UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. In the Matter of CERTAIN MOBILE ELECTRONIC Inv. No. 337-TA-1093 DEVICES AND RADIO FREQUENCY AND PROCESSING COMPONENTS THEREOF (1) NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF INITIAL DETERMINATIO! SECTION 337 IN VIOLATION OF Administrative Law Judge MaryJoan McNamara (March 26, 2019) Thave issued today in this Investigation the Final Initial Determination (“ID”) on Violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 1337 (“Section 337"). Thave found that Complainant, Qualcomm Incorporated (“Qualcomm”), has proven by a preponderance of evidence that Respondent, Apple, Inc. (“Apple”), has violated subsection (b) of Section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within, the United States after importation of certain mobile electronic devices containing processing components. Thave found that Apple has infringed asserted claim 1, but not asserted claim 8, of U.S. Patent No. 8,063,674 (“the 674 patent”). Ihave found that claims 1 and 8 of the °674 patent are valid. Thave found that Apple has not infringed asserted claims 1 and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 9,154,356 (“the "356 patent”), While Apple’s accused products satisfy these claims, I have found that claims 1 and 17 of the *356 patent are invalid. Page 1 ofThave found that Apple has not infringed asserted claim 4 of U.S. Patent No. 9,473,336 (“the °336 patent”). I have found that claim 4 of the ’336 patent is valid. Thave found that one or more of Qualcomm’s domestic industry products satisfy the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement for the °356 and °674 patents. I have found that none of Qualeomm’s domestic industry products satisfy the technical prong of the domestic industry requirement for the °336 patent. Thave found that Qualcomm has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement under Section 337(a)(3)(A), (B), and (C) with respect to the °336 patent. Qualcomm has satisfied the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement under Section 337(a)(3)(A), (B), and (C) through a successful motion for summary determination with respect to the °356 and ’674 patents. (See Order No. 36 (Aug. 24, 2018); Order No. 46 (Nov. 19, 2018); Doc. ID No. 664412 (Comm'n Determination Not to Review ID Granting Summary Determination) (Dec. 17, 2018). A complete recommendation on remedy and bond will be forthcoming together with findings of fact and an analysis of the effects of the public interest factors on the issue of remedy pursuant to 19 C.F.R § 210.42(a)(1)(ii)(A), (B), and (C). However, it should be noted that I will be recommending that a limited exclusion order together with a cease and desist order, both with certification provisions, issue against Apple. A bond will not be recommended during the Presidential Review Period since Qualcomm’s products do not directly compete with the Accused 674 Devices that contain the Apple processors that have been found to infringe the °674 patent. ( SO ORDERED. a l 2 ) s Maryloan Administrative Law Judge Page 2 of 2CERTAIN MOBILE ELECTRONIC DEVICES AND RADIO Inv. No, 337-TA-1093 FREQUENCY AND PROCESSING COMPONENTS THEREOF PUBLIC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, I, Lisa R. Barton, hereby certify that the attached NOTICE has been served by hand upon the Commission Investigative Attorney, Paul Gennari, Esq., and the following parties as indicated, on Mareh 26, 2019. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary US. International Trade Commission 500 E Street, SW, Room 112 Washington, DC 20436 On Behalf of Complainants Qualeomm Incorporated: S. Alex Lasher, II, Esq. CO Via Hand Delivery QUINNN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVANLLP 9X Via Express Delivery 1300 I Street NW, Suite 900 1D Via First Class Mail Washington, DC 20005 Other: On Behalf of Respondents Apple Inc.: Indranil Mukerji, Esq. Cl Via Hand Delivery FISH & RICHARDSON PC 2X Via Express Delivery LOO) Maine ve ee CO Via First Class Mail Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20024 oo