Certain Tires and Products Containing Same; Commission Determination Not to Review an Initial Determination Granting-In-Part Complainants' Motion to Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation To Add Respondents, 78384 [2013-30795]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
78384
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2013 / Notices
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–894]
Certain Tires and Products Containing
Same; Commission Determination Not
to Review an Initial Determination
Granting-In-Part Complainants’ Motion
to Amend the Complaint and Notice of
Investigation To Add Respondents
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined not to
review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’)
(Order No. 11) of the presiding
administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’)
granting-in-part complainants’ motion
to amend the complaint and notice of
investigation to add respondents.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–3115. 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
under section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on
September 20, 2013, based on a
complaint filed by Toyo Tire & Rubber
Co., Ltd. of Japan; Toyo Tire Holdings
of Americas Inc. of Cypress, California;
Toyo Tire U.S.A. Corp. of Cypress,
California; Nitto Tire U.S.A. Inc. of
Cypress, California; and Toyo Tire
North America Manufacturing Inc. of
White, Georgia (collectively, ‘‘Toyo’’).
The complaint, as supplemented,
alleges a violation of section 337 by
reason of infringement of certain claims
of U.S. Design Patent Nos. D487,424;
D610,975; D610,976; D610,977;
D615,031; D626,913; D458,214; and
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:06 Dec 24, 2013
Jkt 232001
D653,200. 78 F . 57882 (Sept. 20, 2013).
The respondents are Hong Kong Tri-Ace
Tire Co., Ltd. of Guangzhou, China;
Weifang Shunfuchang Rubber & Plastic
Co., Ltd. of Shouguang City, China;
Doublestar Dong Feng Tyre Co., Ltd. of
Shiyan, China; Shandong Yongtai
Chemical Group Co., Ltd. of Dawang
Town, Shangrao, China; MHT Luxury
Alloys of Rancho Dominguez,
California; Wheel Warehouse, Inc. of
Anaheim, California; Shandong
Linglong Tyre Co., Ltd. of Zhaoyuan
City, China; Dunlap & Kyle Company,
Inc., d/b/a Gateway Tire and Service of
Batesville, Mississippi; Unicorn Tire
Corp. of Memphis, Tennessee; West KY
Customs, LLC of Benton, Kentucky;
Svizz-One Corporation Ltd. of Bangpla,
Thailand; South China Tire and Rubber
Co., Ltd. of Guangzhou City, China;
American Omni Trading Co., LLC of
Houston, Texas; Tire & Wheel Master,
Inc. of Stockton, California; Simple Tire
of Cookeville, Tennessee; WTD Inc. of
Cerritos, California; Guangzhou South
China Tire & Rubber Co., Ltd. of Aotou,
China; Turbo Wholesale Tires, Inc. of
Irwindale, California; TireCrawler.com
of Downey, California; Lexani Tires
Worldwide, Inc. of Irwindale,
California; Vittore Wheel & Tire of
Asheboro, North Carolina; and RTM
Wheel & Tire of Asheboro, North
Carolina. Id. Subsequently, the
investigation as to respondent
Tirecrawler.com was terminated based
on a settlement agreement.
On October 24, 2013, complainants
Toyo moved to amend the complaint
and notice of investigation to add
Shandong Hengyu Science &
Technology Co., Ltd. (‘‘Shandong
Hengyu’’), Group A Wheels, and Auto
Trend Tire and Wheel, Inc. (‘‘Auto
Trend’’) as respondents. The
Commission investigative attorney filed
a response in support of Toyo’s motion.
No other responses were received.
On November 21, 2013, the ALJ
issued an ID (Order No. 11). The ALJ
found that good cause exists to add
Shandong Hengyu as a respondent. The
ALJ also found that no good cause was
shown to add Auto Trend and Group A
Wheels as respondents. Accordingly,
the ALJ granted Toyo’s motion to amend
the complaint and notice of
investigation to add Shandong Hengyu
as a respondent, and denied Toyo’s
motion to amend the complaint and
notice of investigation to add Auto
Trend and Group A Wheels, thus
granting-in-part Toyo’s motion. No party
petitioned for review of the ID, and the
Commission has determined not to
review it.
The authority for the Commission’s
determination is contained in section
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), and in
sections 210.42–.46 of the Commission’s
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR
210.42–.46).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: December 20, 2013.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013–30795 Filed 12–24–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Filing of Proposed Consent
Decree Under the Clean Air Act
On December 19, 2013, a proposed
Consent Decree was filed, on behalf of
the United States and others, with the
United States District Court for the
Northern District of West Virginia in the
proceeding captioned United States, et.
al v. AL Solutions, Inc., Civil Action No.
5:13–cv–00169–FPS.
The proposed Consent Decree
resolves allegations against AL
Solutions, Inc. (‘‘AL’’) for violations of
Section 112(r)(1) of the Clean Air Act,
42 U.S.C. 7412(r)(1), with respect to two
of its titanium and zirconium processing
facilities located in New Cumberland,
WV and Washington, MO. Section
112(r)(1) imposes a general duty on
owners and operators of stationary
sources producing, processing, handling
or storing ‘‘extremely hazardous
substances’’ to, among other things, (i)
identify hazards that may result from
accidental releases of such substances,
and (ii) design and maintain a safe
facility.
The proposed Consent Decree applies
to all of AL’s facilities and requires,
among other things, that AL assess the
potential hazards associated with
existing and future operations, and take
measures to prevent accidental releases
and minimize the consequences of
releases that may occur. In addition, AL
must use advanced monitoring
technology, including hydrogen
monitoring and infrared cameras, to
assess hazardous chemical storage areas
to prevent fires and explosions. AL must
also process or dispose of approximately
10,000 drums of titanium and
zirconium, or 2.4 million pounds, being
stored at facilities in New Cumberland
and Weirton, WV by December 2014 to
reduce the risk of fire and explosion.
The Consent Decree also requires that
AL pay a civil penalty of $100,000, in
nine installments over two years.
The publication of this notice opens
a period for public comment on the
proposed Consent Decree. Comments
E:\FR\FM\26DEN1.SGM
26DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 248 (Thursday, December 26, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Page 78384]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30795]
[[Page 78384]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-894]
Certain Tires and Products Containing Same; Commission
Determination Not to Review an Initial Determination Granting-In-Part
Complainants' Motion to Amend the Complaint and Notice of Investigation
To Add Respondents
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 an initial determination
(``ID'') (Order No. 11) of the presiding administrative law judge
(``ALJ'') granting-in-part complainants' motion to amend the complaint
and notice of investigation to add respondents.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3115. 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
under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C.
1337, on September 20, 2013, based on a complaint filed by Toyo Tire &
Rubber Co., Ltd. of Japan; Toyo Tire Holdings of Americas Inc. of
Cypress, California; Toyo Tire U.S.A. Corp. of Cypress, California;
Nitto Tire U.S.A. Inc. of Cypress, California; and Toyo Tire North
America Manufacturing Inc. of White, Georgia (collectively, ``Toyo'').
The complaint, as supplemented, alleges a violation of section 337 by
reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Design Patent Nos.
D487,424; D610,975; D610,976; D610,977; D615,031; D626,913; D458,214;
and D653,200. 78 F . 57882 (Sept. 20, 2013). The respondents are Hong
Kong Tri-Ace Tire Co., Ltd. of Guangzhou, China; Weifang Shunfuchang
Rubber & Plastic Co., Ltd. of Shouguang City, China; Doublestar Dong
Feng Tyre Co., Ltd. of Shiyan, China; Shandong Yongtai Chemical Group
Co., Ltd. of Dawang Town, Shangrao, China; MHT Luxury Alloys of Rancho
Dominguez, California; Wheel Warehouse, Inc. of Anaheim, California;
Shandong Linglong Tyre Co., Ltd. of Zhaoyuan City, China; Dunlap & Kyle
Company, Inc., d/b/a Gateway Tire and Service of Batesville,
Mississippi; Unicorn Tire Corp. of Memphis, Tennessee; West KY Customs,
LLC of Benton, Kentucky; Svizz-One Corporation Ltd. of Bangpla,
Thailand; South China Tire and Rubber Co., Ltd. of Guangzhou City,
China; American Omni Trading Co., LLC of Houston, Texas; Tire & Wheel
Master, Inc. of Stockton, California; Simple Tire of Cookeville,
Tennessee; WTD Inc. of Cerritos, California; Guangzhou South China Tire
& Rubber Co., Ltd. of Aotou, China; Turbo Wholesale Tires, Inc. of
Irwindale, California; TireCrawler.com of Downey, California; Lexani
Tires Worldwide, Inc. of Irwindale, California; Vittore Wheel & Tire of
Asheboro, North Carolina; and RTM Wheel & Tire of Asheboro, North
Carolina. Id. Subsequently, the investigation as to respondent
Tirecrawler.com was terminated based on a settlement agreement.
On October 24, 2013, complainants Toyo moved to amend the complaint
and notice of investigation to add Shandong Hengyu Science & Technology
Co., Ltd. (``Shandong Hengyu''), Group A Wheels, and Auto Trend Tire
and Wheel, Inc. (``Auto Trend'') as respondents. The Commission
investigative attorney filed a response in support of Toyo's motion. No
other responses were received.
On November 21, 2013, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No. 11). The ALJ
found that good cause exists to add Shandong Hengyu as a respondent.
The ALJ also found that no good cause was shown to add Auto Trend and
Group A Wheels as respondents. Accordingly, the ALJ granted Toyo's
motion to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to add
Shandong Hengyu as a respondent, and denied Toyo's motion to amend the
complaint and notice of investigation to add Auto Trend and Group A
Wheels, thus granting-in-part Toyo's motion. No party petitioned for
review of the ID, and the Commission has determined not to review it.
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 210.42-.46 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure (19 CFR 210.42-.46).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: December 20, 2013.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013-30795 Filed 12-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
