Certain Electric Power Tools, Battery Cartridges, and ... - USITC

2design, the color "Makita Blue," or the design/color combination of certainMakita products; (2) infringement of the registered trademark llMakitall; (3)false representation; (4) false advertising; or (5) passing off. 2/After a lengthy evidentiary hearing, the presiding administrative lawjudge ("ALJ") issued an initial determination ("ID") that there had been noviolation of section 337 by any respondent other than Equipment Importers,Inc., d/b/a Jet Equipment & Tools, Inc. ("Jet"), a domestic firm that wasfound to have infringed the registered trademark "Makita" in theimportation and sale of a wood planer manufactured in Taiwan.Makita and various respondents petitioned for review of the ID. a/The Commission determined, however, that a review was not warranted. A/ Asits final determination concerning the violation of section 337, theConmission adopted the discussion and findings of fact in the ID concerningcertain outcome-determinative issues and the holding by the ALJ that norespondent other than Jet had violated section 337. I/The following matters are now before the Comission for decision:(1) Makita's motion for reconsideration of the Commission's decision not toreview the violation ID and to adopt only portions thereof; (2) theappropriate remedy for the violation found to have been committed by2/ 53 Fed. Reg. 31112 (Aug. 17, 1988) as amended by 53 Fed. Reg. 47587(Nov. 23, 1988); 53 Fed. Reg. 47586 (Nov. 23, 1988); 54 Fed. Reg. 16009(Apr. 20, 1989); 54 Fed. Reg. 21490 (May 18, 1989).a/% 19 C.F.R. 5 210.54(a) (1989).4/ % 19 C.F.R. 5 210.54(b) (1989): 54 Fed. Reg. 31896 (Aug. 2, 1989).I/ 54 Fed. Reg. 31896 (Aug. 2, 1989). Chairman Brunsdale and ViceChairman Cass adopted the entire ID as their respective finaldeterminations concerning violation of section 337. Ig.