Certain Standard Steel Fasteners From China and Taiwan, 58536-58537 [2011-24207]

Download as PDF 58536 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 21, 2011 / Notices ALABAMA Montgomery County North Lawrence—Monroe Street Historic District, 132–148, 216, 220 Monroe St. and 14, 22, 28–40, 56 N. Lawrence St., Montgomery, 84000712 [FR Doc. 2011–24160 Filed 9–20–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–51–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 731–TA–860 (Second Review)] Tin- and Chromium-Coated Steel Sheet From Japan; Notice of Commission Determination To Conduct a Full FiveYear Review Concerning the Antidumping Duty Order on Tin- and Chromium-Coated Steel Sheet From Japan Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 6, 2011, the Commission determined that it should proceed to a full review in the subject five-year review pursuant to section 751(c)(5) of the Act. The Commission found that both the domestic and respondent interested party group responses to its notice of institution (76 FR 31633, June 1, 2011) were adequate. A record of the Commissioners’ votes, the Commission’s statement on adequacy, and any individual Commissioner’s statements will be available from the Office of the Secretary and at the Commission’s web site. Authority: This review is being conducted under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to section 207.62 of the Commission’s rules. By order of the Commission. AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. Issued: September 15, 2011. James R. Holbein, Secretary to the Commission. The Commission hereby gives notice that it will proceed with a full review pursuant to section 751(c)(5) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(5)) to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty order on tin- and chromium-coated steel sheet from Japan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. A schedule for the review will be established and announced at a later date. For further information concerning the conduct of this review and rules of general application, consult the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 207). [FR Doc. 2011–24208 Filed 9–20–11; 8:45 am] SUMMARY: DATES: Effective Date: September 6, 2011. wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Messer (202–205–3193), Office of Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (https:// www.usitc.gov). The public record for this review may be viewed on the VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:20 Sep 20, 2011 Jkt 223001 BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 701–TA–472 and 731– TA–1171 to 1172 ;Prelim. ; Remand] Certain Standard Steel Fasteners From China and Taiwan United States International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice of remand proceedings AGENCY: The U.S. International Trade Commission (‘‘Commission’’) hereby gives notice of the court-ordered remand of its preliminary determinations in Investigation Nos. 701–TA–472 and 731–TA–1171 to 1172 (Preliminary) concerning certain standard steel fasteners (‘‘CSSF’’) from China and Taiwan. For further information concerning the conduct of these remand proceedings and rules of general application, consult the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subpart A (19 CFR part 207). DATES: Effective Date: September 14, 2011. SUMMARY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas E. Corkran, Office of Investigations, telephone 202–205– 3057, or Mary Jane Alves, Office of General Counsel, telephone 202–708– 2969, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202– 205–1810. Persons with mobility impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202–205–2000. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (https:// www.usitc.gov). The public record of Investigation Nos. 701–TA–472 and 731–TA–1171 to 1172 may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (‘‘EDIS’’) at https://edis.usitc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background.—In November 2009, the Commission issued unanimous negative preliminary determinations in which it found no reasonable indication that an industry in the United States was materially injured or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of CSSF from China and Taiwan that were allegedly sold in the United States at less-than-fair value and imports of subject merchandise from China that were allegedly subsidized by the Government of China. Nucor Fasteners Division, a domestic producer of CSSF and petitioner, contested the Commission’s determination before the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT). The CIT affirmed certain aspects of the Commission’s determination, but remanded two issues to the Commission. It ordered the Commission to take ‘‘action consistent with {its} opinion.’’ Nucor Fasteners Division v. United States, Slip. Op. 11–104 at 2, 31 (Ct. Int’l Trade Aug. 11, 2011). Participation in the proceeding.— Only those persons who were interested parties to the original investigations (i.e., persons listed on the Commission Secretary’s service list) and participated in the appeal proceedings before the CIT may participate in the remand proceedings. Such persons need not refile their appearance notices or protective order applications to participate in the remand proceedings. Business proprietary information (‘‘BPI’’) referred to during the remand proceedings will be governed, as appropriate, by the administrative protective order issued in the original investigations. Written submissions.—The Commission is not reopening the record in these remand proceedings for the submission of new factual information. Nonetheless, the Commission will permit the parties to file written comments pertaining to the issues that E:\FR\FM\21SEN1.SGM 21SEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 183 / Wednesday, September 21, 2011 / Notices wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES are the subject of the CIT’s remand instructions, specifically: 1. The nature of the action the Commission should take on remand to address the Court’s finding that the Commission treated its import data as ‘‘comprehensive.’’ 2. The nature of the action the Commission should take on remand to address the Court’s finding that the Commission did not identify a rational basis for its ‘‘unqualified reliance on’’ the questionnaire response of a firm referred to in the Court’s opinion as Producer A, which reported itself as a U.S. producer of the domestic like product CSSF. Comments should be limited to no more than fifteen (15) double-spaced and single-sided pages of textual material, inclusive of appendices or other such attachments. The parties may not submit any new factual information in their comments and may not address any issue other than those listed above. Any such comments must be filed with the Commission no later than October 7, 2011. All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 201.8 of the Commission’s rules; any submissions that contain BPI must also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission’s rules. The Commission’s rules do not authorize filing of submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic means, except to the extent permitted by section 201.8 of the Commission’s rules, as amended, 67 FR 68036 (Nov. 8, 2002). In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, each document filed by a party to the investigation must be served on all other parties to the investigation (as identified by either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for filing without a certificate of service. Parties are also advised to consult with the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subpart A (19 CFR part 207) for provisions of general applicability concerning written submissions to the Commission. By order of the Commission. Issued: September 15, 2011. James R. Holbein, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2011–24207 Filed 9–20–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:20 Sep 20, 2011 Jkt 223001 INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–710] In the Matter of Certain Personal Data and Mobile Communications Devices and Related Software; Notice of Commission Determination To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on the Issues Under Review and on Remedy, the Public Interest and Bonding U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to review in part the final initial determination (‘‘final ID’’) issued by the presiding administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on July 15, 2011, finding a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the above-captioned investigation. SUMMARY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sidney A. Rosenzweig, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708–2532. 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: The Commission instituted this investigation on April 6, 2010, based on a complaint filed by Apple Inc., and its subsidiary NeXT Software, Inc., both of Cupertino, California (collectively, ‘‘Apple’’), alleging a violation of section 337 in the importation, sale for importation, and sale within the United States after importation of certain personal data and mobile communications devices and related software. 75 FR 17434 (Apr. 6, 2010). The complaint named as respondents High Tech Computer Corp. PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 58537 of Taiwan and its United States subsidiaries HTC America Inc. of Bellevue, Washington, and Exedia, Inc. of Houston, Texas (collectively, ‘‘HTC’’). Several patents that had been asserted by Apple in this investigation were earlier asserted by Apple in Investigation No. 337–TA–704 against Nokia Corp. of Finland and Nokia Inc. of White Plains, New York (collectively, ‘‘Nokia’’). On motion by the Commission investigative attorney (‘‘IA’’) in the 704 investigation and by the respondents in both investigations, the Chief ALJ transferred Apple’s assertion of overlapping patents against Nokia from the 704 investigation into the 710 investigation. See Inv. No. 337– TA–704, Order No. 5 (Apr. 26, 2010). However, Apple and Nokia entered a settlement agreement, and on July 21, 2011, the Commission determined not to review the presiding ALJ’s termination of the investigation as to Nokia in the 710 investigation. HTC remains. On July 15, 2011, the ALJ issued the final ID. By that time, the investigation had narrowed to certain claims of four patents: claims 1, 3, 8, 15, and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 5,946,647 (‘‘the ’647 patent’’); claims 1, 2, 24, and 29 of U.S. Patent No. 6,343,263 (‘‘the ’263 patent’’); claims 1, 5, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 5,481,721 (‘‘the ’721 patent’’); and claims 1 and 7 of U.S. Patent No. 6,275,983 (‘‘the ’983 patent’’). The final ID found a violation of section 337 by HTC by virtue of the infringement of claims 1, 8, 15, and 19 of the ’647 patent, and claims 1, 2, 24, and 29 of the ’263 patent. The ALJ recommended the issuance of a limited exclusion order but that no bond be posted during the Presidential review period. The final ID found that claim 3 of the ’647 patent was not infringed. In addition, the final ID found that Apple had demonstrated neither infringement nor Apple’s own practice (for purposes of establishing the existence of a domestic industry) of claims 5 and 6 of the ’721 patent and claims 1 and 7 of the ’983 patent. The final ID concluded that HTC had not demonstrated that any of the asserted patent claims were invalid. On August 1, 2011, HTC, Apple, and the IA each petitioned for review of the final ID. HTC and the IA challenge the ALJ’s finding of a violation of section 337 for the ’647 and ’263 patents. In addition, HTC challenged some of the final ID’s findings with respect to the ’721 and ’983 patents. Apple’s petition challenges the ALJ’s finding of no violation for the ’721 and ’983 patents. Apple does not contest the ALJ’s determination that HTC did not infringe claim 3 of the ’647 patent. On August E:\FR\FM\21SEN1.SGM 21SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 183 (Wednesday, September 21, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58536-58537]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24207]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation Nos. 701-TA-472 and 731-TA-1171 to 1172 ;Prelim. ; 
Remand]


Certain Standard Steel Fasteners From China and Taiwan

AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice of remand proceedings

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. International Trade Commission (``Commission'') 
hereby gives notice of the court-ordered remand of its preliminary 
determinations in Investigation Nos. 701-TA-472 and 731-TA-1171 to 1172 
(Preliminary) concerning certain standard steel fasteners (``CSSF'') 
from China and Taiwan. For further information concerning the conduct 
of these remand proceedings and rules of general application, consult 
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A 
through E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, subpart A (19 CFR part 207).

DATES: Effective Date: September 14, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas E. Corkran, Office of 
Investigations, telephone 202-205-3057, or Mary Jane Alves, Office of 
General Counsel, telephone 202-708-2969, U.S. International Trade 
Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436. Hearing-impaired 
persons can obtain information on this matter by contacting the 
Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. Persons with mobility 
impairments who will need special assistance in gaining access to the 
Commission should contact the Office of the Secretary at 202-205-2000. 
General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by 
accessing its Internet server (https://www.usitc.gov). The public record 
of Investigation Nos. 701-TA-472 and 731-TA-1171 to 1172 may be viewed 
on the Commission's electronic docket (``EDIS'') at https://edis.usitc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Background.--In November 2009, the Commission issued unanimous 
negative preliminary determinations in which it found no reasonable 
indication that an industry in the United States was materially injured 
or threatened with material injury by reason of imports of CSSF from 
China and Taiwan that were allegedly sold in the United States at less-
than-fair value and imports of subject merchandise from China that were 
allegedly subsidized by the Government of China. Nucor Fasteners 
Division, a domestic producer of CSSF and petitioner, contested the 
Commission's determination before the U.S. Court of International Trade 
(CIT). The CIT affirmed certain aspects of the Commission's 
determination, but remanded two issues to the Commission. It ordered 
the Commission to take ``action consistent with {its{time}  opinion.'' 
Nucor Fasteners Division v. United States, Slip. Op. 11-104 at 2, 31 
(Ct. Int'l Trade Aug. 11, 2011).
    Participation in the proceeding.--Only those persons who were 
interested parties to the original investigations (i.e., persons listed 
on the Commission Secretary's service list) and participated in the 
appeal proceedings before the CIT may participate in the remand 
proceedings. Such persons need not re-file their appearance notices or 
protective order applications to participate in the remand proceedings. 
Business proprietary information (``BPI'') referred to during the 
remand proceedings will be governed, as appropriate, by the 
administrative protective order issued in the original investigations.
    Written submissions.--The Commission is not reopening the record in 
these remand proceedings for the submission of new factual information. 
Nonetheless, the Commission will permit the parties to file written 
comments pertaining to the issues that

[[Page 58537]]

are the subject of the CIT's remand instructions, specifically:
    1. The nature of the action the Commission should take on remand to 
address the Court's finding that the Commission treated its import data 
as ``comprehensive.''
    2. The nature of the action the Commission should take on remand to 
address the Court's finding that the Commission did not identify a 
rational basis for its ``unqualified reliance on'' the questionnaire 
response of a firm referred to in the Court's opinion as Producer A, 
which reported itself as a U.S. producer of the domestic like product 
CSSF.

Comments should be limited to no more than fifteen (15) double-spaced 
and single-sided pages of textual material, inclusive of appendices or 
other such attachments. The parties may not submit any new factual 
information in their comments and may not address any issue other than 
those listed above. Any such comments must be filed with the Commission 
no later than October 7, 2011.
    All written submissions must conform with the provisions of section 
201.8 of the Commission's rules; any submissions that contain BPI must 
also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6, 207.3, and 207.7 
of the Commission's rules. The Commission's rules do not authorize 
filing of submissions with the Secretary by facsimile or electronic 
means, except to the extent permitted by section 201.8 of the 
Commission's rules, as amended, 67 FR 68036 (Nov. 8, 2002).
    In accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission's 
rules, each document filed by a party to the investigation must be 
served on all other parties to the investigation (as identified by 
either the public or BPI service list), and a certificate of service 
must be timely filed. The Secretary will not accept a document for 
filing without a certificate of service.
    Parties are also advised to consult with the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure, part 201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 
201), and part 207, subpart A (19 CFR part 207) for provisions of 
general applicability concerning written submissions to the Commission.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: September 15, 2011.
James R. Holbein,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011-24207 Filed 9-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.