Click here for Adobe Acrobat version
Click here for Microsoft Word version

******************************************************** 
                      NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from Microsoft Word.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat version.

*****************************************************************



                           Before the
                Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of                 )
                                )
TUNG SHIH TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.   )    EB Docket No. 05-30
                                )    EB-02-TS-606
Grantee of Equipment             )
Authorization for                )
Learned Mode Remote Control      )
Transmitter Devices, FCC ID 
Nos. MMORC0196N and MMORMC575


                       ORDER OF REVOCATION 
     
Adopted:  April 15, 2005                                    
Released: April 18, 2005

By the Chief, Enforcement Bureau:

I.   INTRODUCTION

        1.     By this Order of Revocation, acting pursuant to 
   authority delegated to the Enforcement Bureau under section 
   0.111(a)(17) of the Commission's rules,1 we revoke the above-
   captioned equipment authorizations held by Tung Shih 
   Technology Co., Ltd. (``Tung Shih'') for its learned mode 
   remote control devices (``learned mode transmitters'').  We 
   conclude, based upon the evidence described herein, that the 
   learned mode transmitters manufactured by Tung Shih have the 
   capability to transmit impermissibly on restricted 
   frequencies specified in section 15.205(a) of the 
   Commission's rules.2  We further conclude that Tung Shih's 
   learned mode transmitters also have the capability to 
   transmit impermissibly on frequencies that are not authorized 
   by their equipment authorizations. 

II.       BACKGROUND

        2.     On January 31, 2005, the Commission released an 
   Order to Show Cause designating this case for hearing.3  The 
   OSC specified the following issues:

          (a)  To determine whether the LRT-1 learned mode 
             transmitter manufactured by Tung Shih under 
             FCC ID No. MMORC0196M conforms to the 
             technical requirements specified by section 
             15.205(a) of the rules;

          (b)  To determine whether the LRT-1 learned mode 
             transmitter manufactured by Tung Shih under 
             FCC ID No. MMORC0196M conforms to the 
             technical requirements specified by its 
             equipment authorization; 

          (c)  To determine, in light of the evidence 
             adduced pursuant to issues (a) and (b), 
             whether the equipment authorization FCC ID No. 
             MMORC0196M held by Tung Shih should be 
             revoked; 

          (d)  To determine whether the RMC-535 learned mode 
             transmitter manufactured by Tung Shih under 
             FCC ID No. MMORMC575 conforms to the technical 
             requirements specified by section 15.205(a) of 
             the rules; 

          (e)  To determine whether the RMC-535 learned mode 
             transmitter manufactured by Tung Shih under 
             FCC ID No. MMORMC575 conforms to the technical 
             requirements specified by its equipment 
             authorization; and 

          (f)  To determine, in light of the evidence 
             adduced pursuant to issues (d) and (e), 
             whether equipment authorization FCC ID No. 
             MMORMC575 held by Tung Shih should be revoked.

        3.     The OSC ordered Tung Shih, pursuant to section 
   2.939(b) of the Commission's rules,4 within thirty days of 
   the release of the OSC (i.e., by March 2, 2005), in person or 
   by its attorney, to file a written notice of appearance in 
   order to avail itself of the opportunity to be heard.5  The 
   OSC directed that the notice of appearance state that Tung 
   Shih would appear on the date fixed for the hearing and 
   present evidence on the specified issues.  The OSC warned 
   Tung Shih that, if it failed to so file a written notice of 
   appearance, its right to a hearing on the matter of its 
   equipment authorizations would be deemed waived, and the 
   Chief Administrative Law Judge (or the presiding officer if 
   one had been designated) would, at the earliest practicable 
   date, issue an order reciting the events or circumstances 
   constituting a waiver of hearing, terminating the hearing 
   proceeding, and certifying the case to the Commission.6   

        4.     The Presiding Judge determined that Tung Shih had 
   received a copy of the OSC but had failed to file a written 
   notice of appearance seeking to avail itself of the 
   opportunity to be heard.7  Accordingly, he concluded that 
   Tung Shih had waived its right to a hearing, and terminated 
   the proceeding and certified the case to the Commission for 
   disposition in accordance with 47 C.F.R.  1.92(c).  The 
   Commission has delegated authority to the Enforcement Bureau 
   for such revocation proceedings, terminated on the basis of 
   waiver, pursuant to 47 C.F.R.  0.111(a)(17).  

III.      DISCUSSION

     A.  Facts

        5.     Learned mode transmitters are typically sold as 
   universal replacements or duplicates for garage door openers, 
   keyless entry systems, security alarms, remote switches and 
   similar types of radio controlled devices.  These 
   transmitters are designed to recognize and replicate the 
   operating frequency, duty cycle and coding scheme of the 
   targeted radio system.8  As intentional radiators,9 learned 
   mode transmitters must be certified by the Commission prior 
   to marketing according to procedures specified in Part 2, 
   subpart J of the rules.10    

        6.     On October 30, 1996, and October 2, 2002, 
   respectively, the Commission's Office of Engineering and 
   Technology (``OET'') granted Tung Shih equipment 
   certifications, FCC ID Nos. MMORC0196M and MMORMC575, for 
   learned mode transmitters.  The first certification 
   authorized emissions only within the 286-320 MHz frequency 
   band, while the second certification authorized emissions 
   only within the 313.95-314.95 MHz frequency band.  At all 
   relevant times, section 15.205(a) of the rules allowed 
   intentional radiators, such as learned mode transmitters, to 
   transmit only spurious emissions11 in the restricted 
   frequency bands, which include 240-285 MHz, 322-335.4 MHz and 
   399.9-410 MHz.  

        7.     After receiving complaints, OET tested the Remocon 
   LRT-1 (``LRT-1''), which is manufactured by Tung Shih under 
   FCC ID No. MMORC0196M.  OET determined that the LRT-1 is 
   capable of being tuned to and operated on a range of 
   frequencies that are not authorized, including, but not 
   limited to, 437.004 MHz.  The instructions for the LRT-1 
   included with the sample device also indicate that it is 
   designed to acquire and operate on all frequencies within the 
   255-500 MHz band, which includes frequencies that are within 
   the restricted bands specified by section 15.205(a) of the 
   rules.  OET's examination of the LRT-1 confirmed that the 
   device can be readily tuned to operate on restricted band 
   frequencies.

        8.     OET also tested the RMC-535, a device manufactured 
   by Tung Shih under FCC ID No. MMORMC575, a sample of which 
   had been provided by Tung Shih.  OET determined that the RMC-
   535 is capable of being tuned to and operated on a range of 
   unauthorized frequencies, including 310.9 MHz.  OET's 
   examination of the RMC-535 also established that the device 
   can be readily tuned to operate on frequencies that are 
   within the restricted bands specified by section 15.205(a) of 
   the rules.  

     B.  Discussion

        9.     As noted above, section 15.205(a) of the rules 
   allows learned mode transmitters to transmit only spurious 
   emissions in the restricted bands, including 240-285 MHz, 
   322-335.4 MHz and 399.9-410 MHz.  In addition, Tung Shih's 
   equipment certification (FCC ID No. MMORC0196M) covering the 
   LRT-1 authorizes operation only in the frequency band 286-320 
   MHz.  However, OET found that the LRT-1 can be readily tuned 
   to restricted band frequencies, while the instructions for 
   the device indicate that the LRT-1 can operate on any 
   frequency in the band between 255 and 500 MHz.  Thus, the 
   LRT-1 does not conform to either the requirements of section 
   15.205(a) or its equipment authorization.  Likewise, OET 
   found that the RMC-535 can be readily tuned to frequencies 
   that are within the restricted bands specified by section 
   15.205(a) of the Commission's rules and that it was capable 
   of acquiring and transmitting on a range of frequencies, 
   including 310.9 MHz, which is outside the range of 
   frequencies specified by its authorization.  Thus, the RMC-
   535 also does not conform to either the requirements of 
   section 15.205(a) or its equipment authorization.      

     C.  License Revocation

        10.    Section 2.939(a)(2) of the rules provides that the 
   Commission may revoke any equipment authorization ``if upon 
   subsequent inspection or operation it is determined that the 
   equipment does not conform to the pertinent technical 
   requirements or to the representations made in the original 
   application.''12  Furthermore, section 2.939(a)(4) of the 
   rules states that the Commission may revoke any equipment 
   authorization because of conditions coming to its attention 
   ``which would warrant it in refusing to grant an original 
   application.''13  In light of the above, we conclude that 
   both the LRT-1 learned mode transmitter manufactured by Tung 
   Shih under FCC ID No. MMORC0196M and the RMC-535 learned mode 
   transmitter manufactured by Tung Shih under FCC ID No. 
   MMORMC575 do not conform to the applicable technical 
   requirements for learned mode transmitters.  We further 
   conclude that, had the Commission been aware of the technical 
   capability of these devices, it could have refused to grant 
   Tung Shih's original applications for equipment authorization 
   for each such device.  Based on the foregoing, we conclude 
   that the equipment authorizations held by Tung Shih for its 
   learned mode transmitters, FCC ID Nos. MMORC0196M and 
   MMORMC575, should be revoked.

IV.  ORDERING CLAUSES

        11.     Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to 47 
   C.F.R.  2.939(b), the equipment authorizations, FCC ID Nos. 
   MMORC0196M and MMORMC575, held by Tung Shih ARE REVOKED, 
   effective the fortieth (40th) day after release of this Order 
   of Revocation, unless Tung Shih files a petition for 
   reconsideration or application for review within thirty (30) 
   days of the release of this Order of Revocation, in which 
   case the effective date will be suspended, pending further 
   Order of the Commission.  

        12.    IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order of 
   Revocation shall be sent by Registered Mail, Return Receipt 
   Requested, and by Federal Express, to Tung Shih Technology 
   Co., Ltd., 7F-10, No. 130, Ssu Wei Road, Hsin Chu City, 300 
   Taiwan.  


                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


     
                         David H. Solomon
                         Chief, Enforcement Bureau
  




_________________________

1 47 C.F.R.  0.111(a)(17).
2 47 C.F.R.  15.205(a).
3 Order to Show Cause, 20 FCC Rcd 1668 (2005) (``OSC'').

4 47 C.F.R.  2.939(b) states: ``Revocation of an equipment 
authorization shall be made in the same manner as revocation of 
radio station licenses.''  Revocation of radio station licenses 
is governed by sections 1.91 and 1.92 of the Commission's rules.  
47 C.F.R.  1.91, 1.92.  Consequently, we will refer to those 
rules herein.
    
5 See 47 C.F.R.  1.91(c).   
6
 See also 47 C.F.R.  1.92(c).  This rule provides that, whenever 
a hearing is waived, the Presiding Administrative Law Judge 
shall, at the earliest practicable date, issue an order reciting 
the events or circumstances constituting a waiver of hearing, 
terminating the hearing proceeding, and certifying the case to 
the Commission.  See also 47 C.F.R.  1.92(a).
   
7 Memorandum Opinion and Order, FCC 05M-15 (rel. Mar. 23, 2005).  
Therein, the Presiding Judge determined that the Commission had 
sent the OSC to Tung Shih, both by registered mail and by 
facsimile, and that Tung Shih had received the OSC.   
Nonetheless, Tung Shih did not file a written notice of 
appearance by March 2, 2005, nor did it appear in person or by 
attorney at the Prehearing Conference held on March 17, 2005.    

8 Public Notice, FCC Clarifies Equipment Certification Procedures 
for ``Learned Mode'' or ``Trainable'' Transmitters, 17 FCC Rcd 
21423 (OET 2002).  
9 Section 15.3(o) of the rules, 47 C.F.R.  15.3(o), defines an 
intentional radiator as ``A device that intentionally generates 
and emits radio frequency energy by radiation or induction.''  
10 47 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart J.
11 47 C.F.R.  2.1 defines spurious emissions as ``Emission on a 
frequency or frequencies which are outside the necessary 
bandwidth and the level of which may be reduced without affecting 
the corresponding transmission of information.  Spurious 
emissions include harmonic emissions, parasitic emissions, 
intermodulation products and frequency conversion products, but 
exclude out-of-band emissions.''  
12 47 C.F.R.  2.939(a)(2).
13 47 C.F.R.  2.939(a)(4).