In the Matter of: Certain Hydraulic Excavators, 65879-65880 [E8-26319]

Download as PDF hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 215 / Wednesday, November 5, 2008 / Notices York and remained with them when the community resettled in Wisconsin. Today their descendants are members of the Stockbridge Munsee Community. Other Munsee people joined communities comprised primarily of people from southern New Jersey and Pennsylvania who spoke the Unami dialect of the Delaware language. These combined Delaware communities migrated westward and eventually settled in Oklahoma. Today descendants of these communities are members of the Delaware Nation, Oklahoma or the Delaware Tribe of the Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma. Officials of Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (9–10), the human remains described above represent the physical remains of 42 individuals of Native American ancestry. Officials of Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area also have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (3)(A), the 5,566 objects described above are reasonably believed to have been placed with or near individual human remains at the time of death or later as part of the death rite or ceremony. Lastly, officials of Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area have determined that, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001 (2), there is a relationship of shared group identity that can be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and the Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma; Delaware Nation, Oklahoma; and Stockbridge Munsee Community, Wisconsin. A cultural affiliation determination was made with the Delaware Tribe of Indians, Oklahoma prior to its change in status. This determination is reflected in this notice as affiliation with the Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma. Representatives of any other Indian tribe that believes itself to be culturally affiliated with the human remains and associated funerary objects should contact John J. Donahue, superintendent, Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, River Road, Bushkill, PA 18324, telephone (570) 426–2418, before December 5, 2008. Repatriation of the human remains and associated funerary objects to the Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma; Delaware Nation, Oklahoma; and Stockbridge Munsee Community, Wisconsin may proceed after that date if no additional claimants come forward. Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area is responsible for notifying the Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma; Delaware Nation, Oklahoma; and Stockbridge Munsee Community, VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:24 Nov 04, 2008 Jkt 217001 Wisconsin that this notice has been published. Dated: October 21, 2008. Sherry Hutt, Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. E8–26350 Filed 11–4–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–50–S INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–582] In the Matter of: Certain Hydraulic Excavators and Components Thereof; Notice of Commission Decision To Review the Administrative Law Judge’s Final Initial Determination; Schedule for Written Submissions U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to review the presiding administrative law judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) final initial determination, Order No. 67, in the above-captioned investigation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan Engler, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–3112. Copies of non-confidential 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 at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https:// edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on (202) 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 29, 2006, the Commission instituted this investigation, based on a complaint filed by Caterpillar Inc. (‘‘Caterpillar’’) of Peoria, Illinois. The complaint alleges violations of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain hydraulic excavators and components thereof by reason of PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 65879 infringement of U.S. Trademark Registration No. 2,140,606, U.S. Trademark Registration No. 2,421,077, U.S. Trademark Registration No. 2,140,605, and U.S. Trademark Registration No. 2,448,848. The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The complaint named twenty one (21) firms as respondents. The complainant requested that the Commission issue a general exclusion order and cease and desist orders. Two respondents, Barkley Industries LLC (‘‘Barkley’’) and Frontera Equipment Sales (‘‘Frontera’’), have been found in default. Nineteen respondents have been terminated as a result of settlement agreements. On September 9, 2008, the ALJ issued an initial determination, Order No. 67, granting Caterpillar’s motion for summary determination concerning violations of section 337. He also issued his recommended determinations on remedy and bonding. No petitions for review of the initial determination were filed. On October 8, 2008, the Commission extended the date for determining whether to review the initial determination until October 30, 2008. The Commission has determined to review Order No. 67. The Commission requests briefing by the parties, based on the record, on the following questions: 1. Has Caterpillar rebutted the presumption established by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Bourdeau Bros., Inc. v. International Trade Commission, 444 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2006), that its official U.S. dealers had apparent authority to sell gray market hydraulic excavators in the United States? If not, could Caterpillar rebut the presumption if given the opportunity to supplement its motion for summary determination of no violation? For background concerning the Commission’s analytical approach in gray market cases, please refer to the Commission Opinion in Certain Agricultural Vehicles and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337–TA–487 (Aug. 25, 2008). 2. Did any of Caterpillar’s overseas affiliates, subsidiaries, and/or official dealers sell gray market hydraulic excavators to or in the United States? If so, has Caterpillar rebutted, or if given the opportunity could Caterpillar rebut, the presumption that these dealers had actual or apparent authority to sell these excavators in the United States? Also, how many gray market sales were made to or in the United States by E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM 05NON1 hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with NOTICES 65880 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 215 / Wednesday, November 5, 2008 / Notices Caterpillar’s overseas affiliates, subsidiaries, and official dealers? 3. Does the record indicate the total quantity of gray market sales made in the United States from 2000 to 2006? If not, could Caterpillar provide this information if given the opportunity to supplement its motion for summary determination of no violation? In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the Commission may issue an order that results in the exclusion of the subject articles from entry into the United States. Accordingly, the Commission is interested in receiving written submissions that address the form of remedy, if any, that should be ordered. If a party seeks exclusion of an article from entry into the United States for purposes other than entry for consumption, the party should so indicate and provide information establishing that activities involving other types of entry either are adversely affecting it or likely to do so. For background, see In the Matter of Certain Devices for Connecting Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994) (Commission Opinion). If the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders would have on (1) the public health and welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S. production of articles that are like or directly competitive with those that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. consumers. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving written submissions that address the aforementioned public interest factors in the context of this investigation. If the Commission orders some form of remedy, the U.S. Trade Representative, as delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve or disapprove the Commission’s action. See Presidential Memorandum of July 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period, the subject articles would be entitled to enter the United States under bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of the bond that should be imposed if a remedy is ordered. Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation are requested to file written submission on the issues identified in this notice. Parties to the VerDate Aug<31>2005 17:24 Nov 04, 2008 Jkt 217001 investigation, interested government agencies, and any other interested parties are encouraged to file written submissions on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Such submissions should address the recommended determinations on remedy and bonding which were made by the ALJ in Order No. 67. Complainant and the Commission investigative attorney are also requested to submit proposed remedial orders for the Commission’s consideration. Complainant is further requested to state the HTSUS numbers under which the accused products are imported. Written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no later than close of business on Tuesday, November 18, 2008. Reply submissions must be filed no later than the close of business on Tuesday, November 25, 2008. No further submissions on these issues will be permitted unless otherwise ordered by the Commission. Persons filing written submissions must file the original document and 12 true copies thereof with the Office of the Secretary on or before the aforementioned deadlines. Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment unless the information has already been granted such treatment during the proceedings. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary of the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 210.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is sought will be treated accordingly. All nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary. The authority for the Commission’s determination is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in section 210.16 and 210.42–46 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.16; 210.42–46). Issued: October 30, 2008. By order of the Commission. Marilyn R. Abbott, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. E8–26319 Filed 11–4–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–652] In the Matter of Certain Rubber Antidegradants, Antidegradant Intermediates and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Determination Not To Review an Initial Determination of the Administrative Law Judge Granting Sinorgchem’s Summary Determination Motion and Kumho’s Summary Determination Motion; Termination of the Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review an initial determination of the presiding administrative law judge granting respondents’ summary determination motions in the abovecaptioned investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337. This action terminates the investigation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Worth, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–3065. Copies of non-confidential 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 at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https:// edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on (202) 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 10, 2008, the Commission instituted this investigation based upon a complaint filed on behalf of Flexsys America L.P. (St. Louis, Missouri) (‘‘Flexsys’’). The complaint, as supplemented, alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section 337’’), in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM 05NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 215 (Wednesday, November 5, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65879-65880]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-26319]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-582]


In the Matter of: Certain Hydraulic Excavators and Components 
Thereof; Notice of Commission Decision To Review the Administrative Law 
Judge's Final Initial Determination; Schedule for Written Submissions

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined to review the presiding administrative law 
judge's (``ALJ'') final initial determination, Order No. 67, in the 
above-captioned investigation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonathan Engler, Office of the General 
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3112. Copies of non-
confidential 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 at 
https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be 
viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://
edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information 
on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD 
terminal on (202) 205-1810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 29, 2006, the Commission 
instituted this investigation, based on a complaint filed by 
Caterpillar Inc. (``Caterpillar'') of Peoria, Illinois. The complaint 
alleges violations of section 337 in the importation into the United 
States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States 
after importation of certain hydraulic excavators and components 
thereof by reason of infringement of U.S. Trademark Registration No. 
2,140,606, U.S. Trademark Registration No. 2,421,077, U.S. Trademark 
Registration No. 2,140,605, and U.S. Trademark Registration No. 
2,448,848. The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United 
States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The 
complaint named twenty one (21) firms as respondents. The complainant 
requested that the Commission issue a general exclusion order and cease 
and desist orders. Two respondents, Barkley Industries LLC 
(``Barkley'') and Frontera Equipment Sales (``Frontera''), have been 
found in default. Nineteen respondents have been terminated as a result 
of settlement agreements.
    On September 9, 2008, the ALJ issued an initial determination, 
Order No. 67, granting Caterpillar's motion for summary determination 
concerning violations of section 337. He also issued his recommended 
determinations on remedy and bonding. No petitions for review of the 
initial determination were filed. On October 8, 2008, the Commission 
extended the date for determining whether to review the initial 
determination until October 30, 2008.
    The Commission has determined to review Order No. 67. The 
Commission requests briefing by the parties, based on the record, on 
the following questions:
    1. Has Caterpillar rebutted the presumption established by the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Bourdeau Bros., Inc. v. 
International Trade Commission, 444 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2006), that 
its official U.S. dealers had apparent authority to sell gray market 
hydraulic excavators in the United States? If not, could Caterpillar 
rebut the presumption if given the opportunity to supplement its motion 
for summary determination of no violation? For background concerning 
the Commission's analytical approach in gray market cases, please refer 
to the Commission Opinion in Certain Agricultural Vehicles and 
Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-487 (Aug. 25, 2008).
    2. Did any of Caterpillar's overseas affiliates, subsidiaries, and/
or official dealers sell gray market hydraulic excavators to or in the 
United States? If so, has Caterpillar rebutted, or if given the 
opportunity could Caterpillar rebut, the presumption that these dealers 
had actual or apparent authority to sell these excavators in the United 
States? Also, how many gray market sales were made to or in the United 
States by

[[Page 65880]]

Caterpillar's overseas affiliates, subsidiaries, and official dealers?
    3. Does the record indicate the total quantity of gray market sales 
made in the United States from 2000 to 2006? If not, could Caterpillar 
provide this information if given the opportunity to supplement its 
motion for summary determination of no violation?
    In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the 
Commission may issue an order that results in the exclusion of the 
subject articles from entry into the United States. Accordingly, the 
Commission is interested in receiving written submissions that address 
the form of remedy, if any, that should be ordered. If a party seeks 
exclusion of an article from entry into the United States for purposes 
other than entry for consumption, the party should so indicate and 
provide information establishing that activities involving other types 
of entry either are adversely affecting it or likely to do so. For 
background, see In the Matter of Certain Devices for Connecting 
Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337-TA-360, USITC Pub. No. 2843 
(December 1994) (Commission Opinion).
    If the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must 
consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The 
factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an 
exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders would have on (1) the 
public health and welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S. 
economy, (3) U.S. production of articles that are like or directly 
competitive with those that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. 
consumers. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving written 
submissions that address the aforementioned public interest factors in 
the context of this investigation.
    If the Commission orders some form of remedy, the U.S. Trade 
Representative, as delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve 
or disapprove the Commission's action. See Presidential Memorandum of 
July 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). During this period, the 
subject articles would be entitled to enter the United States under 
bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and prescribed by the 
Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is therefore interested in 
receiving submissions concerning the amount of the bond that should be 
imposed if a remedy is ordered.
    Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation are requested 
to file written submission on the issues identified in this notice. 
Parties to the investigation, interested government agencies, and any 
other interested parties are encouraged to file written submissions on 
the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Such 
submissions should address the recommended determinations on remedy and 
bonding which were made by the ALJ in Order No. 67. Complainant and the 
Commission investigative attorney are also requested to submit proposed 
remedial orders for the Commission's consideration. Complainant is 
further requested to state the HTSUS numbers under which the accused 
products are imported. Written submissions and proposed remedial orders 
must be filed no later than close of business on Tuesday, November 18, 
2008. Reply submissions must be filed no later than the close of 
business on Tuesday, November 25, 2008. No further submissions on these 
issues will be permitted unless otherwise ordered by the Commission.
    Persons filing written submissions must file the original document 
and 12 true copies thereof with the Office of the Secretary on or 
before the aforementioned deadlines. Any person desiring to submit a 
document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential 
treatment unless the information has already been granted such 
treatment during the proceedings. All such requests should be directed 
to the Secretary of the Commission and must include a full statement of 
the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 
210.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is 
sought will be treated accordingly. All non-confidential written 
submissions will be available for public inspection at the Office of 
the Secretary.
    The authority for the Commission's determination is contained in 
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and 
in section 210.16 and 210.42-46 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (19 CFR 210.16; 210.42-46).

    Issued: October 30, 2008.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E8-26319 Filed 11-4-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.