SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Commission instituted this investigation on March 7, 2025, based on a complaint filed by Corning Incorporated of Corning, New York (“Complainant”). 90 FR 11549-50 (Mar. 7, 2025). The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (“section 337”), based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain glass substrates for liquid crystal displays, products containing the same, and methods for manufacturing the same by reason of the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,642,491 (“the '491 patent”), U.S. Patent No. 8,640,498 (together, “the Asserted Patents”), and U.S. Patent No. 7,851,394 (“the '394 patent”). Id. at 11549. The complaint further alleges that a domestic industry exists. Id. The notice of investigation names nine respondents: (1) Caihong Display Devices Co., Ltd., d/b/a Irico Display Devices Co., Ltd. of Xianyang City, Shaanxi Province, China (“Caihong”); (2) Hisense USA Corporation of Suwanee, Georgia; (3) HKC Corporation Ltd. of Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, China; (4) HKC Overseas Ltd. of Hong Kong; (5) LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey; (6) TCL China Star Optoelectronics Technology Co., Ltd. of Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province, China (“CSOT”); (7) TTE Technology, Inc., d/b/a TCL North America of Irvine, California (“TCL”); (8) VIZIO, Inc. of Irvine, California; and (9) Xianyang CaiHong Optoelectronics Technology Co., Ltd. of Xianyang City, Shaanxi Province, China (“CHOT”). Id. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations is not named as a party to this investigation. Id.

The Commission previously terminated several respondents from the investigation based on settlement ( printed page 51745) agreements. Order No. 24 (July 15, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Aug. 6, 2025) (HKC Corporation Ltd. and HKC Overseas Ltd.); Order No. 28 (Sept. 10, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Sept. 30, 2025) (VIZIO, Inc.); Order No. 29 (Sept. 30, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Dec. 8, 2025) (LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.); Order No. 57 (Mar. 24, 2026), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Apr. 20, 2026) (Hisense USA Corporation). Accordingly, four respondents remain in the investigation: Caihong, CSOT, CHOT, and TCL (collectively, “Respondents”).

On December 22, 2025, the Commission terminated the investigation as to the '394 patent and claim 2 of the '491 patent. Order No. 35 (Dec. 2, 2025), unreviewed by Comm'n Notice (Dec. 22, 2025).

On April 7, 2026, the presiding administrative law judge (“ALJ”) issued a final initial determination (“FID”), finding a violation of section 337 with respect to each of the remaining asserted claims of the Asserted Patents. The FID also includes the ALJ's Recommended Determination (“RD”) on remedy and bond, should the Commission find a violation of section 337.

On May 7 and 8, 2026, Complainant and Respondents filed, respectively, a public interest statement pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(a)(4), 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4). No submissions were filed in response to the post-RD Federal Register notice. See91 FR 18478-79 (Apr. 10, 2026).

On June 8, 2026, the Commission determined to review the FID in part. 91 FR 35555-56 (June 11, 2026). Specifically, the Commission determined to review the FID's findings that: (1) the claim term “mole percent on an oxide basis” is not indefinite and (2) Complainant has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement under section 337(a)(3)(B). Id. at 35556. The Commission also requested submissions on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Id.

On June 22, 2026, Complainant filed its opening submission on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. On that same date, respondents Caihong and CHOT filed a brief, including a discussion of the issues under review in addition to their view on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Also on that date, respondents TCL and CSOT filed a separate submission on remedy, the public interest, and bonding.

On July 6, 2026, the Commission granted in part Complainant's motion to strike the portions of respondents Caihong's and CHOT's opening brief on remedy, the public interest, and bonding that contain arguments regarding the two issues under review, as the Commission did not request additional briefing on those issues. Comm'n Order at 5-6 (July 6, 2026). Specifically, the Commission struck Sections II.A, II.B, and all arguments in the Introduction and Conclusion sections of the brief that are directed to the issues under review.

On July 13, 2026, the parties submitted their responsive briefs on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. See Order Granting In Part Complainant's Request For An Expedited Response To Motion To Strike; Extension Of Deadline For Responsive Briefing On Issues Of Remedy, The Public Interest, And Bonding (June 24, 2026).

Having examined the record in this investigation, including the FID, the parties' petitions for review and responses thereto and the submissions regarding remedy, the public interest, and bonding, the Commission has determined to find a violation of section 337 as to both Asserted Patents. As set forth in the simultaneously-issued Commission opinion, the Commission affirms with additional reasoning the FID's finding that the claim term “mole percent on an oxide basis” is not indefinite. The Commission also affirms with additional reasoning the FID's finding that Complainant has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement under section 337(a)(3)(B).

The Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is an LEO prohibiting the unlicensed entry of infringing glass substrates for liquid crystal displays, products containing the same, and methods for manufacturing the same that are manufactured by or on behalf of Respondents or any of their affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, or other related business entities, or their successors or assigns. The Commission has also determined to issue a CDO against TCL.

The Commission has further determined that the public interest factors enumerated in subsections (d)(l) and (f)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(l), (f)(1)) do not preclude issuance of the above-referenced remedial orders. Additionally, the Commission has determined to impose a bond in the amount of zero percent (0%) of the infringing products imported during the period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)).

The investigation is terminated.

The Commission vote for this determination took place on August 6, 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 51744