also finds that termination of HMD would not be contrary to the public interest. Order Nos. 26, 27, 28, and 29 each find that the respective motions comply with the requirements of Commission Rule 210.21(b)(1) (19 CFR 210.21(b)(1)), and that the proposed settlements do not adversely affect the public interest in accordance with Commission Rule 210.50(b)(2) (19 CFR 210.50(b)(2)). As the five subject IDs terminate all remaining respondents, Order No. 29 also terminates the investigation in its entirety. No petitions for review of the subject IDs were filed.

The Commission has determined not to review the subject IDs. The Commission has issued consent orders to HMD Global Oy and HMD America, Inc. HMD, OnePlus, Lenovo, Tinno, and TCL are terminated from the investigation, and the investigation is terminated in its entirety.

The Commission vote for this determination took place on July 30, 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).

91 FR 49441