Acting Chief Administrative Law Judge Bullock denied a motion to consolidate investigations filed by Respondents LG Electronics, Inc., LG Innotek Co., LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc., and LG Innotek U.S.A., Inc. (“LG") in Investigation No. 337-TA-785, Certain Light-Emitting Diodes and Products Containing Same (“785 Investigation”). In their motion to consolidate the 785 Investigation with the earlier instituted 784 Investigation, LG argued that such consolidation would conserve resources, allow for efficient discovery, expert reports, motions and a single evidentiary hearing. However, the motion was opposed by Complainant OSRAM GmbH and, while not opposed by Samsung, Samsung indicated that it “remained skeptical that a consolidated investigation -- which would result in an inordinately complex investigation involving a total of fourteen patents and more than 210 asserted claims -- would not work to their disadvantage.” Acting Chief Administrative Judge Bullock, finding no compelling reason to combine the investigations, agreed with Samsung that consolidation would result in an complex investigation which would not simplify and expedite the Commission’s investigations. On the same day, August 23, 211, ALJ Essex denied LG’s companion motion to consolidate filed in the 784 Investigation.