Certain Opaque Polymers; Commission Decision Affirming Grant of Default and Sanctions; Finding a Violation of Section 337; Issuing Remedial Orders and Terminating the Investigation, 22548-22549 [2015-09444]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
22548
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Notices
above individual. The FIRS is available
24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Replies are provided during normal
business hours.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[15X L1109AF LLUT980300
L11500000.PH0000 24–1A]
Authority: 43 CFR 1784.4–1.
Utah Resource Advisory Council/
Recreation Resource Advisory Council
Meeting
AGENCY:
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
Notice.
ACTION:
In accordance with the
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act, the Federal Advisory Committee
Act, and the Federal Lands Recreation
Enhancement Act, the Bureau of Land
Management’s (BLM) Utah Resource
Advisory Council (RAC)/Recreation
Resource Advisory Council (RecRAC)
will meet as indicated below.
DATES: The BLM-Utah RAC/RecRAC
will meet June 23, 2015, from 8:30 a.m.–
5 p.m., and June 24, 2015, from 8:30
a.m.–Noon.
ADDRESSES: The RAC/RecRAC will meet
at the BLM-Utah State Office,
Monument Conference Room (5th
Floor), 440 West 200 South, Salt Lake
City, Utah.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you cannot attend the meeting but wish
to listen via teleconference, orally
present material during the
teleconference, or submit written
material for the RAC/RecRAC, please
notify Sherry Foot, Special Programs
Coordinator, Bureau of Land
Management, Utah State Office, 440
West 200 South, Suite 500, Salt Lake
City, Utah 84101; phone (801) 539–
4195; or, sfoot@blm.gov no later than
Wednesday, June 17, 2015.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Planned
agenda topics include the introduction
of new members; an overview of BLMUtah issues; and planning effort
updates. The RecRAC will listen to a
presentation on the BLM’s Draft
Connecting with Utah Communities
[Recreation] Strategy; a review of the
Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement
Act; and presentations regarding
proposed fees from the BLM and the
U.S. Forest Service.
A half-hour public comment period
will take place on June 23, from 3:00–
3:30 p.m. The meeting is open to the
public; however, transportation,
lodging, and meals are the responsibility
of the participating individuals.
Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339
to leave a message or question for the
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:00 Apr 21, 2015
Jkt 235001
Lance C. Porter,
Acting Associate State Director.
[FR Doc. 2015–09312 Filed 4–21–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–DQ–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–883]
Certain Opaque Polymers;
Commission Decision Affirming Grant
of Default and Sanctions; Finding a
Violation of Section 337; Issuing
Remedial Orders and Terminating the
Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission affirmed, with
modification, an initial determination
(‘‘ID’’) (Order No. 27) by the presiding
Administrative Law Judge (‘‘ALJ’’)
granting a motion for default and
sanctions. The Commission has found a
violation of section 337 in this
investigation and has issued a limited
exclusion order prohibiting importation
of certain opaque polymers
manufactured using the Complainants’
misappropriated trade secrets. The
Commission has also issued a cease and
desist order directed to one respondent.
The Commission has affirmed the
assessment and calculation of sanctions
including joint and several liability as to
U.S. counsel, but has reversed the ID to
the extent that it imposed joint and
several liability on Turkish counsel. The
Commission has thereby terminated the
investigation with a finding of violation
of section 337.
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
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 TDD
terminal on (202) 205–1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Commission instituted this investigation
on June 21, 2013, based on a complaint
filed by the Dow Chemical Company of
Midland, Michigan, and by Rohm and
Haas Company and Rohm and Haas
Chemicals LLC, both of Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania (collectively, ‘‘Dow’’). 78
FR 37571 (June 21, 2013). The
complaint alleged violations of section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended (19 U.S.C. 1337), by reason of
the importation into the United States,
the sale for importation, and the sale
within the United States after
importation of certain opaque polymers
that infringe certain claims of four
United States patents. The notice of
investigation named five respondents,
three of whom remain in this
investigation: Organik Kimya San. ve
Tic. A.S of Istanbul, Turkey; Organik
¸
Kimya Netherlands B.V. of RotterdamBotlek, Netherlands; and Organik Kimya
US, Inc., of Burlington, Massachusetts
(collectively, ‘‘Organik Kimya’’). 78 FR
at 37571; Notice (Dec. 1, 2014)
(termination as to two of the five
originally-named respondents). The
complaint and notice of investigation
were amended to add allegations of
misappropriation of trade secrets. 78 FR
71643 (Nov. 29, 2013). The allegations
of patent infringement have been
withdrawn from the investigation. See
Notice (Dec. 13, 2013) (withdrawal of
two asserted patents); Notice (Dec. 1,
2014) (withdrawal of the remaining two
asserted patents). The only remaining
issues are Dow’s claims based on trade
secret misappropriation and sanctions
for discovery abuse.
On May 19, 2014, Dow filed a motion
for default and other sanctions against
Organik Kimya for discovery abuse. On
May 21, 2014, Organik Kimya filed a
motion to terminate based upon a
consent order stipulation. On July 8–9,
2014, the ALJ conducted a hearing on
the pending motions. On October 20,
2014, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No.
27) (‘‘the sanctions ID’’) finding Organik
Kimya in default, under Commission
Rule 210.42(c), and ordering monetary
sanctions jointly and severally against
Organik Kimya and its counsel. Organik
Kimya is represented by Finnegan,
Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner,
LLP (‘‘Finnegan’’), a law firm in
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Notices
¨ ¨
Washington, DC, and by Omur Yarsuvat,
an attorney in Istanbul, Turkey. The ALJ
denied Organik Kimya’s motion to
terminate the investigation based upon
a consent order stipulation.
On October 28, 2014, Organik Kimya
filed a petition for review of the
sanctions ID. The same day, Finnegan
and Yarsuvat filed separate motions
before the Commission to intervene in
the investigation for the purpose of
contesting joint liability for the
monetary sanction. Finnegan and
Yarsuvat also filed provisional petitions
for review of the sanctions ID. On
November 10, 2014, Finnegan filed a
motion for leave to file a reply in
support of its motion to intervene,
which Dow opposed.
On December 16, 2014, the
Commission granted the motions to
intervene and determined to review the
sanctions ID. The Commission notice
granting review solicited further briefing
on two questions concerning sanctions
and on remedy, the public interest, and
bonding.
On December 30, 2014, the parties—
Dow, Organik Kimya, Finnegan, and
Yarsuvat—filed opening briefs in
response to the Commission notice.
(Organik Kimya filed two briefs.) On
January 7, 2015, the parties filed replies.
(Dow filed two replies.)
Having examined the record of this
investigation, including the ALJ’s
sanctions ID, as well as the petitions to
the Commission and their replies, and
the briefs to the Commission and their
replies, the Commission has determined
to affirm the ID’s finding of Organik
Kimya in default. See 19 U.S.C. 1337(h);
19 CFR 210.16-.17, 210.33. The
Commission has determined that the
appropriate remedy is the issuance of a
limited exclusion order prohibiting, for
twenty-five years, the entry of opaque
polymers manufactured using any of the
misappropriated trade secrets identified
in Dow’s Disclosure of Misappropriated
Trade Secrets (Jan. 29, 2014) (listing
trade secrets A–ZZ). The Commission
has also determined to issue a cease and
desist order prohibiting Organik Kimya
U.S., Inc. from, inter alia, importing or
selling opaque polymers manufactured
using any of the aforementioned
misappropriated trade secrets. The
Commission has also determined that
the public interest factors enumerated in
section 337(d) and (f), 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)
& (f), do not preclude the issuance of the
limited exclusion order or the cease and
desist order. The Commission has
determined that no bonding is required
during the period of Presidential review,
19 U.S.C. 1337(j).
The Commission has further
determined to affirm the ALJ’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:00 Apr 21, 2015
Jkt 235001
assessment and calculation of attorneys’
fees and costs against Organik Kimya.
The Commission has determined to
affirm, with modification, the ALJ’s
determination that Finnegan be held
jointly and severally liable with Organik
Kimya for those sanctions. The
Commission has determined to reverse
the sanctions ID to the extent that it
imposed joint and several liability on
Mr. Yarsuvat. The Commission’s
reasoning in support of these
determinations is provided in an
accompanying Commission opinion.
The investigation is terminated.
Commissioner Schmidtlein dissents,
for the reasons to be set forth in her
separate opinion, as to the
Commission’s determination on
sanctions for Organik Kimya’s counsel.
She otherwise joins the Commission’s
determination as to Organik Kimya’s
default, the Commission remedial
orders to be issued, and the liability of
Organik Kimya for fees and costs.
The Commission’s limited exclusion
order and opinion were delivered to the
President and the United States Trade
Representative on the day of their
issuance.
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 Part
210 of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure (19 CFR part
210).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: April 17, 2015.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015–09444 Filed 4–21–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–887]
Certain Crawler Cranes and
Components Thereof; Commission’s
Final Determination; Issuance of a
Limited Exclusion Order and Cease
and Desist Order; Termination of the
Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has found a violation of
section 337 in this investigation and has
(1) issued a limited exclusion order
prohibiting importation of certain
crawler cranes and components thereof
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
22549
and (2) issued a cease and desist order
directed to the domestic respondent.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amanda Pitcher Fisherow, 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 (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 July 17, 2013, based on a complaint
filed by Manitowoc Cranes, LLC of
Manitowoc, Wisconsin (‘‘Manitowoc’’).
78 FR 42800–01 (July 17, 2013). The
complaint alleges violations of
subsection (a)(1)(B) 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 crawler cranes and components
thereof, by reason of infringement of
U.S. Patent Nos. 7,546,928 (‘‘the ’928
patent’’) and 7,967,158 (‘‘the ’158
patent’’), and that an industry in the
United States exists or is in the process
of being established as required by
subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The
complaint further alleges violations of
subsection (a)(1)(A) of section 337 by
reason of trade secret misappropriation,
the threat or effect of which is to destroy
or substantially injure an industry in the
United States or to prevent the
establishment of such an industry. The
Commission’s notice of investigation
named Sany Heavy Industry Co., Ltd. of
Changsha, China, and Sany America,
Inc. of Peachtree City, Georgia
(collectively, ‘‘Sany’’) as respondents.
The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) was also named
as a party.
On July 11, 2014, the ALJ issued his
final initial determination (‘‘ID’’) finding
a violation of section 337 with respect
to claims 1, 2, 5, 8, and 23–26 of the
’928 patent and misappropriation of
E:\FR\FM\22APN1.SGM
22APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 77 (Wednesday, April 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22548-22549]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-09444]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-883]
Certain Opaque Polymers; Commission Decision Affirming Grant of
Default and Sanctions; Finding a Violation of Section 337; Issuing
Remedial Orders and Terminating the Investigation
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission affirmed, with modification, an initial determination
(``ID'') (Order No. 27) by the presiding Administrative Law Judge
(``ALJ'') granting a motion for default and sanctions. The Commission
has found a violation of section 337 in this investigation and has
issued a limited exclusion order prohibiting importation of certain
opaque polymers manufactured using the Complainants' misappropriated
trade secrets. The Commission has also issued a cease and desist order
directed to one respondent. The Commission has affirmed the assessment
and calculation of sanctions including joint and several liability as
to U.S. counsel, but has reversed the ID to the extent that it imposed
joint and several liability on Turkish counsel. The Commission has
thereby terminated the investigation with a finding of violation of
section 337.
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 TDD terminal on (202) 205-
1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation
on June 21, 2013, based on a complaint filed by the Dow Chemical
Company of Midland, Michigan, and by Rohm and Haas Company and Rohm and
Haas Chemicals LLC, both of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (collectively,
``Dow''). 78 FR 37571 (June 21, 2013). The complaint alleged violations
of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337),
by reason of the importation into the United States, the sale for
importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of
certain opaque polymers that infringe certain claims of four United
States patents. The notice of investigation named five respondents,
three of whom remain in this investigation: Organik Kimya San. ve Tic.
A.[Scedil] of Istanbul, Turkey; Organik Kimya Netherlands B.V. of
Rotterdam-Botlek, Netherlands; and Organik Kimya US, Inc., of
Burlington, Massachusetts (collectively, ``Organik Kimya''). 78 FR at
37571; Notice (Dec. 1, 2014) (termination as to two of the five
originally-named respondents). The complaint and notice of
investigation were amended to add allegations of misappropriation of
trade secrets. 78 FR 71643 (Nov. 29, 2013). The allegations of patent
infringement have been withdrawn from the investigation. See Notice
(Dec. 13, 2013) (withdrawal of two asserted patents); Notice (Dec. 1,
2014) (withdrawal of the remaining two asserted patents). The only
remaining issues are Dow's claims based on trade secret
misappropriation and sanctions for discovery abuse.
On May 19, 2014, Dow filed a motion for default and other sanctions
against Organik Kimya for discovery abuse. On May 21, 2014, Organik
Kimya filed a motion to terminate based upon a consent order
stipulation. On July 8-9, 2014, the ALJ conducted a hearing on the
pending motions. On October 20, 2014, the ALJ issued an ID (Order No.
27) (``the sanctions ID'') finding Organik Kimya in default, under
Commission Rule 210.42(c), and ordering monetary sanctions jointly and
severally against Organik Kimya and its counsel. Organik Kimya is
represented by Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
(``Finnegan''), a law firm in
[[Page 22549]]
Washington, DC, and by [Ouml]m[uuml]r Yarsuvat, an attorney in
Istanbul, Turkey. The ALJ denied Organik Kimya's motion to terminate
the investigation based upon a consent order stipulation.
On October 28, 2014, Organik Kimya filed a petition for review of
the sanctions ID. The same day, Finnegan and Yarsuvat filed separate
motions before the Commission to intervene in the investigation for the
purpose of contesting joint liability for the monetary sanction.
Finnegan and Yarsuvat also filed provisional petitions for review of
the sanctions ID. On November 10, 2014, Finnegan filed a motion for
leave to file a reply in support of its motion to intervene, which Dow
opposed.
On December 16, 2014, the Commission granted the motions to
intervene and determined to review the sanctions ID. The Commission
notice granting review solicited further briefing on two questions
concerning sanctions and on remedy, the public interest, and bonding.
On December 30, 2014, the parties--Dow, Organik Kimya, Finnegan,
and Yarsuvat--filed opening briefs in response to the Commission
notice. (Organik Kimya filed two briefs.) On January 7, 2015, the
parties filed replies. (Dow filed two replies.)
Having examined the record of this investigation, including the
ALJ's sanctions ID, as well as the petitions to the Commission and
their replies, and the briefs to the Commission and their replies, the
Commission has determined to affirm the ID's finding of Organik Kimya
in default. See 19 U.S.C. 1337(h); 19 CFR 210.16-.17, 210.33. The
Commission has determined that the appropriate remedy is the issuance
of a limited exclusion order prohibiting, for twenty-five years, the
entry of opaque polymers manufactured using any of the misappropriated
trade secrets identified in Dow's Disclosure of Misappropriated Trade
Secrets (Jan. 29, 2014) (listing trade secrets A-ZZ). The Commission
has also determined to issue a cease and desist order prohibiting
Organik Kimya U.S., Inc. from, inter alia, importing or selling opaque
polymers manufactured using any of the aforementioned misappropriated
trade secrets. The Commission has also determined that the public
interest factors enumerated in section 337(d) and (f), 19 U.S.C.
1337(d) & (f), do not preclude the issuance of the limited exclusion
order or the cease and desist order. The Commission has determined that
no bonding is required during the period of Presidential review, 19
U.S.C. 1337(j).
The Commission has further determined to affirm the ALJ's
assessment and calculation of attorneys' fees and costs against Organik
Kimya. The Commission has determined to affirm, with modification, the
ALJ's determination that Finnegan be held jointly and severally liable
with Organik Kimya for those sanctions. The Commission has determined
to reverse the sanctions ID to the extent that it imposed joint and
several liability on Mr. Yarsuvat. The Commission's reasoning in
support of these determinations is provided in an accompanying
Commission opinion. The investigation is terminated.
Commissioner Schmidtlein dissents, for the reasons to be set forth
in her separate opinion, as to the Commission's determination on
sanctions for Organik Kimya's counsel. She otherwise joins the
Commission's determination as to Organik Kimya's default, the
Commission remedial orders to be issued, and the liability of Organik
Kimya for fees and costs.
The Commission's limited exclusion order and opinion were delivered
to the President and the United States Trade Representative on the day
of their issuance.
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 Part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR
part 210).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: April 17, 2015.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2015-09444 Filed 4-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
