Final Determinations On Nikon and Fujifilm


Administrative law judge a final determination issues a Final Determination into an investigation into certain digital cameras. The remedy is a limited exclusion order, a cease and desist orders directed to each of the respondents named

Cameras and Software

The investigation, names as respondents the entities of Nikon Corporation of Tokyo, Sendai Nikon Corporation also of Japan, Nikon Inc of Melville New York, Nikon Co. Ltd of Ayutthaya Thailand, and Nikon Imaging Co. Ltd. of China.

The commission seeks further development of the record from the public’s interest in regards to these investigations. Additionally Section 337 of the Tariff Act provides the power to exclude articles in concern from the United States, if the Commission finds a violation. Exclude, after consideration of the impact to public health, public welfare, competitive conditions in the economy, domestic production capabilities of like or competitive articles, and to the consumers of the United States.

Magnetic Stripe

The presiding administrative law judge issues a final determination on section 337 in the investigation into certain Magnetic Tape Cartridges and components thereof. The following respondents were named Japan based Fujifilm Holdings Corporation, Fujifilm Corporation, Fujifilm Media Manufacturing Co. Ltd, United States based Fujifilm Holdings America Corporation, Fujifilm Recording Media U.S.A. Inc, collectively Fujifilm, or respondents. Cease and Desist Orders

The commission has high interest in the development of the record showing public interest in these investigations.

The Commission’s highest interest goes to comments that develop understanding around any of the following fields, regarding either of the investigations.

  1. That gives, in detail; an explanation as to how the potentially subject article’s use in the United States.
    Identify any public health, safety, or welfare concern relevant to impacts of the orders.
  2. Identify like, or competitive articles the complainant, licensees, or third parties production position, which could replace the subject articles if exclusion occurs.
  3. Identify and assess whether the complainant, licensees, or third parties have the production capacity to replace the volume of articles potential to the recommendation’s exclusion order. To include that same assessment from recommendation’s cease and desist order within a reasonable amount of time within commercial activities.
  4. Explanation and review of the impact to consumers in the United States from the exclusion and cease and desist orders.

Persons whom wish to comment anonymously must request confidentiality, send to the Secretary of the Commission and include statement of reasons why such treatment should be granted.


The companies here in reference are responsible for a good supply of good quality equipment. Placing duties on these articles could harm supply of such photographic equipment in the United States. This constraint on supply could encourage domestic supply efforts, or open the demand up for other foreign manufacturers.



Regulations can be a source of opportunity, as they make a major part in the determination of barriers to entry.  An industry or practice is difficult to enter if there is a significant amount of regulative procedures and requirements, versus when restrictions are removed an opportunity may be presented.  In this way we are doing our small part to encourage an informed people.

We start from modest beginnings but continue to identify, develop, and research opportunity and strategy for entrepreneurs, to better develop business ideas.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.