Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Court Decision Not in Harmony With Final Results and Amended Final Results of Review, 13983-13984 [2011-5918]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 15, 2011 / Notices injury determination in the Federal Register. srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES On March 9, 2011, in accordance with section 735(d) of the Act, the ITC notified the Department of its final determination that an industry in the United States is materially injured within the meaning of section 735(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act by reason of less-than-fair-value imports of PVA from Taiwan. In accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, the Department will direct CBP to assess, upon further instruction by the Department, antidumping duties equal to the amount by which the normal value of the merchandise exceeds U.S. price of the merchandise for all relevant entries of PVA from Taiwan. These antidumping duties will be assessed on all unliquidated entries of PVA from Taiwan entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after September 13, 2010, the date on which the Department published its notice of preliminary determination in the Federal Register, excluding those entries entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption between March 13, 2011 (the day following the end of the provisional-measures period), and the day preceding the publication date of the ITC’s final injury determination in the Federal Register. See Preliminary Results, 75 FR at 55552. Effective on the date of publication of the ITC’s notice of final determination in the Federal Register, CBP will require, pursuant to section 736(a)(3) of the Act and at the same time as importers would normally deposit estimated duties on subject merchandise, a cash deposit equal to the estimated weighted-average antidumping margins listed below. Upon further instruction by the Department and in accordance with section 736(a)(1) of the Act, the Department will instruct CBP to assess antidumping duties equal to the amount by which the normal value of the merchandise exceeds U.S. price of the merchandise for all relevant entries of PVA from Taiwan. These antidumping duties will be assessed on all unliquidated entries of PVA entered from Taiwan, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of publication of the ITC’s notice of final determination in the Federal Register. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:50 Mar 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 (‘‘Timken’’), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (‘‘Diamond Sawblades’’), the Department Chang Chun Petrochemical is notifying the public that the final Co., Ltd ................................. 3.08 All Others .................................. 3.08 judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department’s final results and is amending the final results of the This notice constitutes the administrative review of the antidumping duty order with respect to antidumping duty order on fresh garlic PVA from Taiwan pursuant to section 736(a) of the Act. Interested parties may from the People’s Republic of China (‘‘PRC’’) covering the period of review contact the Central Records Unit of the (‘‘POR’’) of November 1, 2006, through main Department of Commerce October 31, 2007 with respect to building, Room 7046, for copies of an updated list of antidumping duty orders Greening. See Fresh Garlic From the People’s Republic of China: Final currently in effect. This order is published in accordance Results and Partial Rescission of the 13th Antidumping Duty Administrative with section 736(a) of the Act and 19 Review and New Shipper Reviews, 74 CFR 351.211(b). FR 29174 (June 19, 2009) (‘‘Final Dated: March 9, 2011. Results’’), and accompanying Issues and Ronald K. Lorentzen, Decision Memorandum at Comment 11. Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import DATES: Effective Date: March 11, 2011. Administration. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: [FR Doc. 2011–6004 Filed 3–14–11; 8:45 am] Scott Lindsay or David Lindgren, AD/ BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration—International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20230; International Trade Administration telephone (202) 482–0780 or (202) 482– [A–570–831] 3870. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China: Court Decision Not Background in Harmony With Final Results and On June 19, 2009, the Department Amended Final Results of Review issued its Final Results, where it AGENCY: Import Administration, determined that neither Shandong International Trade Administration, Chenhe International Trading Co., Ltd. Department of Commerce. (‘‘Chenhe’’) nor Greening submitted a SUMMARY: On March 1, 2011, the United separate rate application or certification, States Court of International Trade and neither company informed the (‘‘CIT’’) sustained in an unpublished Department that they had no shipments judgment the Department of of subject merchandise during the POR Commerce’s (‘‘the Department’’) final within the deadlines provided in the results of redetermination as applied to separate rate applications and respondent Shenzhen Greening Trading certifications. See Final Results and Co., Ltd. (‘‘Greening’’) pursuant to the accompanying Issues and Decision CIT’s order granting the Department’s Memorandum at Comment 11. voluntary remand request in Shandong Accordingly, for the six months of the Chenhe International Trading Co., Ltd. POR not covered by the concurrently and Shenzhen Greening Trading Co., conducted new shipper review (‘‘NSR’’), Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 09– we determined that Chenhe and 00246 (Ct. Int’l Trade April 22, 2010). Greening had not established that they See Final Results of Redetermination were each entitled to a separate rate, Pursuant to Voluntary Remand, Court and without timely filed no-shipment No. 09–00246, dated July 30, 2010, certifications, Chenhe and Greening available at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/ should be deemed to be part of the PRCremands (‘‘Remand Results’’); Shandong wide entity. Id. See also Fresh Garlic Chenhe International Trading Co., Ltd. from the People’s Republic of China: and Shenzhen Greening Trading Co., Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 09– Shipper Reviews, 72 FR 38057 (July 12, 00246 (Ct. Int’l Trade March 1, 2011) 2007). (‘‘Judgment’’). Consistent with the Chenhe and Greening timely decision of the United States Court of challenged the Department’s Appeals for the Federal Circuit determination not to rescind the (‘‘CAFC’’) in Timken Co. v. United administrative review with respect to States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) both companies to the CIT. On April 22, Producer or exporter Antidumping Duty Order 13983 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Weightedaverage margin E:\FR\FM\15MRN1.SGM 15MRN1 13984 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 15, 2011 / Notices srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES 2009, the CIT granted the United States’ motion for voluntary remand to reconsider whether the separate rate application or other relevant judicial or administrative precedent support a finding that Chenhe and Greening were on notice that they were required to submit, within a set deadline, a certification that they had no shipments during the POR in order for the Department to consider rescinding the administrative review as to both companies. On July 30, 2010, the Department issued its final results of redetermination. See Remand Results. In the redetermination, the Department reconsidered the specific circumstances surrounding Chenhe’s and Greening’s no-shipment certifications and rescinded the administrative review for both Chenhe and Greening, pending affirmance by the CIT. Id. On February 16, 2011, Chenhe moved to dismiss, with prejudice, its complaint and the CIT granted the motion on February 18, 2011. Subsequently, on March 1, 2011, the CIT sustained the Department’s remand redetermination with respect to Greening. See Judgment. Amended Final Results Timken Notice In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond Sawblades, the CAFC has held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘Act’’), the Department must publish a notice of a court decision that is not ‘‘in harmony’’ with a Department determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. The CIT’s March 1, 2011 Judgment sustaining the Department’s Remand Results with respect to Greening constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with the Department’s Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment of the publication requirements of Timken. The cash deposit rate will remain the company-specific rate established for the subsequent and most recent period during which Greening was reviewed. See Fresh Garlic from the People’s Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of the 14th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 34976 (June 21, 2010). However, because Greening had no shipments during the POR not covered by the NSR, there are no entries to suspend during the administrative review POR and, therefore, the Department does not find it necessary to instruct United States Customs and Border Protection to continue to suspend the liquidation of entries pending a ‘‘conclusive’’ court decision. SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:50 Mar 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 Because there is now a final court decision with respect to Greening, the Department amends its Final Results, and is rescinding its review of Greening for the administrative review POR. See Judgment; Remand Results. This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: March 9, 2011. Ronald K. Lorentzen, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. 2011–5918 Filed 3–11–11; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Institute of Standards and Technology Cloud Computing Forum & Workshop III National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Commerce. ACTION: Notice of public workshop. AGENCY: NIST announces the Cloud Computing Forum & Workshop III to be held on April 7 and 8, 2011. The event will include keynotes from the U.S. Chief Information Officer, NIST Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology, and other key federal officials. This workshop will provide information on the NIST strategic and tactical Cloud Computing program, including progress on the NIST efforts to advance open standards in interoperability, portability and security in cloud computing. The goals of this workshop are to present updates on: The NIST U.S. Government (USG) Cloud Computing Technology Roadmap; a series of high-value target U.S. Government Agency Cloud Computing Business Use Cases; a first version of a neutral cloud computing reference architecture and taxonomy; the NIST Standards Roadmap and the Standards Acceleration to Jumpstart the Adoption of Cloud Computing (SAJACC) process; and progress by the NIST Cloud Computing Security working group. The event will also include panels focusing on Cloud Computing across the Federal landscape as well as broad private sector topics. DATES: The Cloud Computing Forum & Workshop III will be held April 7 and 8, 2011. ADDRESSES: The event will be held at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD 20899 in the Red PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Auditorium of the Administration Building, Building 101. All visitors to the NIST site are required to pre-register to be admitted and have appropriate government-issued photo ID to gain entry to NIST. Anyone wishing to attend this meeting must register at http:// www.nist.gov/itl/cloud/ cloudworkshopiii.cfm by close of business Monday, March 28, 2011, in order to attend. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information contact Robert Bohn by e-mail at robert.bohn@nist.gov or by phone at (301) 975–4500. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 20, 2010, NIST hosted the first Cloud Computing Forum & Workshop. The purpose of that initial workshop was to respond to the request of the Federal Chief Information Officer to NIST to lead Federal efforts on standards for data portability, cloud interoperability, and security. The workshop’s goals were to initiate engagement with industry to accelerate the development of cloud standards for interoperability, portability, and security; introduce NIST Cloud Computing efforts; and discuss the Federal Government’s experience with cloud computing. The purpose of the second Cloud Computing Forum & Workshop II, on November 4 and 5, 2010, was to report on the status of the efforts and to socialize the NIST strategy to collaboratively develop a Cloud Computing Roadmap among multiple Federal and industrial stakeholders, and to advance a dialogue between these groups. Panel discussions considered the roles of standard organizations and ad-hoc standards in the cloud; need and use of a reference architecture to support cloud adoption; key cloud computing issues and proposed solutions; security in the cloud; and international aspects of cloud computing. Breakout sessions on the following day, November 5, actively engaged stakeholders, discussed these issues, and developed a series of next steps for the effort in cloud computing standards. NIST led and stake-holder driven working groups in Standards, Security, Reference Architecture and Taxonomy, Target USG Agency Business Use Cases and SAJACC were formed. The purpose of the Cloud Computing Forum & Workshop III is to elaborate on the progress of the NIST USG Cloud Computing Technology Roadmap through the activities of the NIST led, stake-holder driven working groups that were formed during the November 2010 event. The progress of these groups will be presented over a two-day span. Panel E:\FR\FM\15MRN1.SGM 15MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13983-13984]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5918]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

[A-570-831]


Fresh Garlic from the People's Republic of China: Court Decision 
Not in Harmony With Final Results and Amended Final Results of Review

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY: On March 1, 2011, the United States Court of International 
Trade (``CIT'') sustained in an unpublished judgment the Department of 
Commerce's (``the Department'') final results of redetermination as 
applied to respondent Shenzhen Greening Trading Co., Ltd. 
(``Greening'') pursuant to the CIT's order granting the Department's 
voluntary remand request in Shandong Chenhe International Trading Co., 
Ltd. and Shenzhen Greening Trading Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court 
No. 09-00246 (Ct. Int'l Trade April 22, 2010). See Final Results of 
Redetermination Pursuant to Voluntary Remand, Court No. 09-00246, dated 
July 30, 2010, available at http://ia.ita.doc.gov/remands (``Remand 
Results''); Shandong Chenhe International Trading Co., Ltd. and 
Shenzhen Greening Trading Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 09-
00246 (Ct. Int'l Trade March 1, 2011) (``Judgment''). Consistent with 
the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal 
Circuit (``CAFC'') in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. 
Cir. 1990) (``Timken''), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. 
Coalition v. United States, 626 F.3d 1374 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (``Diamond 
Sawblades''), the Department is notifying the public that the final 
judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's final 
results and is amending the final results of the administrative review 
of the antidumping duty order on fresh garlic from the People's 
Republic of China (``PRC'') covering the period of review (``POR'') of 
November 1, 2006, through October 31, 2007 with respect to Greening. 
See Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Final Results and 
Partial Rescission of the 13th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review 
and New Shipper Reviews, 74 FR 29174 (June 19, 2009) (``Final 
Results''), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum at Comment 
11.

DATES: Effective Date: March 11, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Lindsay or David Lindgren, AD/
CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration--International Trade 
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20230; telephone (202) 482-
0780 or (202) 482-3870.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 19, 2009, the Department issued its Final Results, where it 
determined that neither Shandong Chenhe International Trading Co., Ltd. 
(``Chenhe'') nor Greening submitted a separate rate application or 
certification, and neither company informed the Department that they 
had no shipments of subject merchandise during the POR within the 
deadlines provided in the separate rate applications and 
certifications. See Final Results and accompanying Issues and Decision 
Memorandum at Comment 11. Accordingly, for the six months of the POR 
not covered by the concurrently conducted new shipper review (``NSR''), 
we determined that Chenhe and Greening had not established that they 
were each entitled to a separate rate, and without timely filed no-
shipment certifications, Chenhe and Greening should be deemed to be 
part of the PRC-wide entity. Id. See also Fresh Garlic from the 
People's Republic of China: Initiation of Antidumping Duty New Shipper 
Reviews, 72 FR 38057 (July 12, 2007).
    Chenhe and Greening timely challenged the Department's 
determination not to rescind the administrative review with respect to 
both companies to the CIT. On April 22,

[[Page 13984]]

2009, the CIT granted the United States' motion for voluntary remand to 
reconsider whether the separate rate application or other relevant 
judicial or administrative precedent support a finding that Chenhe and 
Greening were on notice that they were required to submit, within a set 
deadline, a certification that they had no shipments during the POR in 
order for the Department to consider rescinding the administrative 
review as to both companies.
    On July 30, 2010, the Department issued its final results of 
redetermination. See Remand Results. In the redetermination, the 
Department reconsidered the specific circumstances surrounding Chenhe's 
and Greening's no-shipment certifications and rescinded the 
administrative review for both Chenhe and Greening, pending affirmance 
by the CIT. Id. On February 16, 2011, Chenhe moved to dismiss, with 
prejudice, its complaint and the CIT granted the motion on February 18, 
2011. Subsequently, on March 1, 2011, the CIT sustained the 
Department's remand redetermination with respect to Greening. See 
Judgment.

Timken Notice

    In its decision in Timken, 893 F.2d at 341, as clarified by Diamond 
Sawblades, the CAFC has held that, pursuant to section 516A(e) of the 
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``Act''), the Department must publish a 
notice of a court decision that is not ``in harmony'' with a Department 
determination and must suspend liquidation of entries pending a 
``conclusive'' court decision. The CIT's March 1, 2011 Judgment 
sustaining the Department's Remand Results with respect to Greening 
constitutes a final decision of that court that is not in harmony with 
the Department's Final Results. This notice is published in fulfillment 
of the publication requirements of Timken. The cash deposit rate will 
remain the company-specific rate established for the subsequent and 
most recent period during which Greening was reviewed. See Fresh Garlic 
from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial 
Rescission of the 14th Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 75 FR 
34976 (June 21, 2010). However, because Greening had no shipments 
during the POR not covered by the NSR, there are no entries to suspend 
during the administrative review POR and, therefore, the Department 
does not find it necessary to instruct United States Customs and Border 
Protection to continue to suspend the liquidation of entries pending a 
``conclusive'' court decision.

Amended Final Results

    Because there is now a final court decision with respect to 
Greening, the Department amends its Final Results, and is rescinding 
its review of Greening for the administrative review POR. See Judgment; 
Remand Results.
    This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 
516A(e)(1), 751(a)(1), and 777(i)(1) of the Act.

    Dated: March 9, 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-5918 Filed 3-11-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P