Action Affecting Export Privileges; Wen Enterprises, Ning Wen, Hailin Lin, and Beijung Rich Linscience Electronics Company; Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges, 6410-6412 [05-2239]

Download as PDF 6410 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 24 / Monday, February 7, 2005 / Notices manufacturer by a company in New Jersey. The purchase order stated that end-user of the triggered spark gaps was a hospital in the South Africa. The manufacturer of the triggered sparks gaps confirmed that a standard or normal size order of triggered spark gaps for a hospital would be five to six. On or about September 29, 2003, the U.S. manufacturer made the first shipment under the purchase order to the New Jersey company. On or about October 3, 2003, the New Jersey then shipped approximately 66 triggered spark gaps from the United States to South Africa. On or about October 19, 2003, the triggered spark gaps were shipped from South Africa to Pakistan (the intended destination of the triggered spark gaps) without a BIS license by persons who were conspirators with the Respondents. Additionally, in 2003, Respondents were involved in at least two unauthorized export of oscilloscopes from the United States to Pakistan through South Africa, including one export to a Pakistani corporation on BIS’s Entity List, the Al-Technique Corporation of Pakistan, Ltd. I find the evidence presented by BIS demonstrates that the Respondents have conspired to violate the EAR, that such violations have been deliberate and covert, and that there is a strong likelihood of future violations, particularly given the nature of the transactions and the elaborate steps that have been taken by Respondents to avoid detection by the U.S. Government while knowing that their actions were in violation of the EAR. As such, a Temporary Denial Order (‘‘TDO’’) is needed to give notice to persons and companies in the United States and abroad that they should cease dealing with the Respondents in export transactions involving items subject to the EAR. Such a TDO is consistent with the public interest to preclude future violations of the EAR. Accordingly, I find that a TDO naming Pakland and Khan as Respondents is necessary, in the public interest, to prevent an imminent violation of the EAR. This Order is issued on an ex parte basis without a hearing based upon BIS’s showing of an imminent violation. It is therefore ordered: First, that the Respondents, Pakland PME Corporation, Unit 7 & 8, 2nd Floor, Mohammadi Plaza, Jinnah Avenue, Blue Area, F–6/4, Islamabad–44000, Pakistan, and Humayun Khan, Unit 7 & 8, 2nd Floor, Mohammadi Plaza, Jinnah Avenue, Blue Area, F–6/4, Islamabad– 44000, Pakistan (collectively the ‘‘Denied Persons’’), may not, directly or VerDate jul<14>2003 21:04 Feb 04, 2005 Jkt 205001 indirectly, participate in any way in any transaction involving any commodity, software or technology (hereinafter collectively referred to as ‘‘item’’) exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Export Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR’’), or in any other activity subject to the EAR, including, but not limited to: A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, License Exception, or export control document; B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or ordering, buying, receiving, using, selling, delivering, storing, disposing of, forwarding, transporting, financing, or otherwise servicing in any way, any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the EAR, or in any other activity subject to the EAR; or C. Benefitting in any way from any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the EAR, or in any other activity subject to the EAR. Second, that no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the following: A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of the Denied Persons any item subject to the EAR; B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted acquisition by the Denied Persons of the ownership, possession, or control of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States, including financing or other support activities related to a transaction whereby the Denied Persons acquires or attempts to acquire such ownership, possession or control; C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate acquisition or attempted acquisition from the Denied Persons of any item subject to the EAR that has been exported from the United States; D. Obtain from the Denied Persons order in the United States any item subject to the EAR with knowledge or reason to know that the item will be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Persons, or service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Persons if such service involves the use of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States. For purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 maintenance, repair, modification or testing. Third, that, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided in section 766.23 of the EAR, any other person, firm, corporation, or business organization related to any of the Respondents by affiliation, ownership, control, or position of responsibility in the conduct of trade or related services may also be made subject to the provisions of this Order. Fourth, that this Order does not prohibit any export, reexport, or other transaction subject to the EAR where the only items involved that are subject to the EAR are the foreign-produced direct product of U.S.-origin technology. In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(e) of the EAR, the Respondents may, at any time, appeal this Order by filing a full written statement in support of the appeal with the Office of the Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202–4022. In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(d) of the EAR, BIS may seek renewal of this Order by filing a written request not later than 20 days before the expiration date. The Respondents may oppose a request to renew this Order by filing a written submission with the Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement, which must be received not later than seven days before the expiration date of the Order. A copy of this Order shall be served on the Respondents shall be published in the Federal Register. This Order is effective upon date of publication in the Federal Register and shall remain in effect for 180 days. Entered this 31st day of January, 2005. Wendy L. Wysong, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement. [FR Doc. 05–2240 Filed 2–4–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DT–M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Action Affecting Export Privileges; Wen Enterprises, Ning Wen, Hailin Lin, and Beijung Rich Linscience Electronics Company; Order Temporarily Denying Export Privileges In the Matters of: Wen Enterprises, 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; and, Ning Wen, 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; and, Hailin Lin, 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; and, Beijing Rich Linscience Electronics Company, No. 2 Zhong Guan Cun South Avenue, Cyber Mode Room 1001, Haidian District, Beijing, E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM 07FEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 24 / Monday, February 7, 2005 / Notices People’s Republic of China 100086; Respondents. Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Export Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR’’),1 the Bureau of Industry and Security (‘‘BIS’’), U.S. Department of Commerce, through its Office of Export Enforcement (‘‘OEE’’), has requested that I issue an Order temporarily denying export privileges of Wen Enterprises (‘‘WE’’), 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; Ning Wen (‘‘Wen’’), 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; Hailin Lin (‘‘Lin’’), 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; and Beijing Rich Linscience Electronics Company (‘‘BRLE’’), No. 2 Zhong Guan Cun South Avenue, Cyber Mode Room 1001, Haidian District, Beijing, China 100086 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the ‘‘Respondents’’). BIS has presented evidence that shows that Respondents have conspired together and with others, known and unknown, to illegally export items subject to the EAR, including national security controlled electronic components, to the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) without the Department of Commerce necessary licenses. Specifically, the evidence shows that WE’s sole business is exporting electronic components and semiconductor chips to BRLE in the PRC. WE has two employees: (1) Wen, the owner of WE, and (2) Lin, Wen’s wife who runs WE. WE does not sell domestically and does not sell to any customer other than BRLE. The evidence shows that on more than 30 occasions during the period of June 7, 2002 through September 17, 2004, WE exported national security controlled electronic components to BRLE in the PRC with knowledge that export licenses were required for the items and that those licenses were neither applied for nor received. The evidence also shows that BRLE caused such exports to happen with knowledge that a violation of the EAR would subsequently occur. BRLE is a distributor and not the enduser of these electronic components. I find the evidence presented by BIS demonstrates that the Respondents conspired to do acts that violate the EAR and did in fact commit numerous 1 The EAR, which are currently codified at 15 CFR Parts 730–774 (2004), are issued under the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. app. 2401–2420) (2000) (the ‘‘Act’’). The EAA was in effect from November 13, 2000 through August 20, 2001 but lapsed on August 21, 2001. However, the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), as extended by the Notice of August 6, 2004 (69 FR 48763, August 10, 2004), has continued the EAR in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1706 (2000)). VerDate jul<14>2003 21:04 Feb 04, 2005 Jkt 205001 violations of the EAR by participating in the unlicensed export of national security controlled items to the PRC. I further find that such violations have been significant, deliberate and covert, and are likely to occur again, especially given the nature of the structure and relationships of the Respondents. As such, a Temporary Denial Order (‘‘TDO’’) is needed to give notice to persons in the United States and abroad that they should cease dealing with the Respondents in export transactions involving commodities, software or technology that are subject to the EAR. Such a TDO is consistent with the public interest to preclude future violations of the EAR. Accordingly, I find that a TDO naming WE, Wen, Lin and BRLE as Respondents is necessary and in the public interest, to prevent an imminent violation of the EAR. This Order is issued on an ex parte basis without a hearing based upon BIS’s showing of an imminent violation. It is therefore ordered: First, that the Respondents, Wen Enterprises, 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; Ning Wen, 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; Hailin Lin, 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; and Beijing Rich Linscience Electronics Company, No. 2 Zhong Guan Cun South Avenue, Cyber Mode Room 1001, Haidian District, Beijing, China 100086, and their successors and assigns and when or for acting on behalf of any of the Respondents, their officers, agents or representatives, (‘‘Denied Persons’’) may not, directly or indirectly, participate in any way in any transaction involving any commodity, software or technology (hereinafter collectively referred to as ‘‘item’’) exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Export Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR’’), or in any other activity subject to the EAR, including, but not limited to: A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, License Exception, or export control document; B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or ordering, buying, receiving, using, selling, delivering, storing, disposing of, forwarding, transporting, financing, or otherwise servicing in any way, any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the EAR, or in any other activity subject to the EAR; or C. Benefiting in any way from any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the EAR, or in any other activity subject to the EAR. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 6411 Second, that no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the following: A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of the Denied Person any item subject to the EAR; B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted acquisition by the Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or control of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States, including financing or other support activities related to a transaction whereby the Denied Person acquires or attempts to acquire such ownership, possession or control; C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate the acquisition or attempted acquisition from the Denied Person of any item subject to the EAR that has been exported from the United States; D. Obtain from the Denied Person in the United States any item subject to the EAR with knowledge or reason to know that the item will be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person, or service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person is such service involves the use of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States. For purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance, repair, modification or testing. Third, that, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided in section 766.23 of the EAR, any other person, firm, corporation, or business organization related to any of the Respondents by affiliation, ownership, control, or position of responsibility in the conduct of trade or related services may also be made subject to the provisions of this Order. Fourth, that this Order does not prohibit any export, reexport, or other transaction subject to the EAR where the only items involved that are subject to the EAR are the foreign-produced direct product of U.S.-origin technology. In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(e) of the EAR, the Respondents may, at any time, appeal this Order by filing a full written statement in support of the appeal with the Office of the Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202–4022. In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(d) of the Ear, BIS may seek renewal of this Order by filing a written request not later than 20 days E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM 07FEN1 6412 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 24 / Monday, February 7, 2005 / Notices before the expiration date. The Respondents may oppose a request to renew this Order by filing a written submission with the Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement, which must be received not later than seven days before the expiration date of the Order. A copy of this Order shall be served on the Respondents and shall be published in the Federal Register This Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect for 180 days. Entered this 31st day of January, 2005. Wendy L. Wysong, Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement. [FR Doc. 05–2239 Filed 2–4–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DT–M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security Information Systems Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Partially Closed Meeting The Information Systems Technical Advisory Committee (ISTAC) will meet on February 23 and 24, 2005, 9 a.m., at the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center (SPAWAR), Building 33, Cloud Room, 53560 Hull Street, San Diego, California, 92152. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration on technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to information systems equipment and technology. February 23: Public Session 1. Opening remarks and introductions. 2. Comments or presentations by the public. 3. Presentation on Excimer Lasers and EUV. 4. Presentation on Microwave Semiconductor Technology. 5. Overview of the STI Cell processor. February 23–24: Closed Session 6. Discussion of matters determined to be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 §§ 10(a)(1) and 10(a). A limited number of seats will be available for the public session. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. The public may submit written statements at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation VerDate jul<14>2003 21:04 Feb 04, 2005 Jkt 205001 materials to Committee members, the Committee suggests that public presentation materials or comments be forwarded before the meeting to Ms. Lee Ann Carpenter at Lcarpent@bis.doc.gov. The Assistant Secretary for Administration, with the concurrence of the delegate of the General Counsel, formally determined on January 31, 2005, pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. app. 2 (10)(d)), that the portion of the meeting concerning trade secrets and commercial or financial information deemed privileged or confidential as described in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) and the portion of the meeting concerning matters the disclosure of which would be likely to frustrate significantly implementation of an agency action as described in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(9)(B) shall be exempt from the provisions relating to public meetings found in 5 U.S.C. app. 2 10(a)1 and 10(a)(3). The remaining portions of the meeting will be open to the public. For more information, call Lee Ann Carpenter at (202) 482–2583. Dated: February 2, 2005. Lee Ann Carpenter, Committee Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. 05–2246 Filed 2–4–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–JT–M Bureau of Industry and Security Transportation and Related Equipment Technical Advisory Committee; Notice of Open Meeting The Transportation and Related Equipment Technical Advisory Committee will meet on March 17, 2005, 9:30 a.m., in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, Room 3884, 14th Street Between Pennsylvania & Constitution Avenues, NW., Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration with respect to technical questions that affect the level of export controls applicable to transportation and related equipment or technology. Agenda 1. Opening remarks and introductions. 2. Update on country-specific policies. 3. Update on regulations and procedures. 4. Review of Wassenaar Arrangement and Technical Working Group issues. Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Dated: February 2, 2005. Lee Ann Carpenter, Committee Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. 05–2247 Filed 2–4–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–JT–M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [A–570–863] DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PO 00000 5. Review of Missile Technology Control Regime issues. 6. Update on Commerce Control List issues. 7. Update on status of U.S. Munitions List review. 8. Presentation of papers, proposals and comments by the public. The meeting will be open to the public and a limited number of seats will be available. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. Written statements may be submitted at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to Committee members, the Committee suggests that you forward your public presentation materials to Lee Ann Carpenter at Lcarpent@bis.doc.gov. For more information, call Ms. Carpenter on (202) 482–2583. Sfmt 4703 Honey from the People’s Republic of China: Initiation of New Shipper Antidumping Duty Review Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: February 7, 2005. SUMMARY: In December 2004, the Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) received a request to conduct a new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on honey from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’). We have determined that this request meets the statutory and regulatory requirements for the initiation of a new shipper review. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anya Naschak at (202) 482–6375 or Kristina Boughton at (202) 482–8173; AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Background The Department received a timely request from Kunshan Xin’an Trade Co., Ltd. (‘‘Xinan’’) in accordance with 19 E:\FR\FM\07FEN1.SGM 07FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 24 (Monday, February 7, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6410-6412]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2239]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security


Action Affecting Export Privileges; Wen Enterprises, Ning Wen, 
Hailin Lin, and Beijung Rich Linscience Electronics Company; Order 
Temporarily Denying Export Privileges

    In the Matters of: Wen Enterprises, 402 Wild Oak Drive, 
Manitowoc, WI 54220; and, Ning Wen, 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, 
WI 54220; and, Hailin Lin, 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; 
and, Beijing Rich Linscience Electronics Company, No. 2 Zhong Guan 
Cun South Avenue, Cyber Mode Room 1001, Haidian District, Beijing,

[[Page 6411]]

People's Republic of China 100086; Respondents.

    Pursuant to Section 766.24 of the Export Administration Regulations 
(``EAR''),\1\ the Bureau of Industry and Security (``BIS''), U.S. 
Department of Commerce, through its Office of Export Enforcement 
(``OEE''), has requested that I issue an Order temporarily denying 
export privileges of Wen Enterprises (``WE''), 402 Wild Oak Drive, 
Manitowoc, WI 54220; Ning Wen (``Wen''), 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, 
WI 54220; Hailin Lin (``Lin''), 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 
54220; and Beijing Rich Linscience Electronics Company (``BRLE''), No. 
2 Zhong Guan Cun South Avenue, Cyber Mode Room 1001, Haidian District, 
Beijing, China 100086 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the 
``Respondents'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EAR, which are currently codified at 15 CFR Parts 730-
774 (2004), are issued under the Export Administration Act of 1979, 
as amended (50 U.S.C. app. 2401-2420) (2000) (the ``Act''). The EAA 
was in effect from November 13, 2000 through August 20, 2001 but 
lapsed on August 21, 2001. However, the President, through Executive 
Order 13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), as 
extended by the Notice of August 6, 2004 (69 FR 48763, August 10, 
2004), has continued the EAR in effect under the International 
Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706 (2000)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BIS has presented evidence that shows that Respondents have 
conspired together and with others, known and unknown, to illegally 
export items subject to the EAR, including national security controlled 
electronic components, to the People's Republic of China (``PRC'') 
without the Department of Commerce necessary licenses. Specifically, 
the evidence shows that WE's sole business is exporting electronic 
components and semiconductor chips to BRLE in the PRC. WE has two 
employees: (1) Wen, the owner of WE, and (2) Lin, Wen's wife who runs 
WE. WE does not sell domestically and does not sell to any customer 
other than BRLE. The evidence shows that on more than 30 occasions 
during the period of June 7, 2002 through September 17, 2004, WE 
exported national security controlled electronic components to BRLE in 
the PRC with knowledge that export licenses were required for the items 
and that those licenses were neither applied for nor received. The 
evidence also shows that BRLE caused such exports to happen with 
knowledge that a violation of the EAR would subsequently occur. BRLE is 
a distributor and not the end-user of these electronic components.
    I find the evidence presented by BIS demonstrates that the 
Respondents conspired to do acts that violate the EAR and did in fact 
commit numerous violations of the EAR by participating in the 
unlicensed export of national security controlled items to the PRC. I 
further find that such violations have been significant, deliberate and 
covert, and are likely to occur again, especially given the nature of 
the structure and relationships of the Respondents. As such, a 
Temporary Denial Order (``TDO'') is needed to give notice to persons in 
the United States and abroad that they should cease dealing with the 
Respondents in export transactions involving commodities, software or 
technology that are subject to the EAR. Such a TDO is consistent with 
the public interest to preclude future violations of the EAR.
    Accordingly, I find that a TDO naming WE, Wen, Lin and BRLE as 
Respondents is necessary and in the public interest, to prevent an 
imminent violation of the EAR. This Order is issued on an ex parte 
basis without a hearing based upon BIS's showing of an imminent 
violation.
    It is therefore ordered:
    First, that the Respondents, Wen Enterprises, 402 Wild Oak Drive, 
Manitowoc, WI 54220; Ning Wen, 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; 
Hailin Lin, 402 Wild Oak Drive, Manitowoc, WI 54220; and Beijing Rich 
Linscience Electronics Company, No. 2 Zhong Guan Cun South Avenue, 
Cyber Mode Room 1001, Haidian District, Beijing, China 100086, and 
their successors and assigns and when or for acting on behalf of any of 
the Respondents, their officers, agents or representatives, (``Denied 
Persons'') may not, directly or indirectly, participate in any way in 
any transaction involving any commodity, software or technology 
(hereinafter collectively referred to as ``item'') exported or to be 
exported from the United States that is subject to the Export 
Administration Regulations (``EAR''), or in any other activity subject 
to the EAR, including, but not limited to:
    A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, License 
Exception, or export control document;
    B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or ordering, buying, 
receiving, using, selling, delivering, storing, disposing of, 
forwarding, transporting, financing, or otherwise servicing in any way, 
any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the 
United States that is subject to the EAR, or in any other activity 
subject to the EAR; or
    C. Benefiting in any way from any transaction involving any item 
exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to 
the EAR, or in any other activity subject to the EAR.
    Second, that no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the 
following:
    A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of the Denied Person any item 
subject to the EAR;
    B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted 
acquisition by the Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or 
control of any item subject to the EAR that has been or will be 
exported from the United States, including financing or other support 
activities related to a transaction whereby the Denied Person acquires 
or attempts to acquire such ownership, possession or control;
    C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate the acquisition 
or attempted acquisition from the Denied Person of any item subject to 
the EAR that has been exported from the United States;
    D. Obtain from the Denied Person in the United States any item 
subject to the EAR with knowledge or reason to know that the item will 
be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or
    E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the EAR 
that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is 
owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person, or service any 
item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the 
Denied Person is such service involves the use of any item subject to 
the EAR that has been or will be exported from the United States. For 
purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance, 
repair, modification or testing.
    Third, that, after notice and opportunity for comment as provided 
in section 766.23 of the EAR, any other person, firm, corporation, or 
business organization related to any of the Respondents by affiliation, 
ownership, control, or position of responsibility in the conduct of 
trade or related services may also be made subject to the provisions of 
this Order.
    Fourth, that this Order does not prohibit any export, reexport, or 
other transaction subject to the EAR where the only items involved that 
are subject to the EAR are the foreign-produced direct product of U.S.-
origin technology.
    In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(e) of the EAR, 
the Respondents may, at any time, appeal this Order by filing a full 
written statement in support of the appeal with the Office of the 
Administrative Law Judge, U.S. Coast Guard ALJ Docketing Center, 40 
South Gay Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202-4022.
    In accordance with the provisions of Section 766.24(d) of the Ear, 
BIS may seek renewal of this Order by filing a written request not 
later than 20 days

[[Page 6412]]

before the expiration date. The Respondents may oppose a request to 
renew this Order by filing a written submission with the Assistant 
Secretary for Export Enforcement, which must be received not later than 
seven days before the expiration date of the Order.
    A copy of this Order shall be served on the Respondents and shall 
be published in the Federal Register
    This Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect for 
180 days.

    Entered this 31st day of January, 2005.
Wendy L. Wysong,
Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Export Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 05-2239 Filed 2-4-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DT-M

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.