In the Matter of Certain Lens-Fitted Film Packages; Notice of Commission Determinations Concerning Enforcement Measures and Respondents' Request for a Stay of Any Order Levying Civil Penalties, 3385-3386 [05-1201]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 14 / Monday, January 24, 2005 / Notices Estimated Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping ‘‘Non-hour’’ Cost Burden: We have identified no ‘‘nonhour’’ cost burdens. Public Disclosure Statement: The PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. Comments: Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA requires each agency ‘‘* * * to provide notice * * * and otherwise consult with members of the public and affected agencies concerning each proposed collection of information * * *.’’ Agencies must specifically solicit comments to: (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the agency to perform its duties, including whether the information is useful; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) enhance the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) minimize the burden on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology. To comply with the public consultation process, we published a notice in the Federal Register on June 10, 2004 (69 FR 32606), announcing that we would submit this ICR to OMB for approval. The notice provided the required 60-day comment period. We received no comments in response to the notice. If you wish to comment in response to this notice, you may send your comments to the offices listed under the ADDRESSES section of this notice. The OMB has up to 60 days to approve or disapprove the information collection but may respond after 30 days. Therefore, to ensure maximum consideration, OMB should receive public comments by February 23, 2005. Public Comment Policy: We will post all comments in response to this notice on our Web site at https:// www.mrm.mms.gov/Laws_R_D/InfoColl/ InfoColCom.htm. We will also make copies of the comments available for public review, including names and addresses of respondents, during regular business hours at our offices in Lakewood, Colorado. Upon request, we will withhold an individual respondent’s home address from the public record, as allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in which we would withhold from the rulemaking record a respondent’s identity, as allowable by law. If you request that we withhold your name VerDate jul<14>2003 18:04 Jan 21, 2005 Jkt 205001 and/or address, state your request prominently at the beginning of your comment. However, we will not consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. MMS Information Collection Clearance Officer: Arlene Bajusz (202) 208–7744. Dated: November 5, 2004. Lucy Querques Denett, Associate Director for Minerals Revenue Management. [FR Doc. 05–1174 Filed 1–21–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731–TA–1070A (Final)] Certain Crepe Paper Products From China Determination On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject investigation, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) determines, pursuant to section 735(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)) (the Act), that an industry in the United States is materially injured by reason of imports from China of crepe paper,2 provided for in subheadings 4802.30; 4802.54; 4802.61; 4802.62; 4802.69; 4804.39; 4806.40; 4808.30; 4808.90; 4811.90; 4818.90; 4823.90; and 9505.90.40 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, that have been found by the Department of Commerce (Commerce) to be sold in the United States at less than fair value (LTFV). The Commission makes a negative finding with respect to critical circumstances. Background The Commission instituted this investigation effective February 17, 2004, following receipt of a petition filed with the Commission and Commerce by Seaman Paper Company of Massachusetts, Inc.; American Crepe Corporation; Eagle Tissue LLC; Flower City Tissue Mills Co.; Garlock Printing 1 The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). 2 Crepe paper as defined by Commerce in Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value and Affirmative Final Determination of Critical Circumstances: Certain Crepe Paper from the People’s Republic of China, 69 FR 70233, December 3, 2004. PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 3385 & Converting, Inc.; Paper Service Ltd.; Putney Paper Co., Ltd.; and the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union AFL-CIO, CLC. The final phase of the investigation was scheduled by the Commission following notification of a preliminary determination by Commerce that imports of crepe paper from China were being sold at LTFV within the meaning of section 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of the final phase of the Commission’s investigation and of a public hearing to be held in connection therewith was given by posting copies of the notice in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, Washington, DC, and by publishing the notice in the Federal Register of October 8, 2004 (69 FR 60423), subsequently revised on November 15, 2004 (69 FR 65632). The hearing was held in Washington, DC, on December 9, 2004, and all persons who requested the opportunity were permitted to appear in person or by counsel. The Commission transmitted its determination in this investigation to the Secretary of Commerce on January 18, 2005. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 3749 (January 2005), entitled Certain Crepe Paper Products from China: Investigation No. 731–TA–1070A (Final). Issued: January 18, 2005. By order of the Commission. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 05–1231 Filed 1–21–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Inv. No. 337–TA–406; Enforcement Proceedings (II)] In the Matter of Certain Lens-Fitted Film Packages; Notice of Commission Determinations Concerning Enforcement Measures and Respondents’ Request for a Stay of Any Order Levying Civil Penalties U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (the Commission) has determined to levy civil penalties against respondents Jazz Photo Corp. (Jazz), Jack Benun, and Anthony Cossentino, for the violation of the E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM 24JAN1 3386 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 14 / Monday, January 24, 2005 / Notices Commission cease and desist order issued to Jazz in the original investigation. The Commission has further determined not to issue a new cease and desist order as requested by complainant Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd., or to modify the existing cease and desist order or exclusion order. Finally, the Commission has deemed respondents’ request for a stay moot in view of its decision to defer enforcement efforts until appeals of its civil penalty determinations are exhausted. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark B. Rees, Esq., telephone 202–205– 3106, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Copies of all nonconfidential documents filed in connection with this investigation are or will be available for inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202–205–2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS-ON-LINE) at https://dockets.usitc.gov/eol.public. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on the matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission’s original investigation in this matter was terminated on June 2, 1999, with a finding of violation of section 337 by 26 respondents by reason of importation or sales after importation of certain lens-fitted film packages (LFFPs) (i.e., disposable cameras) that were found to infringe one or more claims of 15 patents held by complainant Fuji Photo Film Co. (Fuji). 64 FR 30541 (June 8, 1999). The Commission issued a general exclusion order, prohibiting the importation of LFFPs that infringe any of the claims at issue, and issued cease and desist orders to twenty domestic respondents. Id. The Commission’s orders were upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Jazz Photo Corp. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 264 F.3d 1094 (Fed. Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 536 U.S. 950 (2002). On September 24, 2002, the Commission initiated enforcement proceedings under Commission rule 210.75(b) against Jazz and Messrs. Benun and Cossentino (enforcement respondents), at the request of VerDate jul<14>2003 18:04 Jan 21, 2005 Jkt 205001 complainant Fuji. The Commission referred the proceedings to the presiding Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) to determine whether enforcement respondents had violated the general exclusion order or cease and desist orders issued by the Commission on June 2, 1999, and to recommend appropriate enforcement measures if necessary. 67 FR 61152 (September 27, 2002). On April 6, 2004, the ALJ issued his Enforcement Initial Determination (EID) in which he found a violation of the general exclusion order and cease and desist order by respondents. He ultimately recommended penalties of $13,675,000 against Jazz and Mr. Benun, jointly and severally, and $154,000 against Mr. Cossentino, for violation of the cease and desist order. He also declined Fuji’s request to recommend modification of the existing orders or the issuance of new orders. Fuji, Jazz, Mr. Benun, and Mr. Cossentino timely filed petitions for review. All parties, including the investigative attorney (IA), filed responses. Based on the petitions and responses, and the record developed below, which fully supported the EID’s violation findings (including that Messrs. Benun and Cossentino were subject to individual liability under the circumstances), the Commission determined not to review the violation findings and thereby adopted them. 69 FR 46179–46180 (Aug. 2, 2004). The Commission then requested, per the two-phase review established in the notice of initiation, separate briefing on whether to adopt the specific enforcement measures recommended by the ALJ. The Commission received briefs and responses from all parties. Based upon its consideration of the EID, the submissions of the parties, and the entire record in this proceeding, the Commission adopts the EID’s recommendations and analysis concerning enforcement measures, except as otherwise noted or supplemented in its order and opinion (to be issued later). Accordingly, and subject to final adjudication of any appeal of the same, the Commission has determined to impose a civil penalty in the amount of $13,675,000 against Jazz and Mr. Benun, jointly and severally, based on a daily penalty rate of $25,000 and 547 violation days. Against Mr. Cossentino, the Commission has determined to impose a civil penalty in the amount of $119,750, based on a daily penalty rate of $250 and 479 violation days. The Commission has further denied Fuji’s request for additional injunctive PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 or other relief. Finally, with respect to respondents’ request to stay enforcement of any order assessing civil penalties, the Commission finds that such relief is unnecessary and the request thus moot because, in this case, the Commission will not pursue enforcement efforts prior to the exhaustion of appeals of its civil penalty determinations, as indicated in its accompanying order and the opinion to be issued. This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and § 210.75 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.75). By order of the Commission. Issued: January 14, 2005. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 05–1201 Filed 1–21–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Pursuant to the Rivers and Harbors Act and Clean Water Act In accordance with Departmental Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby given that a consent decree in United States v. AT&T Corp., et al., (D.V.I.), Civil Action No. 2004–174, was lodged with the District Court of the Virgin Islands, Division of St. Thomas and St. John, on December 17, 2004. This is a civil enforcement action stating claims against AT&T Corp. and AT&T of the Virgin Islands for violations of the Rivers and Harbors Act (‘‘RHA’’), 33 U.S.C. 401 et seq., and the Clean Water Act (‘‘CWA’’), 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., in connection with the Defendants’ construction of a breakwater structure in the Magens Bay in St. Thomas, the U.S. Virgin Islands along the shoreline adjacent to the location where Defendants had installed an ‘‘ocean ground bed.’’ The proposed Consent Decree would resolve these violations and, among other provisions, would require Defendants to (1) Pay a civil penalty in the amount of $450,000, (2) ensure that the violation area is restored, (3) grant a conservation easement over the beach area to an environmental organization, and (4) abide by certain corporate compliance procedures to help avoid future violations. The Department of Justice will accept written comments relating to the proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30) days from the date of publication of this E:\FR\FM\24JAN1.SGM 24JAN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 14 (Monday, January 24, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3385-3386]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1201]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337-TA-406; Enforcement Proceedings (II)]


In the Matter of Certain Lens-Fitted Film Packages; Notice of 
Commission Determinations Concerning Enforcement Measures and 
Respondents' Request for a Stay of Any Order Levying Civil Penalties

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission (the Commission) has determined to levy civil penalties 
against respondents Jazz Photo Corp. (Jazz), Jack Benun, and Anthony 
Cossentino, for the violation of the

[[Page 3386]]

Commission cease and desist order issued to Jazz in the original 
investigation. The Commission has further determined not to issue a new 
cease and desist order as requested by complainant Fuji Photo Film Co., 
Ltd., or to modify the existing cease and desist order or exclusion 
order. Finally, the Commission has deemed respondents' request for a 
stay moot in view of its decision to defer enforcement efforts until 
appeals of its civil penalty determinations are exhausted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark B. Rees, Esq., telephone 202-205-
3106, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade 
Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Copies of all 
nonconfidential documents filed in connection with this investigation 
are or will be available for inspection during official business hours 
(8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the Secretary, U.S. 
International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20436, telephone 202-205-2000. General information concerning the 
Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server 
(https://www.usitc.gov). The public record for this investigation may be 
viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS-ON-LINE) at https://
dockets.usitc.gov/eol.public. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that 
information on the matter can be obtained by contacting the 
Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission's original investigation in 
this matter was terminated on June 2, 1999, with a finding of violation 
of section 337 by 26 respondents by reason of importation or sales 
after importation of certain lens-fitted film packages (LFFPs) (i.e., 
disposable cameras) that were found to infringe one or more claims of 
15 patents held by complainant Fuji Photo Film Co. (Fuji). 64 FR 30541 
(June 8, 1999). The Commission issued a general exclusion order, 
prohibiting the importation of LFFPs that infringe any of the claims at 
issue, and issued cease and desist orders to twenty domestic 
respondents. Id. The Commission's orders were upheld by the U.S. Court 
of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Jazz Photo Corp. v. Int'l Trade 
Comm'n, 264 F.3d 1094 (Fed. Cir. 2001), cert. denied, 536 U.S. 950 
(2002).
    On September 24, 2002, the Commission initiated enforcement 
proceedings under Commission rule 210.75(b) against Jazz and Messrs. 
Benun and Cossentino (enforcement respondents), at the request of 
complainant Fuji. The Commission referred the proceedings to the 
presiding Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) to determine whether 
enforcement respondents had violated the general exclusion order or 
cease and desist orders issued by the Commission on June 2, 1999, and 
to recommend appropriate enforcement measures if necessary. 67 FR 61152 
(September 27, 2002).
    On April 6, 2004, the ALJ issued his Enforcement Initial 
Determination (EID) in which he found a violation of the general 
exclusion order and cease and desist order by respondents. He 
ultimately recommended penalties of $13,675,000 against Jazz and Mr. 
Benun, jointly and severally, and $154,000 against Mr. Cossentino, for 
violation of the cease and desist order. He also declined Fuji's 
request to recommend modification of the existing orders or the 
issuance of new orders.
    Fuji, Jazz, Mr. Benun, and Mr. Cossentino timely filed petitions 
for review. All parties, including the investigative attorney (IA), 
filed responses. Based on the petitions and responses, and the record 
developed below, which fully supported the EID's violation findings 
(including that Messrs. Benun and Cossentino were subject to individual 
liability under the circumstances), the Commission determined not to 
review the violation findings and thereby adopted them. 69 FR 46179-
46180 (Aug. 2, 2004). The Commission then requested, per the two-phase 
review established in the notice of initiation, separate briefing on 
whether to adopt the specific enforcement measures recommended by the 
ALJ.
    The Commission received briefs and responses from all parties. 
Based upon its consideration of the EID, the submissions of the 
parties, and the entire record in this proceeding, the Commission 
adopts the EID's recommendations and analysis concerning enforcement 
measures, except as otherwise noted or supplemented in its order and 
opinion (to be issued later). Accordingly, and subject to final 
adjudication of any appeal of the same, the Commission has determined 
to impose a civil penalty in the amount of $13,675,000 against Jazz and 
Mr. Benun, jointly and severally, based on a daily penalty rate of 
$25,000 and 547 violation days. Against Mr. Cossentino, the Commission 
has determined to impose a civil penalty in the amount of $119,750, 
based on a daily penalty rate of $250 and 479 violation days.
    The Commission has further denied Fuji's request for additional 
injunctive or other relief. Finally, with respect to respondents' 
request to stay enforcement of any order assessing civil penalties, the 
Commission finds that such relief is unnecessary and the request thus 
moot because, in this case, the Commission will not pursue enforcement 
efforts prior to the exhaustion of appeals of its civil penalty 
determinations, as indicated in its accompanying order and the opinion 
to be issued.
    This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and Sec.  210.75 of 
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.75).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: January 14, 2005.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-1201 Filed 1-21-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.