Certain Food Waste Disposers and Components and Packaging Thereof; Notice of Commission Determination Not to Review an Initial Determination Granting Complainant's Motions To Amend the Notice of Investigation and Complaint, 50716-50717 [2012-20601]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
50716
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 22, 2012 / Notices
Written submissions.—Each party
who is an interested party shall submit
a prehearing brief to the Commission.
Prehearing briefs must conform with the
provisions of section 207.23 of the
Commission’s rules; the deadline for
filing is December 6, 2012. Parties may
also file written testimony in connection
with their presentation at the hearing, as
provided in section 207.24 of the
Commission’s rules, and posthearing
briefs, which must conform with the
provisions of section 207.25 of the
Commission’s rules. The deadline for
filing posthearing briefs is December 20,
2012; witness testimony must be filed
no later than three days before the
hearing. In addition, any person who
has not entered an appearance as a party
to the investigations may submit a
written statement of information
pertinent to the subject of the
investigations, including statements of
support or opposition to the petition, on
or before December 20, 2012. On
January 11, 2012, the Commission will
make available to parties all information
on which they have not had an
opportunity to comment. Parties may
submit final comments on this
information on or before January 15,
2012, but such final comments must not
contain new factual information and
must otherwise comply with section
207.30 of the Commission’s rules. 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. Please be aware that the
Commission’s rules with respect to
electronic filing have been amended.
The amendments took effect on
November 7, 2011. See 76 FR 61937
(Oct. 6, 2011) and the newly revised
Commission’s Handbook on E-Filing,
available on the Commission’s Web site
at https://edis.usitc.gov.
Additional written submissions to the
Commission, including requests
pursuant to section 201.12 of the
Commission’s rules, shall not be
accepted unless good cause is shown for
accepting such submissions, or unless
the submission is pursuant to a specific
request by a Commissioner or
Commission staff.
In accordance with sections 201.16(c)
and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules,
each document filed by a party to the
investigations must be served on all
other parties to the investigations (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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:53 Aug 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
Authority: These investigations are being
conducted under authority of title VII of the
Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published
pursuant to section 207.21 of the
Commission’s rules.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: August 17, 2012.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012–20624 Filed 8–21–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
[Investigation No. 731–TA–344 (Third
Review)]
Tapered Roller Bearings From China
Determination
On the basis of the record 1 developed
in the subject five-year review, the
United States International Trade
Commission (Commission) determines,
pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff
Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), that
revocation of the antidumping duty
order on tapered roller bearings from
China would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of material
injury to an industry in the United
States within a reasonably foreseeable
time.2
Background
The Commission instituted this
review on August 1, 2011 (76 FR 45853)
and determined on November 4, 2011
that it would conduct a full review (76
FR 72213, November 22, 2011). Notice
of the scheduling of the Commission’s
review and of a public hearing to be
held in connection therewith was given
by posting copies of the notice in the
Office of the Secretary, U.S.
International Trade Commission,
Washington, DC, and by publishing the
notice in the Federal Register on
February 29, 2012 (77 FR 12326). The
hearing was held in Washington, DC, on
June 19, 2012, and all persons who
requested the opportunity were
permitted to appear in person or by
counsel.
The Commission transmitted its
determination in this review to the
Secretary of Commerce on August 16,
2012. The views of the Commission are
contained in USITC Publication 4343
(August 2012), entitled Tapered Roller
Bearings from China: Investigation No.
731–TA–344 (Third Review).
1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19
CFR 207.2(f)).
2 Commissioner Deanna Tanner Okun did not
participate in this five-year review.
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
[FR Doc. 2012–20600 Filed 8–21–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–838]
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
PO 00000
By order of the Commission.
Issued: August 16, 2012.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
Sfmt 4703
Certain Food Waste Disposers and
Components and Packaging Thereof;
Notice of Commission Determination
Not to Review an Initial Determination
Granting Complainant’s Motions To
Amend the Notice of Investigation and
Complaint
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined not to
review the presiding administrative law
judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) initial determination
(‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 5) granting a motion
by complainant Emerson Electric Co. of
St. Louis, Missouri to amend the Notice
of Investigation (‘‘NOI’’) and complaint
to add as respondents Jiangsu Mega
Motors (‘‘Mega’’) of Jiangsu, China and
Zhejiang Zhongda Technical Export Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘Zhongda’’) of Hangzhou, China.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amanda S. Pitcher, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–2737. 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 20, 2012, based on a complaint
filed by Emerson Electric Co.
(‘‘Emerson’’), of St. Louis, Missouri,
alleging violations of section 337 of the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 22, 2012 / Notices
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) by
reason of (1) infringement of the claim
of U.S. Patent No. D535,850; (2)
infringement of U.S. Trademark
Registration No. 2,518,010 and common
law trademarks; (3) unfair competition
by passing off; (4) trademark dilution;
and (5) trade dress infringement. 77 FR
23751 (Apr. 20, 2012). The
Commission’s Notice of Investigation
named Anaheim Manufacturing Co.
(‘‘Anaheim’’), of Brea, California, as the
only respondent. The Office of Unfair
Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) was also
named as a party.
On June 7, 2012, Emerson filed a
corrected motion to amend the
complaint and NOI to add Mega as a
respondent. Then on June 28, 2012,
Emerson filed a second motion to
amend the complaint and NOI to add
Zhongda as a respondent. Respondent
Anaheim did not oppose the motions.
On June 15, 2012 and July 10, 2012, the
OUII investigative staff attorney (‘‘IA’’)
filed responses in support of the
motions to amend.
On July 17, 2012, the ALJ issued an
ID granting Emerson’s motions to amend
the complaint and NOI to add Mega and
Zhongda as respondents. The ALJ found
that Emerson made a showing of good
cause for the amendments based on new
evidence obtained during the course of
the investigation. In particular, the ALJ
noted that Emerson first learned that
Mega was involved in the production
and manufacturing of the accused
products in interrogatory responses. In
addition, the ALJ noted that Emerson
first learned that Zhongda was involved
in the distribution, transportation, and
importation of the accused products
during discovery. The ALJ further found
that neither the public interest nor any
party would be prejudiced by the
amendments. Anaheim filed a petition
for review on July 25, 2012, and the IA
and Emerson filed replies on August 1,
2012. We note that Anaheim’s petition
is not proper under the Commission’s
Rules. 19 CFR 210.43(a)(2).
The Commission finds no reason to
overturn the ALJ’s findings, and
accordingly, has determined not to
review the subject ID.
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 210.43–45 of the Commission’s
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR
210.43–45).
By order of the Commission.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:53 Aug 21, 2012
Jkt 226001
Issued: August 16, 2012.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012–20601 Filed 8–21–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of Proposed
Consent Decree and Settlement
Agreement Under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act and
Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Notice is hereby given that on August
13, 2012, a proposed Consent Decree
and Settlement Agreement (‘‘Proposed
Consent Decree’’) in In re: Eaglepicher
Holdings, Inc., et al., Civil Action No.
05–12601 was lodged with the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the
Southern District of Ohio.
In this action, the United States
sought natural resource damages under
Section 107(a) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA), 42 U.S.C. 9607(a), and
Section 311(f) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (‘‘Clean Water
Act’’), 33 U.S.C. 1321(f), related to the
release or threat of release of hazardous
substances from EaglePicher
Technology, LLC’s (‘‘EPT’’) former
facility in Joplin, Missouri. The United
States also sought response costs and
natural resource damages under
CERCLA from EaglePicher Incorporated
(‘‘EPI’’) related to the release or threat of
release of hazardous substances from
the Eagle Zinc Superfund Site in
Hillsboro, Illinois, the Delta, Ohio
residential fill sites, the Wentworth
Subdistrict of the Newton County Mine
Tailings Superfund Site in Newton
County, Missouri, the Phoenix Park
Millsite in Creede, Colorado, and the
Creta Copper Operations Site in Jackson
County, Oklahoma.
The proposed Consent Decree entered
into by the United States, the State of
Missouri, and EP Management
Corporation resolves the United States’
and State of Missouri’s claims against
EPT for natural resource damages under
CERCLA and the Clean Water Act at the
former EPT manufacturing facility in
Joplin, Missouri. The proposed Consent
Decree also resolves the United States’
claims against EaglePicher Incorporated
(EPI) under CERCLA, for: (1) EPA
response costs at the Eagle Zinc
Superfund Site in Hillsboro, Illinois; (2)
EPA response costs at three residential
fill sites located in Delta Ohio; (3) EPA
response costs at the Wentworth
Subdistrict of the Newton County Mine
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50717
Tailings, Superfund Site in Newton
County, Missouri; (4) DOI Natural
Resource Damages at the Newton
County Mine Tailings Superfund Site;
(5) USDA Forest Service Response Costs
at the Phoenix Park Millsite in Creede,
Colorado; (6) Natural Resource Damages
at the Creta Copper Operation Site in
Jackson County, OK. The proposed
Consent Decree provides for a payment
by EPMC of $822,600 to resolve the
United States’ and States of Missouri’s
natural resource damage claims against
EPT, of which $255,955 will be paid to
the United States, $658,000 will be
placed in an escrow account for the
restoration, replacement, or acquisition
of the equivalent of the injured natural
resources at the former EPT facility in
Joplin, Missouri, and $8,645 will be
paid to the State of Missouri. The
proposed Consent Decree also obligates
EPMC to pay an additional $100,000 to
resolve the United States’ claims for
response costs and natural resource
damages against EPI.
The Department of Justice will receive
for a period of thirty (30) days from the
date of this publication comments
relating to the Proposed Consent Decree.
Comments should be addressed to the
Assistant Attorney General,
Environment and Natural Resources
Division, and either emailed to
pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov or
mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S.
Department of Justice, Washington, DC
20044–7611, and should refer to In re:
EaglePicher Holdings, Inc., et al., D.J.
Ref. 90–11–3–747/2.
During the public comment period,
the Proposed Consent Decree, may also
be examined on the following
Department of Justice Web site, to
https://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent_
Decrees.html. A copy of the Proposed
Consent Decree may also be obtained by
mail from the Consent Decree Library,
P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of
Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611 or
by faxing or emailing a request to
‘‘Consent Decree Copy’’ (EESCDCopy.
ENRD@usdoj.gov), fax no. (202) 514–
0097, phone confirmation number (202)
514–5271. If requesting a copy from the
Consent Decree Library by mail, please
enclose a check in the amount of $9.75
(25 cents per page reproduction cost)
payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if
requesting by email or fax, forward a
check in that amount to the Consent
E:\FR\FM\22AUN1.SGM
22AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50716-50717]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20601]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-838]
Certain Food Waste Disposers and Components and Packaging
Thereof; Notice of Commission Determination Not to Review an Initial
Determination Granting Complainant's Motions To Amend the Notice of
Investigation and Complaint
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined not to review the presiding administrative
law judge's (``ALJ'') initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 5)
granting a motion by complainant Emerson Electric Co. of St. Louis,
Missouri to amend the Notice of Investigation (``NOI'') and complaint
to add as respondents Jiangsu Mega Motors (``Mega'') of Jiangsu, China
and Zhejiang Zhongda Technical Export Co., Ltd. (``Zhongda'') of
Hangzhou, China.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amanda S. Pitcher, Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2737. 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 20, 2012, based on a complaint filed by Emerson Electric Co.
(``Emerson''), of St. Louis, Missouri, alleging violations of section
337 of the
[[Page 50717]]
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) by reason of (1) infringement of
the claim of U.S. Patent No. D535,850; (2) infringement of U.S.
Trademark Registration No. 2,518,010 and common law trademarks; (3)
unfair competition by passing off; (4) trademark dilution; and (5)
trade dress infringement. 77 FR 23751 (Apr. 20, 2012). The Commission's
Notice of Investigation named Anaheim Manufacturing Co. (``Anaheim''),
of Brea, California, as the only respondent. The Office of Unfair
Import Investigations (``OUII'') was also named as a party.
On June 7, 2012, Emerson filed a corrected motion to amend the
complaint and NOI to add Mega as a respondent. Then on June 28, 2012,
Emerson filed a second motion to amend the complaint and NOI to add
Zhongda as a respondent. Respondent Anaheim did not oppose the motions.
On June 15, 2012 and July 10, 2012, the OUII investigative staff
attorney (``IA'') filed responses in support of the motions to amend.
On July 17, 2012, the ALJ issued an ID granting Emerson's motions
to amend the complaint and NOI to add Mega and Zhongda as respondents.
The ALJ found that Emerson made a showing of good cause for the
amendments based on new evidence obtained during the course of the
investigation. In particular, the ALJ noted that Emerson first learned
that Mega was involved in the production and manufacturing of the
accused products in interrogatory responses. In addition, the ALJ noted
that Emerson first learned that Zhongda was involved in the
distribution, transportation, and importation of the accused products
during discovery. The ALJ further found that neither the public
interest nor any party would be prejudiced by the amendments. Anaheim
filed a petition for review on July 25, 2012, and the IA and Emerson
filed replies on August 1, 2012. We note that Anaheim's petition is not
proper under the Commission's Rules. 19 CFR 210.43(a)(2).
The Commission finds no reason to overturn the ALJ's findings, and
accordingly, has determined not to review the subject ID.
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 210.43-45 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure (19 CFR 210.43-45).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: August 16, 2012.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012-20601 Filed 8-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P