In the Matter of Certain Automotive Vehicles and Designs Therefore; Notice of Commission Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders Against Infringing Products of Respondents Found in Default; Termination of Investigation, 14070-14072 [2011-5999]

Download as PDF 14070 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 15, 2011 / Notices srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES of Wisconsin; Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan; Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians of Michigan; Sokaogon Chippewa Community, Wisconsin; Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians of North Dakota; and White Earth Band of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, Minnesota (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘The Tribes’’). On October 21, 2010, the Office of the State Archaeologist received a letter from the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians requesting disposition of the human remains and associated funerary objects from Fayette Historic State Park. However, the associated funerary objects are not part of this disposition. The Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians expressed interest in the remains, but had no objections to the disposition to the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians and did not submit a request for disposition. No objections or other disposition requests from the Indian Tribes that have Delta County, MI, as their aboriginal land have been received. History and Description of the Remains In 1972, human remains representing a minimum of seven individuals were removed from Fayette State Historic Park, in Delta County, MI, by Dr. Marla Buckmaster, an archeologist at Northern Michigan University, in cooperation with State park officials. In 1993, Dr. Buckmaster transferred the remains and entire assemblage, except for some potsherds, to the Office of the State Archaeologist, which manages cultural resources on State-owned lands. No known individuals were identified. No associated funerary objects are being transferred. Prior to 1972, a cranium at the base of a cliff found by a visitor to the Fayette State Historic Park was sent to the University of Michigan; this cranium is not part of the Office of the State Archaeologist’s collection. Later, park officials determined that human remains were eroding out of a small cave in the cliff, about 20 feet above the shoreline of Snailshell Harbor. Dr. Buckmaster found that the human remains were incomplete secondary burials covered with a layer of rocks. The mandibles were lying together in a niche at the back of the shallow cave. It is likely that part of the cave and some of the human remains were destroyed either by erosion or by quarrying that took place on the cliff in the 19th century. The use of caves for burial was a practice of Native Americans in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan for at least 2,000 years. A Middle Woodland camp is located across the harbor from the VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:50 Mar 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 burial cave at Fayette State Historic Park. The types of funerary objects found in the cave are consistent with the Middle Woodland period (circa 100 B.C. to circa 400 A.D.). In 1994, David Barondess, physical anthropologist at Michigan State University, examined the remains and found that some of the teeth were shovel-shaped incisors. In 1986, human remains representing a minimum of one individual were removed from Fayette State Historic Park, in Delta County, MI. The remains were limited to a few fragments that were unearthed while archeologists from the Office of the State Archaeologist were looking for the former porch foundations on the mid19th century Supervisor’s House, a historic building in the park. In 2001, one additional bone was found while working on the foundation of House 3, another historic structure close to the Supervisor’s House. It is uncertain if these remains are from the same individual, but the single additional bone may be associated with the 1986 fragments based on its proximity to them. Therefore, the park believes that the 1986 fragments and 2001 bone belong to one individual. No known individual was identified. No associated funerary objects are present. The earliest known Euro-American settlement in this location dates to the mid-19th century. The bones were included in soil that had been disturbed when the foundation of the Supervisor’s House was built in the 1860s. This suggests that house construction had damaged all or part of an older grave. The condition of the bones suggested great age. A Middle Woodland camp was located on this side of the park, and Middle Woodland burials were found in a cave across the harbor. It seems likely that the human remains around the two houses date to the same period, and, therefore, are Native American. At the time the human remains were removed, the land was the property of the State of Michigan. Determinations Made by the Office of the State Archaeologist Officials of the Office of the State Archaeologist have determined that: • For the human remains removed in 1972, the burial practices, types of funerary objects, and the shovel-shaped incisors are all indicative of Native American remains. For the human remains removed in 1986 and 2001, based on the manner of disturbance, age of the remains, proximity and location, the remains are believed to represent one Native American individual. • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(2), a relationship of shared group identity PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 cannot be reasonably traced between the Native American human remains and associated funerary objects and any present-day Indian Tribe. • At the time the remains were removed, the sites were on State-owned land within the aboriginal territory of The Tribes, as indicated by 19th-century treaties (see ‘‘Present-Day Tribes Associated with Indian Land Cessions 1784–1894’’ database on the National Park Service’s National NAGPRA Program Web site.) • Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 3001(9), the human remains described above represent the physical remains of a minimum of eight individuals of Native American ancestry. • Pursuant to 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1), the disposition of the human remains is to the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians of Michigan. Additional Requestors and Disposition Representatives of any Indian Tribe that believes itself to be culturally affiliated with the human remains and/ or associated funerary objects, or any other Indian Tribe that believes it satisfies the criteria in 43 CFR 10.11(c)(1) should contact the Office of the State Archaeologist’s representative, Scott M. Grammer, Michigan State Historic Preservation Office, P.O. Box 30740, 702 W. Kalamazoo St., Lansing, MI 48909–8240, telephone (517) 373– 4765, before April 14, 2011. Disposition of the human remains to the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians of Michigan may proceed after that date if no additional requestors come forward. The Office of the State Archaeologist is responsible for notifying The Tribes that this notice has been published. Dated: March 9, 2011. Sherry Hutt, Manager, National NAGPRA Program. [FR Doc. 2011–5866 Filed 3–14–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–50–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–722] In the Matter of Certain Automotive Vehicles and Designs Therefore; Notice of Commission Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders Against Infringing Products of Respondents Found in Default; Termination of Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\15MRN1.SGM 15MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 15, 2011 / Notices Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has terminated the abovecaptioned investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and has issued the following remedial orders against respondents previously found in default: a cease and desist order against infringing products of Vehicles Online, Inc. (‘‘Vehicles’’) of Charlotte, North Carolina, and a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order against infringing products of Shanghai Tandem Industrial Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shanghai Tandem’’) of China. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clint Gerdine, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708–2310. 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 http://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at http:// 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: The Commission instituted this investigation on June 17, 2010, based on a complaint filed by Chrysler Group LLC (‘‘Chrysler’’) of Auburn Hills, Michigan. 75 FR 34483–84 (June 17, 2010). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain automotive vehicles and designs therefor by reason of infringement of U.S. Patent No. D513,395 (‘‘the ’395 patent’’). The complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The Commission’s notice of investigation named several respondents including Vehicles, Boat N RV Supercenter (‘‘Boat N RV’’) of Rockwood, Tennessee, and Shanghai Tandem. On July 7, 2010, Chrysler moved, pursuant to 19 CFR 210.16, for: (1) An order directing respondents Vehicles and Boat N RV to show cause why they srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:50 Mar 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 should not be found in default for failure to respond to the complaint and notice of investigation as required by 19 CFR 210.13, and (2) the issuance of an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) finding Vehicles and Boat N RV in default upon their failure to show cause. On July 19, 2010, the ALJ issued Order No. 8, which required Vehicles and Boat N RV to show cause no later than August 2, 2010, as to why they should not be held in default and judgment rendered against them pursuant to § 210.16. Boat N RV responded to Order No. 8, but no response was received from Vehicles. The presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) issued an ID on August 11, 2010, finding Vehicles in default, pursuant to §§ 210.13 and 210.16, because Vehicles did not respond to the complaint and notice of investigation or to Order No. 8’s instruction to show cause. On September 9, 2010, the Commission issued notice of its determination not to review the ALJ’s ID finding Vehicles in default. On August 19, 2010, Chrysler moved, pursuant to § 210.16, for: (1) An order directing respondent Shanghai Tandem to show cause why it should not be found in default for failure to respond to the complaint and notice of investigation as required by § 210.13, and (2) the issuance of an ID finding Shanghai Tandem in default upon its failure to show cause. On August 31, 2010, the ALJ issued Order No. 12, which required Shanghai Tandem to show cause no later than September 14, 2010, as to why it should not be held in default and judgment rendered against it pursuant to § 210.16. The ALJ issued an ID on September 22, 2010, finding Shanghai Tandem in default, pursuant to §§ 210.13 and 210.16, because Shanghai Tandem did not respond to the complaint and notice of investigation or to Order No. 12’s instruction to show cause. On October 14, 2010, the Commission issued notice of its determination not to review the ALJ’s ID finding Shanghai Tandem in default. On October 29, 2010, complainant Chrysler filed declarations requesting immediate relief against the defaulting respondents. On November 15, 2010, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order No. 17) terminating the last remaining respondents, including Boat N RV, on the basis of a consent order. On November 29, 2010, the Commission issued a Notice that requested briefing from interested parties on remedy, the public interest, and bonding with respect to respondents found in default. 75 FR 75184–85 (Dec. 2, 2010). PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 14071 Chrysler and the Commission investigative attorney submitted briefing responsive to the Commission’s request on December 6 and 14, 2010, respectively. Each proposed a cease and desist order directed to Vehicles’ infringing products, and a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order directed to Shanghai Tandem’s infringing products. Neither party requested bonding during the period of Presidential review. The Commission found that the statutory requirements of section 337(g)(1)(A)–(E) (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)(A)–(E)) were met with respect to the defaulting respondents. Accordingly, pursuant to section 337(g)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)) and Commission rule 210.16(c) (19 CFR 210.16(c)), the Commission presumed the facts alleged in the complaint to be true. The Commission has determined that the appropriate form of relief is the following: (1) Cease and desist orders prohibiting Vehicles and Shanghai Tandem from conducting any of the following activities in the United States: importing, selling, marketing, advertising, distributing, offering for sale, transferring (except for exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for automotive vehicles and designs therefor that infringe the ’395 patent; and (2) a limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of automotive vehicles and designs therefore that infringe the ’395 patent, which are manufactured abroad by or on behalf of, or are imported by or on behalf of, Shanghai Tandem, or any of its affiliated companies, parents, subsidiaries, licensees, contractors, or other related business entities, or its successors or assigns. The Commission has further determined that the public interest factors enumerated in section 337(g)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)) do not preclude issuance of the limited exclusion order or the cease and desist orders. Finally, the Commission has determined that no bond is required during the period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)). The Commission’s orders were delivered to the President and to the United States Trade Representative on the day of their issuance. The Commission has terminated this investigation. 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 sections 210.16(c) and 210.41 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.16(c) and 210.41). By order of the Commission. E:\FR\FM\15MRN1.SGM 15MRN1 14072 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 15, 2011 / Notices Issued: March 10, 2011. William R. Bishop, Hearings and Meetings Coordinator. [FR Doc. 2011–5999 Filed 3–14–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE National Institute of Justice Office of Justice Programs [OMB Number 1121–NEW] Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comments Requested 60-Day Notice of Information Collection Under Review: Teen Dating Relationships: Opportunities for Youth To Define What’s Healthy and Unhealthy. ACTION: srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES The Department of Justice (DOJ), National Institute of Justice (NIJ) and Office of Justice Programs (OJP) will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed information collection is published to obtain comments from the public and affected agencies. Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for ‘‘sixty days’’ until May 16, 2011. This process is conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. If you have comments especially on the estimated public burden or associated response time, suggestions, or need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions or additional information, please contact Carrie Mulford, National Institute of Justice, 810 7th Street NW., Washington, DC 20531. Written comments concerning this information collection should be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attn: DOJ Desk Officer. The best way to ensure your comments are received is to e-mail them to oira_submission@omb.eop.gov or fax them to 202–395–7285. All comments should reference the 8 digit OMB number for the collection or the title of the collection. If you have questions concerning the collection, please call Carrie Mulford at 202–307–2959 or the DOJ Desk Officer at 202–395–3176. Written comments and suggestions from the public and affected agencies concerning the proposed collection of information are encouraged. Your comments should address one or more of the following four points: —Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; —Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; —Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and —Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. Overview of This Information Collection (1) Type of Information Collection: New collection. (2) Title of the Form/Collection: Teen Dating Relationships: Opportunities for Youth To Define What’s Healthy and Unhealthy. (3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the Department of Justice sponsoring the collection: Form Number: ATF F 3312.1 and ATF F 3312.2. National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. (4) Affected public who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief abstract: Primary: Youth, ages 11–22 and adult practitioners, advocates and researchers in professions related to youth and youth relationships. A recent review of the teen dating violence research indicated that youth are rarely involved in research designed to better understand this issue. The purpose of this data collection is to better Preteens (11–13) Task Teens (14–18) understand how youth conceptualize healthy and unhealthy dating relationships by intentionally involving youth in the research process. In the first phase of the study, concept mapping will be used to create a visual representation of the ways youth and adults perceive teen dating relationships. Concept mapping is a well-documented method of applied research that makes explicit, implicit theoretical models that can be used for planning and action. The process requires respondents to brainstorm a set of statements relevant to the topic of interest (‘‘brainstorming’’ task), individually sort these statements into piles based on perceived similarity (‘‘sorting’’ task), rate each statement on one or more scales (‘‘rating’’ task), and interpret the graphical representation that result from several multivariate analyses. The collection of data for all concept mapping activities will be facilitated via a dedicated project Web site. The second phase of the study includes a series of eight face-to-face facilitated discussions with relevant stakeholder groups, practitioners, researchers and youth. Guiding questions and discussion prompts, derived from the concept mapping results, will be used to gather information from the respondents on the meaning and potential use of the concept mapping results. This input will be aggregated and linked to the emerging conceptual framework that will result in a better understanding of adolescent relationship features, including the range of healthy, unhealthy, and abusive characteristics, from the standpoint of youth, and determine how prevention and intervention efforts can effectively target relationship characteristics related to abusive behavior. (5) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of time estimated for an average respondent to respond: It is estimated that 400 respondents total will participate in the concept mapping phase of this collection, and that 80 respondents total will participate in the facilitated discussions. The table below shows the estimated number of respondents for each portion of the collection: Young adults (19–22) Total task target Adults Concept Mapping Participation Targets Brainstorming ....................................................................... Sorting .................................................................................. Rating ................................................................................... VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:50 Mar 14, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 50 0 0 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 100 25 125 E:\FR\FM\15MRN1.SGM 100 25 125 15MRN1 150 50 150 400 100 400

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14070-14072]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5999]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-722]


In the Matter of Certain Automotive Vehicles and Designs 
Therefore; Notice of Commission Issuance of Limited Exclusion Order and 
Cease and Desist Orders Against Infringing Products of Respondents 
Found in Default; Termination of Investigation

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

[[Page 14071]]

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has terminated the above-captioned investigation under 
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and 
has issued the following remedial orders against respondents previously 
found in default: a cease and desist order against infringing products 
of Vehicles Online, Inc. (``Vehicles'') of Charlotte, North Carolina, 
and a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order against 
infringing products of Shanghai Tandem Industrial Co., Ltd. (``Shanghai 
Tandem'') of China.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Clint Gerdine, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-2310. 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 
http://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be 
viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at http://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: The Commission instituted this investigation 
on June 17, 2010, based on a complaint filed by Chrysler Group LLC 
(``Chrysler'') of Auburn Hills, Michigan. 75 FR 34483-84 (June 17, 
2010). The complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff 
Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the importation into the 
United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United 
States after importation of certain automotive vehicles and designs 
therefor by reason of infringement of U.S. Patent No. D513,395 (``the 
'395 patent''). The complaint further alleges the existence of a 
domestic industry. The Commission's notice of investigation named 
several respondents including Vehicles, Boat N RV Supercenter (``Boat N 
RV'') of Rockwood, Tennessee, and Shanghai Tandem.
    On July 7, 2010, Chrysler moved, pursuant to 19 CFR 210.16, for: 
(1) An order directing respondents Vehicles and Boat N RV to show cause 
why they should not be found in default for failure to respond to the 
complaint and notice of investigation as required by 19 CFR 210.13, and 
(2) the issuance of an initial determination (``ID'') finding Vehicles 
and Boat N RV in default upon their failure to show cause. On July 19, 
2010, the ALJ issued Order No. 8, which required Vehicles and Boat N RV 
to show cause no later than August 2, 2010, as to why they should not 
be held in default and judgment rendered against them pursuant to Sec.  
210.16. Boat N RV responded to Order No. 8, but no response was 
received from Vehicles.
    The presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') issued an ID on 
August 11, 2010, finding Vehicles in default, pursuant to Sec. Sec.  
210.13 and 210.16, because Vehicles did not respond to the complaint 
and notice of investigation or to Order No. 8's instruction to show 
cause. On September 9, 2010, the Commission issued notice of its 
determination not to review the ALJ's ID finding Vehicles in default.
    On August 19, 2010, Chrysler moved, pursuant to Sec.  210.16, for: 
(1) An order directing respondent Shanghai Tandem to show cause why it 
should not be found in default for failure to respond to the complaint 
and notice of investigation as required by Sec.  210.13, and (2) the 
issuance of an ID finding Shanghai Tandem in default upon its failure 
to show cause. On August 31, 2010, the ALJ issued Order No. 12, which 
required Shanghai Tandem to show cause no later than September 14, 
2010, as to why it should not be held in default and judgment rendered 
against it pursuant to Sec.  210.16.
    The ALJ issued an ID on September 22, 2010, finding Shanghai Tandem 
in default, pursuant to Sec. Sec.  210.13 and 210.16, because Shanghai 
Tandem did not respond to the complaint and notice of investigation or 
to Order No. 12's instruction to show cause. On October 14, 2010, the 
Commission issued notice of its determination not to review the ALJ's 
ID finding Shanghai Tandem in default.
    On October 29, 2010, complainant Chrysler filed declarations 
requesting immediate relief against the defaulting respondents. On 
November 15, 2010, the Commission determined not to review an ID (Order 
No. 17) terminating the last remaining respondents, including Boat N 
RV, on the basis of a consent order. On November 29, 2010, the 
Commission issued a Notice that requested briefing from interested 
parties on remedy, the public interest, and bonding with respect to 
respondents found in default. 75 FR 75184-85 (Dec. 2, 2010).
    Chrysler and the Commission investigative attorney submitted 
briefing responsive to the Commission's request on December 6 and 14, 
2010, respectively. Each proposed a cease and desist order directed to 
Vehicles' infringing products, and a limited exclusion order and a 
cease and desist order directed to Shanghai Tandem's infringing 
products. Neither party requested bonding during the period of 
Presidential review.
    The Commission found that the statutory requirements of section 
337(g)(1)(A)-(E) (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)(A)-(E)) were met with respect to 
the defaulting respondents. Accordingly, pursuant to section 337(g)(1) 
(19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)) and Commission rule 210.16(c) (19 CFR 
210.16(c)), the Commission presumed the facts alleged in the complaint 
to be true. The Commission has determined that the appropriate form of 
relief is the following: (1) Cease and desist orders prohibiting 
Vehicles and Shanghai Tandem from conducting any of the following 
activities in the United States: importing, selling, marketing, 
advertising, distributing, offering for sale, transferring (except for 
exportation), and soliciting U.S. agents or distributors for automotive 
vehicles and designs therefor that infringe the '395 patent; and (2) a 
limited exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed entry of automotive 
vehicles and designs therefore that infringe the '395 patent, which are 
manufactured abroad by or on behalf of, or are imported by or on behalf 
of, Shanghai Tandem, or any of its affiliated companies, parents, 
subsidiaries, licensees, contractors, or other related business 
entities, or its successors or assigns.
    The Commission has further determined that the public interest 
factors enumerated in section 337(g)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)) do not 
preclude issuance of the limited exclusion order or the cease and 
desist orders. Finally, the Commission has determined that no bond is 
required during the period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C. 1337(j)). 
The Commission's orders were delivered to the President and to the 
United States Trade Representative on the day of their issuance.
    The Commission has terminated this investigation. 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 sections 
210.16(c) and 210.41 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure (19 CFR 210.16(c) and 210.41).

    By order of the Commission.


[[Page 14072]]


    Issued: March 10, 2011.
William R. Bishop,
Hearings and Meetings Coordinator.
[FR Doc. 2011-5999 Filed 3-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P