Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From China; Termination of Previously Instituted Five-Year Review and Institution of Five-Year Review, 65420-65423 [2014-26099]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
65420
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 2014 / Notices
the recommendation, should be
provided and discussed to the extent
feasible.
The Act requires that an
administering organization administer
the process for the MHCC’s
development and interpretation of the
Federal Standards and Procedural and
Enforcement Regulations. The
administering organization that has
been selected by HUD to administer this
process is Home Innovation Research
Labs, Inc. This Notice requests that
proposed revisions to the Federal
standards be submitted to the MHCC for
consideration through the administering
organization, Home Innovation Research
Labs, Inc. This organization will be
responsible for ensuring delivery of all
appropriately prepared proposed
changes to the MHCC for its review and
consideration.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements contained in this notice
have been approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520), and assigned
OMB Control Number 2535–0116. In
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, an agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information, unless the collection
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
Dated: October 29, 2014.
Teresa B. Payne,
Deputy Administrator, Office of
Manufactured Housing Programs.
[FR Doc. 2014–26198 Filed 11–3–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 731–TA–1092 (Review)]
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof
From China; Termination of Previously
Instituted Five-Year Review and
Institution of Five-Year Review
United States International
Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Commission hereby gives
notice that it has instituted a review
pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff
Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)) (the Act)
to determine whether revocation of the
antidumping duty order on diamond
sawblades and parts thereof from China
would be likely to lead to continuation
or recurrence of material injury.
Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act,
interested parties are requested to
respond to this notice by submitting the
information specified below to the
Commission; 1 to be assured of
consideration, the deadline for
responses is December 4, 2014. As
indicated below, in light of prior
proceedings in this matter, the
Commission reserves the right to waive
its regulations concerning filing of
comments on whether to conduct an
expedited review. 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).
DATES: Effective Date: November 4,
2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Szustakowski (202–205–3169),
Office of Investigations, 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 for
this review may be viewed on the
Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS)
at https://edis.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background. On November 4, 2009,
the Department of Commerce issued an
antidumping duty order on imports of
diamond sawblades and parts thereof
from China (74 FR 57145, November 4,
2009). The effective date of the order
was January 23, 2009. On December 2,
2013, the Commission instituted a fiveyear review on the antidumping duty
order on imports of diamond sawblades
and parts thereof from China (78 FR
72116, Dec. 2, 2013). The U.S.
Department of Commerce (Commerce)
initiated its five-year review of the order
on the same day (78 FR 72061, Dec. 2,
2013). On May 20, 2014, the
rmajette on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Nov 03, 2014
Jkt 235001
1 No response to this request for information is
required if a currently valid Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) number is not displayed; the
OMB number is 14–5–322, expiration date June 30,
2017. Public reporting burden for the request is
estimated to average 15 hours per response. Please
send comments regarding the accuracy of this
burden estimate to the Office of Investigations, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Commission determined to conduct a
full review of the order (Explanation of
Commission Determination on
Adequacy in Diamond Sawblades and
Parts Thereof from China, Inv. No. 731–
TA–1092 (Review)).
The Diamond Sawblades
Manufacturers’ Coalition (DSMC), an
association of domestic producers of
diamond sawblades, subsequently filed
an action in the U.S. Court of
International Trade (CIT) to declare that
the five-year reviews that Commerce
initiated and the Commission instituted
were ultra vires because they began
prematurely. On September 23, 2014,
the CIT issued a judgment in favor of
DSMC, directed the Commission to
cease further work on the five-year
review it previously instituted, and to
instead institute a review on November
4, 2014. Diamond Sawblades Mfrs.
Coalition v. United States, Slip Op. 14–
111 (Ct. Int’l Trade Sept. 23, 2014).
Accordingly, pursuant to the CIT order
in Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers’
Coalition, we are hereby terminating the
previously instituted sunset review,
effective September 23, 2014.
Pursuant to the judgment of the CIT,
the Commission is instituting this
review to determine whether revocation
of the antidumping duty order on
diamond sawblades and parts thereof
from China would be likely to lead to
continuation or recurrence of material
injury to the domestic industry within
a reasonably foreseeable time. It will
assess the adequacy of interested party
responses to this notice of institution to
determine whether to conduct a full
review or an expedited review. The
Commission is mindful, however, that
both domestic and respondent
interested parties responded to the
notice of institution it published on
December 2, 2013, and that in light of
these responses the Commission
determined that conducting a full
review was appropriate.
In order to avoid duplication of effort
and to streamline these proceedings, the
Commission is not requiring those
interested parties that submitted
adequate responses to the December 2,
2013 institution notice to submit full
responses to this notice. Instead, each
such party may simply submit no later
than December 4, 2014 a response
indicating that: (1) It incorporates the
contents of its response to the December
2, 2013 institution notice and (2) that it
is willing to participate in this review
by providing information requested to
the Commission. Any such party,
should it desire, may also provide
additional information of the nature
specified below. Parties that did not
submit an adequate response to the
E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM
04NON1
rmajette on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 2014 / Notices
December 2, 2013 institution notice may
also provide additional information of
the nature specified below no later than
December 4, 2014.
Should those parties that submitted
adequate responses to the December 2,
2013 institution notice indicate their
desire to participate in this review, the
Commission intends to issue a notice
stating that it will conduct a full review.
In light of this, the Commission reserves
the right to waive the process specified
in 19 CFR 207.62(b) for submitting
comments to the Commission on
whether to conduct an expedited review
should it be unnecessary given the
unusual circumstances of this
proceeding.
Definitions. The following definitions
apply to these reviews:
(1) Subject Merchandise is the class or
kind of merchandise that is within the
scope of the five-year review, as defined
by the Department of Commerce.
(2) The Subject Country in this review
is China.
(3) The Domestic Like Product is the
domestically produced product or
products which are like, or in the
absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the
Subject Merchandise. In its original
determination, the Commission defined
the Domestic Like Product as diamond
sawblades and parts thereof,
coextensive with Commerce’s scope.
(4) The Domestic Industry is the U.S.
producers as a whole of the Domestic
Like Product, or those producers whose
collective output of the Domestic Like
Product constitutes a major proportion
of the total domestic production of the
product. In its original determination,
the Commission determined that the
Domestic Industry comprised the
assemblers in addition to all domestic
producers of finished diamond
sawblades and component parts.
(5) The Order Date is the date that the
antidumping duty order under review
became effective. In this review, the
Order Date is January 23, 2009.
(6) An Importer is any person or firm
engaged, either directly or through a
parent company or subsidiary, in
importing the Subject Merchandise into
the United States from a foreign
manufacturer or through its selling
agent.
Participation in the proceeding and
public service list. Persons, including
industrial users of the Subject
Merchandise and, if the merchandise is
sold at the retail level, representative
consumer organizations, wishing to
participate in the proceeding as parties
must file an entry of appearance with
the Secretary to the Commission, as
provided in section 201.11(b)(4) of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Nov 03, 2014
Jkt 235001
Commission’s rules, no later than 21
days after publication of this notice in
the Federal Register. The Secretary will
maintain a public service list containing
the names and addresses of all persons,
or their representatives, who are parties
to the proceeding.
Former Commission employees who
are seeking to appear in Commission
five-year reviews are advised that they
may appear in a review even if they
participated personally and
substantially in the corresponding
underlying original investigation or an
earlier review of the same underlying
investigation. The Commission’s
designated agency ethics official has
advised that a five-year review is not the
same particular matter as the underlying
original investigation, and a five-year
review is not the same particular matter
as an earlier review of the same
underlying investigation for purposes of
18 U.S.C. 207, the post employment
statute for Federal employees, and
Commission rule 201.15(b) (19 CFR
201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014),
73 FR 24609 (May 5, 2008).
Consequently, former employees are not
required to seek Commission approval
to appear in a review under Commission
rule 19 CFR 201.15, even if the
corresponding underlying original
investigation or an earlier review of the
same underlying investigation was
pending when they were Commission
employees. For further ethics advice on
this matter, contact Carol McCue
Verratti, Deputy Agency Ethics Official,
at 202–205–3088.
Limited disclosure of business
proprietary information (BPI) under an
administrative protective order (APO)
and APO service list. Pursuant to
section 207.7(a) of the Commission’s
rules, the Secretary will make BPI
submitted in this proceeding available
to authorized applicants under the APO
issued in the proceeding, provided that
the application is made no later than 21
days after publication of this notice in
the Federal Register. Authorized
applicants must represent interested
parties, as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9),
who are parties to the proceeding. A
separate service list will be maintained
by the Secretary for those parties
authorized to receive BPI under the
APO.
Certification. Pursuant to section
207.3 of the Commission’s rules, any
person submitting information to the
Commission in connection with this
proceeding must certify that the
information is accurate and complete to
the best of the submitter’s knowledge. In
making the certification, the submitter
will be deemed to consent, unless
otherwise specified, for the
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65421
Commission, its employees, and
contract personnel to use the
information provided in any other
reviews or investigations of the same or
comparable products which the
Commission conducts under Title VII of
the Act, or in internal audits and
investigations relating to the programs
and operations of the Commission
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3.
Written submissions. The nature of
written responses to the notice by those
parties that submitted adequate
responses to the December 2, 2013
notice of institution is specified above.
Pursuant to section 207.61 of the
Commission’s rules, each interested
party that did not provide an adequate
response to the December 2, 2013 notice
but desires to respond to this notice
must provide the information specified
below. The deadline for filing such
responses is December 4, 2014. As
stated above, the Commission reserves
the right to waive the provision of
section 207.62(b) of the Commission’s
rules concerning whether the
Commission should conduct an
expedited or full review. All written
submissions must conform with the
provisions of sections 201.8 and 207.3
of the Commission’s rules and any
submissions that contain BPI must also
conform with the requirements of
sections 201.6 and 207.7 of the
Commission’s rules. Regarding
electronic filing requirements under the
Commission’s rules, see also the
Commission’s Handbook on E-filing,
available on the Commission’s Web site
at https://edis.usitc.gov. Also, in
accordance with sections 201.16(c) and
207.3 of the Commission’s rules, each
document filed by a party to the review
must be served on all other parties to
the review (as identified by either the
public or APO service list as
appropriate), and a certificate of service
must accompany the document (if you
are not a party to the review you do not
need to serve your response).
Inability to provide requested
information. Pursuant to section
207.61(c) of the Commission’s rules, any
interested party that cannot furnish the
information requested by this notice in
the requested form and manner shall
notify the Commission at the earliest
possible time, provide a full explanation
of why it cannot provide the requested
information, and indicate alternative
forms in which it can provide
equivalent information. If an interested
party does not provide this notification
(or the Commission finds the
explanation provided in the notification
inadequate) and fails to provide a
complete response to this notice, the
Commission may take an adverse
E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM
04NON1
rmajette on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
65422
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 2014 / Notices
inference against the party pursuant to
section 776(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C.
1677e(b)) in making its determinations
in the reviews.
Information To Be Provided in
Response to this Notice of Institution:
As used below, the term ‘‘firm’’ includes
any related firms.
(1) The name and address of your firm
or entity (including World Wide Web
address) and name, telephone number,
fax number, and Email address of the
certifying official.
(2) A statement indicating whether
your firm/entity is a U.S. producer of
the Domestic Like Product, a U.S. union
or worker group, a U.S. importer of the
Subject Merchandise, a foreign producer
or exporter of the Subject Merchandise,
a U.S. or foreign trade or business
association, or another interested party
(including an explanation). If you are a
union/worker group or trade/business
association, identify the firms in which
your workers are employed or which are
members of your association.
(3) A statement indicating whether
your firm/entity is willing to participate
in this proceeding by providing
information requested by the
Commission.
(4) A statement of the likely effects of
the revocation of the antidumping and
countervailing duty orders on the
Domestic Industry in general and/or
your firm/entity specifically. In your
response, please discuss the various
factors specified in section 752(a) of the
Act (19 U.S.C. 1675a(a)) including the
likely volume of subject imports, likely
price effects of subject imports, and
likely impact of imports of Subject
Merchandise on the Domestic Industry.
(5) A list of all known and currently
operating U.S. producers of the
Domestic Like Product. Identify any
known related parties and the nature of
the relationship as defined in section
771(4)(B) of the Act (19 U.S.C.
1677(4)(B)).
(6) A list of all known and currently
operating U.S. importers of the Subject
Merchandise and producers of the
Subject Merchandise in the Subject
Country that currently export or have
exported Subject Merchandise to the
United States or other countries since
the Order Date.
(7) A list of 3–5 leading purchasers in
the U.S. market for the Domestic Like
Product and the Subject Merchandise
(including street address, World Wide
Web address, and the name, telephone
number, fax number, and Email address
of a responsible official at each firm).
(8) A list of known sources of
information on national or regional
prices for the Domestic Like Product or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Nov 03, 2014
Jkt 235001
the Subject Merchandise in the U.S. or
other markets.
(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the
Domestic Like Product, provide the
following information on your firm’s
operations on that product during
calendar year 2012, except as noted
(report quantity data in units and value
data in U.S. dollars, f.o.b. plant). If you
are a union/worker group or trade/
business association, provide the
information, on an aggregate basis, for
the firms in which your workers are
employed/which are members of your
association.
(a) Production (quantity) and, if
known, an estimate of the percentage of
total U.S. production of the Domestic
Like Product accounted for by your
firm’s(s’) production;
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to
produce the Domestic Like Product (i.e.,
the level of production that your
establishment(s) could reasonably have
expected to attain during the year,
assuming normal operating conditions
(using equipment and machinery in
place and ready to operate), normal
operating levels (hours per week/weeks
per year), time for downtime,
maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a
typical or representative product mix);
(c) the quantity and value of U.S.
commercial shipments of the Domestic
Like Product produced in your U.S.
plant(s);
(d) the quantity and value of U.S.
internal consumption/company
transfers of the Domestic Like Product
produced in your U.S. plant(s); and
(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost
of goods sold (COGS), (iii) gross profit,
(iv) selling, general and administrative
(SG&A) expenses, and (v) operating
income of the Domestic Like Product
produced in your U.S. plant(s) (include
both U.S. and export commercial sales,
internal consumption, and company
transfers) for your most recently
completed fiscal year (identify the date
on which your fiscal year ends).
(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a
trade/business association of U.S.
importers of the Subject Merchandise
from the Subject Country, provide the
following information on your firm’s(s’)
operations on that product during
calendar year 2012 (report quantity data
in units and value data in U.S. dollars).
If you are a trade/business association,
provide the information, on an aggregate
basis, for the firms which are members
of your association.
(a) The quantity and value (landed,
duty-paid but not including
antidumping or countervailing duties)
of U.S. imports and, if known, an
estimate of the percentage of total U.S.
imports of Subject Merchandise from
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the Subject Country accounted for by
your firm’s(s’) imports;
(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S.
port, including antidumping and/or
countervailing duties) of U.S.
commercial shipments of Subject
Merchandise imported from the Subject
Country; and
(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S.
port, including antidumping and/or
countervailing duties) of U.S. internal
consumption/company transfers of
Subject Merchandise imported from the
Subject Country.
(11) If you are a producer, an exporter,
or a trade/business association of
producers or exporters of the Subject
Merchandise in the Subject Country,
provide the following information on
your firm’s(s’) operations on that
product during calendar year 2012
(report quantity data in units and value
data in U.S. dollars, landed and dutypaid at the U.S. port but not including
antidumping or countervailing duties).
If you are a trade/business association,
provide the information, on an aggregate
basis, for the firms which are members
of your association.
(a) Production (quantity) and, if
known, an estimate of the percentage of
total production of Subject Merchandise
in the Subject Country accounted for by
your firm’s(s’) production;
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s)
to produce the Subject Merchandise in
the Subject Country (i.e., the level of
production that your establishment(s)
could reasonably have expected to
attain during the year, assuming normal
operating conditions (using equipment
and machinery in place and ready to
operate), normal operating levels (hours
per week/weeks per year), time for
downtime, maintenance, repair, and
cleanup, and a typical or representative
product mix); and
(c) the quantity and value of your
firm’s(s’) exports to the United States of
Subject Merchandise and, if known, an
estimate of the percentage of total
exports to the United States of Subject
Merchandise from the Subject Country
accounted for by your firm’s(s’) exports.
(12) Identify significant changes, if
any, in the supply and demand
conditions or business cycle for the
Domestic Like Product that have
occurred in the United States or in the
market for the Subject Merchandise in
the Subject Country since the Order
Date, and significant changes, if any,
that are likely to occur within a
reasonably foreseeable time. Supply
conditions to consider include
technology; production methods;
development efforts; ability to increase
production (including the shift of
production facilities used for other
E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM
04NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 213 / Tuesday, November 4, 2014 / Notices
products and the use, cost, or
availability of major inputs into
production); and factors related to the
ability to shift supply among different
national markets (including barriers to
importation in foreign markets or
changes in market demand abroad).
Demand conditions to consider include
end uses and applications; the existence
and availability of substitute products;
and the level of competition among the
Domestic Like Product produced in the
United States, Subject Merchandise
produced in the Subject Country, and
such merchandise from other countries.
(13) (Optional) A statement of
whether you agree with the above
definitions of the Domestic Like Product
and Domestic Industry; if you disagree
with either or both of these definitions,
please explain why and provide
alternative definitions.
Authority: This proceeding is being
conducted under authority of Title VII of the
Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published
pursuant to section 207.61 of the
Commission’s rules.
Issued: October 29, 2014.
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
The Commission completed and filed
its determination in this review on
October 30, 2014. The views of the
Commission are contained in USITC
Publication 4498 (October 2014),
entitled Certain Frozen Fish Fillets
FSrom Vietnam: Investigation No. 731–
TA–1012 (Second Review).
Issued: October 30, 2014.
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014–26157 Filed 11–3–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–915]
Certain Set-Top Boxes, Gateways,
Bridges, and Adapters and
Components Thereof; Commission
Determination Not To Review an Initial
Determination Granting Complainants’
Unopposed Motion To Terminate the
Investigation on the Basis of
Settlement; Termination of
Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
[FR Doc. 2014–26099 Filed 11–3–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
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. 17) granting the
unopposed motion of complainants
ViXS Systems, Inc., of Toronto, Ontario,
Canada and ViXS USA, Inc. of Austin,
Texas (collectively ‘‘ViXS’’) to terminate
the above-referenced investigation as to
respondent Entropic Communications,
Inc. of San Diego, California
(‘‘Entropic’’) on the basis of a settlement
agreement. The investigation is
terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Megan M. Valentine, Office of the
General Counsel, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
708–2301. 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
SUMMARY:
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 731–TA–1012 (Second
Review)]
Certain Frozen Fish Fillets From
Vietnam
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 certain
frozen fish fillets from Vietnam would
be likely to lead to continuation or
recurrence of material injury to an
industry in the United States within a
reasonably foreseeable time.
rmajette on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Background
The Commission instituted this
review on June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31345)
and determined on September 5, 2014,
that it would conduct an expedited
review (79 FR 56826).
1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19
CFR 207.2(f)).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:39 Nov 03, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65423
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.
The
Commission instituted this investigation
on May 21, 2014, based on a Complaint
filed by ViXS, as supplemented and
amended. 79 FR 29204 (May 21, 2014).
The Complaint alleges violations of
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section
337’’), in the importation into the
United States, the sale for importation,
and the sale within the United States
after importation of certain set-top
boxes, gateways, bridges, and adapters
and components thereof by reason of
infringement of certain claims of U.S.
Patent Nos. 7,301,900; 7,099,951;
7,200,855; and 7,406,598. The
Complaint further alleges the existence
of a domestic industry. The
Commission’s Notice of Investigation
named as respondents Entropic;
DirectTV, LLC of El Segundo, California
(‘‘DirectTV’’); Wistron NeWeb
Corporation of Hsinchu, Taiwan and
Winstron Corporation of Taipei Hsien,
Taiwan (collectively ‘‘Wistron’’); and
CyberTAN Technology, Inc. of Hsinchu,
Taiwan (‘‘CyberTAN’’). The Office of
Unfair Import Investigations was also
named as a party to the investigation.
The Commission later terminated the
investigation with respect to certain
asserted claims of the patents-in-suit,
thus limiting the investigation to
products incorporating Entropic chips
and, in effect, terminating the
investigation with respect to
respondents DirectTV, Wistron, and
CyberTAN. Notice (Aug. 25, 2014);
Order No. 9 (Aug. 15, 2014).
On September 15, 2014, ViXS filed a
motion to terminate this investigation
based on a settlement agreement
between ViXS and Entropic. The motion
stated that the respondents do not
oppose the motion. On September 29,
2014, the Commission investigative
attorney (Mr. Taylor) filed a response in
support of the motion.
On October 7, 2014, the ALJ issued
the subject ID granting ViXS’s motion
for termination of the investigation. The
ALJ found that the joint motion
complied with the requirements of
section 210.21(b)(1) of the Commission’s
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR
210.21(b)(1)) and that there are no
extraordinary circumstances that would
prevent the requested terminations. The
ALJ also found that granting the motion
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\04NON1.SGM
04NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 213 (Tuesday, November 4, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65420-65423]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26099]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 731-TA-1092 (Review)]
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof From China; Termination of
Previously Instituted Five-Year Review and Institution of Five-Year
Review
AGENCY: United States International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives notice that it has instituted a
review pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1675(c)) (the Act) to determine whether revocation of the antidumping
duty order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China would be
likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury.
Pursuant to section 751(c)(2) of the Act, interested parties are
requested to respond to this notice by submitting the information
specified below to the Commission; \1\ to be assured of consideration,
the deadline for responses is December 4, 2014. As indicated below, in
light of prior proceedings in this matter, the Commission reserves the
right to waive its regulations concerning filing of comments on whether
to conduct an expedited review. 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No response to this request for information is required if a
currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) number is not
displayed; the OMB number is 14-5-322, expiration date June 30,
2017. Public reporting burden for the request is estimated to
average 15 hours per response. Please send comments regarding the
accuracy of this burden estimate to the Office of Investigations,
U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington,
DC 20436.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: November 4, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Szustakowski (202-205-3169),
Office of Investigations, 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 for this
review may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at
https://edis.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background. On November 4, 2009, the Department of Commerce issued
an antidumping duty order on imports of diamond sawblades and parts
thereof from China (74 FR 57145, November 4, 2009). The effective date
of the order was January 23, 2009. On December 2, 2013, the Commission
instituted a five-year review on the antidumping duty order on imports
of diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China (78 FR 72116, Dec. 2,
2013). The U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) initiated its five-
year review of the order on the same day (78 FR 72061, Dec. 2, 2013).
On May 20, 2014, the Commission determined to conduct a full review of
the order (Explanation of Commission Determination on Adequacy in
Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from China, Inv. No. 731-TA-1092
(Review)).
The Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition (DSMC), an
association of domestic producers of diamond sawblades, subsequently
filed an action in the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT) to
declare that the five-year reviews that Commerce initiated and the
Commission instituted were ultra vires because they began prematurely.
On September 23, 2014, the CIT issued a judgment in favor of DSMC,
directed the Commission to cease further work on the five-year review
it previously instituted, and to instead institute a review on November
4, 2014. Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States, Slip Op.
14-111 (Ct. Int'l Trade Sept. 23, 2014). Accordingly, pursuant to the
CIT order in Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers' Coalition, we are hereby
terminating the previously instituted sunset review, effective
September 23, 2014.
Pursuant to the judgment of the CIT, the Commission is instituting
this review to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty
order on diamond sawblades and parts thereof from China would be likely
to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to the
domestic industry within a reasonably foreseeable time. It will assess
the adequacy of interested party responses to this notice of
institution to determine whether to conduct a full review or an
expedited review. The Commission is mindful, however, that both
domestic and respondent interested parties responded to the notice of
institution it published on December 2, 2013, and that in light of
these responses the Commission determined that conducting a full review
was appropriate.
In order to avoid duplication of effort and to streamline these
proceedings, the Commission is not requiring those interested parties
that submitted adequate responses to the December 2, 2013 institution
notice to submit full responses to this notice. Instead, each such
party may simply submit no later than December 4, 2014 a response
indicating that: (1) It incorporates the contents of its response to
the December 2, 2013 institution notice and (2) that it is willing to
participate in this review by providing information requested to the
Commission. Any such party, should it desire, may also provide
additional information of the nature specified below. Parties that did
not submit an adequate response to the
[[Page 65421]]
December 2, 2013 institution notice may also provide additional
information of the nature specified below no later than December 4,
2014.
Should those parties that submitted adequate responses to the
December 2, 2013 institution notice indicate their desire to
participate in this review, the Commission intends to issue a notice
stating that it will conduct a full review. In light of this, the
Commission reserves the right to waive the process specified in 19 CFR
207.62(b) for submitting comments to the Commission on whether to
conduct an expedited review should it be unnecessary given the unusual
circumstances of this proceeding.
Definitions. The following definitions apply to these reviews:
(1) Subject Merchandise is the class or kind of merchandise that is
within the scope of the five-year review, as defined by the Department
of Commerce.
(2) The Subject Country in this review is China.
(3) The Domestic Like Product is the domestically produced product
or products which are like, or in the absence of like, most similar in
characteristics and uses with, the Subject Merchandise. In its original
determination, the Commission defined the Domestic Like Product as
diamond sawblades and parts thereof, coextensive with Commerce's scope.
(4) The Domestic Industry is the U.S. producers as a whole of the
Domestic Like Product, or those producers whose collective output of
the Domestic Like Product constitutes a major proportion of the total
domestic production of the product. In its original determination, the
Commission determined that the Domestic Industry comprised the
assemblers in addition to all domestic producers of finished diamond
sawblades and component parts.
(5) The Order Date is the date that the antidumping duty order
under review became effective. In this review, the Order Date is
January 23, 2009.
(6) An Importer is any person or firm engaged, either directly or
through a parent company or subsidiary, in importing the Subject
Merchandise into the United States from a foreign manufacturer or
through its selling agent.
Participation in the proceeding and public service list. Persons,
including industrial users of the Subject Merchandise and, if the
merchandise is sold at the retail level, representative consumer
organizations, wishing to participate in the proceeding as parties must
file an entry of appearance with the Secretary to the Commission, as
provided in section 201.11(b)(4) of the Commission's rules, no later
than 21 days after publication of this notice in the Federal Register.
The Secretary will maintain a public service list containing the names
and addresses of all persons, or their representatives, who are parties
to the proceeding.
Former Commission employees who are seeking to appear in Commission
five-year reviews are advised that they may appear in a review even if
they participated personally and substantially in the corresponding
underlying original investigation or an earlier review of the same
underlying investigation. The Commission's designated agency ethics
official has advised that a five-year review is not the same particular
matter as the underlying original investigation, and a five-year review
is not the same particular matter as an earlier review of the same
underlying investigation for purposes of 18 U.S.C. 207, the post
employment statute for Federal employees, and Commission rule 201.15(b)
(19 CFR 201.15(b)), 79 FR 3246 (Jan. 17, 2014), 73 FR 24609 (May 5,
2008). Consequently, former employees are not required to seek
Commission approval to appear in a review under Commission rule 19 CFR
201.15, even if the corresponding underlying original investigation or
an earlier review of the same underlying investigation was pending when
they were Commission employees. For further ethics advice on this
matter, contact Carol McCue Verratti, Deputy Agency Ethics Official, at
202-205-3088.
Limited disclosure of business proprietary information (BPI) under
an administrative protective order (APO) and APO service list. Pursuant
to section 207.7(a) of the Commission's rules, the Secretary will make
BPI submitted in this proceeding available to authorized applicants
under the APO issued in the proceeding, provided that the application
is made no later than 21 days after publication of this notice in the
Federal Register. Authorized applicants must represent interested
parties, as defined in 19 U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to the
proceeding. A separate service list will be maintained by the Secretary
for those parties authorized to receive BPI under the APO.
Certification. Pursuant to section 207.3 of the Commission's rules,
any person submitting information to the Commission in connection with
this proceeding must certify that the information is accurate and
complete to the best of the submitter's knowledge. In making the
certification, the submitter will be deemed to consent, unless
otherwise specified, for the Commission, its employees, and contract
personnel to use the information provided in any other reviews or
investigations of the same or comparable products which the Commission
conducts under Title VII of the Act, or in internal audits and
investigations relating to the programs and operations of the
Commission pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3.
Written submissions. The nature of written responses to the notice
by those parties that submitted adequate responses to the December 2,
2013 notice of institution is specified above. Pursuant to section
207.61 of the Commission's rules, each interested party that did not
provide an adequate response to the December 2, 2013 notice but desires
to respond to this notice must provide the information specified below.
The deadline for filing such responses is December 4, 2014. As stated
above, the Commission reserves the right to waive the provision of
section 207.62(b) of the Commission's rules concerning whether the
Commission should conduct an expedited or full review. All written
submissions must conform with the provisions of sections 201.8 and
207.3 of the Commission's rules and any submissions that contain BPI
must also conform with the requirements of sections 201.6 and 207.7 of
the Commission's rules. Regarding electronic filing requirements under
the Commission's rules, see also the Commission's Handbook on E-filing,
available on the Commission's Web site at https://edis.usitc.gov. Also,
in accordance with sections 201.16(c) and 207.3 of the Commission's
rules, each document filed by a party to the review must be served on
all other parties to the review (as identified by either the public or
APO service list as appropriate), and a certificate of service must
accompany the document (if you are not a party to the review you do not
need to serve your response).
Inability to provide requested information. Pursuant to section
207.61(c) of the Commission's rules, any interested party that cannot
furnish the information requested by this notice in the requested form
and manner shall notify the Commission at the earliest possible time,
provide a full explanation of why it cannot provide the requested
information, and indicate alternative forms in which it can provide
equivalent information. If an interested party does not provide this
notification (or the Commission finds the explanation provided in the
notification inadequate) and fails to provide a complete response to
this notice, the Commission may take an adverse
[[Page 65422]]
inference against the party pursuant to section 776(b) of the Act (19
U.S.C. 1677e(b)) in making its determinations in the reviews.
Information To Be Provided in Response to this Notice of
Institution: As used below, the term ``firm'' includes any related
firms.
(1) The name and address of your firm or entity (including World
Wide Web address) and name, telephone number, fax number, and Email
address of the certifying official.
(2) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is a U.S.
producer of the Domestic Like Product, a U.S. union or worker group, a
U.S. importer of the Subject Merchandise, a foreign producer or
exporter of the Subject Merchandise, a U.S. or foreign trade or
business association, or another interested party (including an
explanation). If you are a union/worker group or trade/business
association, identify the firms in which your workers are employed or
which are members of your association.
(3) A statement indicating whether your firm/entity is willing to
participate in this proceeding by providing information requested by
the Commission.
(4) A statement of the likely effects of the revocation of the
antidumping and countervailing duty orders on the Domestic Industry in
general and/or your firm/entity specifically. In your response, please
discuss the various factors specified in section 752(a) of the Act (19
U.S.C. 1675a(a)) including the likely volume of subject imports, likely
price effects of subject imports, and likely impact of imports of
Subject Merchandise on the Domestic Industry.
(5) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. producers of
the Domestic Like Product. Identify any known related parties and the
nature of the relationship as defined in section 771(4)(B) of the Act
(19 U.S.C. 1677(4)(B)).
(6) A list of all known and currently operating U.S. importers of
the Subject Merchandise and producers of the Subject Merchandise in the
Subject Country that currently export or have exported Subject
Merchandise to the United States or other countries since the Order
Date.
(7) A list of 3-5 leading purchasers in the U.S. market for the
Domestic Like Product and the Subject Merchandise (including street
address, World Wide Web address, and the name, telephone number, fax
number, and Email address of a responsible official at each firm).
(8) A list of known sources of information on national or regional
prices for the Domestic Like Product or the Subject Merchandise in the
U.S. or other markets.
(9) If you are a U.S. producer of the Domestic Like Product,
provide the following information on your firm's operations on that
product during calendar year 2012, except as noted (report quantity
data in units and value data in U.S. dollars, f.o.b. plant). If you are
a union/worker group or trade/business association, provide the
information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms in which your workers
are employed/which are members of your association.
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the
percentage of total U.S. production of the Domestic Like Product
accounted for by your firm's(s') production;
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm to produce the Domestic Like
Product (i.e., the level of production that your establishment(s) could
reasonably have expected to attain during the year, assuming normal
operating conditions (using equipment and machinery in place and ready
to operate), normal operating levels (hours per week/weeks per year),
time for downtime, maintenance, repair, and cleanup, and a typical or
representative product mix);
(c) the quantity and value of U.S. commercial shipments of the
Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s);
(d) the quantity and value of U.S. internal consumption/company
transfers of the Domestic Like Product produced in your U.S. plant(s);
and
(e) the value of (i) net sales, (ii) cost of goods sold (COGS),
(iii) gross profit, (iv) selling, general and administrative (SG&A)
expenses, and (v) operating income of the Domestic Like Product
produced in your U.S. plant(s) (include both U.S. and export commercial
sales, internal consumption, and company transfers) for your most
recently completed fiscal year (identify the date on which your fiscal
year ends).
(10) If you are a U.S. importer or a trade/business association of
U.S. importers of the Subject Merchandise from the Subject Country,
provide the following information on your firm's(s') operations on that
product during calendar year 2012 (report quantity data in units and
value data in U.S. dollars). If you are a trade/business association,
provide the information, on an aggregate basis, for the firms which are
members of your association.
(a) The quantity and value (landed, duty-paid but not including
antidumping or countervailing duties) of U.S. imports and, if known, an
estimate of the percentage of total U.S. imports of Subject Merchandise
from the Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') imports;
(b) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping
and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. commercial shipments of Subject
Merchandise imported from the Subject Country; and
(c) the quantity and value (f.o.b. U.S. port, including antidumping
and/or countervailing duties) of U.S. internal consumption/company
transfers of Subject Merchandise imported from the Subject Country.
(11) If you are a producer, an exporter, or a trade/business
association of producers or exporters of the Subject Merchandise in the
Subject Country, provide the following information on your firm's(s')
operations on that product during calendar year 2012 (report quantity
data in units and value data in U.S. dollars, landed and duty-paid at
the U.S. port but not including antidumping or countervailing duties).
If you are a trade/business association, provide the information, on an
aggregate basis, for the firms which are members of your association.
(a) Production (quantity) and, if known, an estimate of the
percentage of total production of Subject Merchandise in the Subject
Country accounted for by your firm's(s') production;
(b) Capacity (quantity) of your firm(s) to produce the Subject
Merchandise in the Subject Country (i.e., the level of production that
your establishment(s) could reasonably have expected to attain during
the year, assuming normal operating conditions (using equipment and
machinery in place and ready to operate), normal operating levels
(hours per week/weeks per year), time for downtime, maintenance,
repair, and cleanup, and a typical or representative product mix); and
(c) the quantity and value of your firm's(s') exports to the United
States of Subject Merchandise and, if known, an estimate of the
percentage of total exports to the United States of Subject Merchandise
from the Subject Country accounted for by your firm's(s') exports.
(12) Identify significant changes, if any, in the supply and demand
conditions or business cycle for the Domestic Like Product that have
occurred in the United States or in the market for the Subject
Merchandise in the Subject Country since the Order Date, and
significant changes, if any, that are likely to occur within a
reasonably foreseeable time. Supply conditions to consider include
technology; production methods; development efforts; ability to
increase production (including the shift of production facilities used
for other
[[Page 65423]]
products and the use, cost, or availability of major inputs into
production); and factors related to the ability to shift supply among
different national markets (including barriers to importation in
foreign markets or changes in market demand abroad). Demand conditions
to consider include end uses and applications; the existence and
availability of substitute products; and the level of competition among
the Domestic Like Product produced in the United States, Subject
Merchandise produced in the Subject Country, and such merchandise from
other countries.
(13) (Optional) A statement of whether you agree with the above
definitions of the Domestic Like Product and Domestic Industry; if you
disagree with either or both of these definitions, please explain why
and provide alternative definitions.
Authority: This proceeding is being conducted under authority of
Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is published
pursuant to section 207.61 of the Commission's rules.
Issued: October 29, 2014.
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014-26099 Filed 11-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
