Certain Intermediate Bulk Containers; Institution of Investigation, 49265-49266 [2016-17745]
Download as PDF
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2016 / Notices
Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office (‘‘PTAB’’) on April 14,
2016, finding certain claims of the ’934
patent unpatentable, on the
Commission’s final determination. 81
FR 23749–50 (Apr. 22, 2016). On April
26, 2016, the parties filed initial written
submissions addressing the
Commission’s question. On May 3,
2016, the parties filed response briefs.
Having examined the record of this
investigation, including the final ID and
the parties’ submissions, the
Commission has determined that RealD
has proven a violation of section 337
based on infringement of claims 1–3, 9–
11, 13, 15, 17–19, and 21 of the ’455
patent; claims 1, 2, 7, 8, 11, and 12 of
the ’296 patent; and claims 1, 6, and 11
of the ’934 patent. The Commission has
determined to modify the ALJ’s
construction of the ‘‘uniformly
modulate’’ limitation recited in claims 1
and 17 of the ’455 patent. Under the
modified construction, the Commission
has determined that RealD has proven
that the accused MasterImage Horizon
3D, 3D S, M, Rv1, and Rv2 products
infringe the asserted claims of the ’455
patent and that the technical prong of
the domestic industry requirement is
satisfied with respect to that patent. The
Commission has determined that the
asserted claims of the ’455 patent are
not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(e),
102(g), 103, and 112, ¶¶ 1 and 2. The
Commission has determined that the
asserted claims of the ’296 patent are
not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 116 for
improper inventorship. The
Commission has also determined that
the asserted claims of the ’934 patent are
not invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(g) and
103.
The Commission has determined the
appropriate remedy is a limited
exclusion order prohibiting the
importation of certain threedimensional cinema systems, and
components thereof, that infringe the
asserted claims of the ’455, ’296, and
’934 patents and cease and desist orders
directed against MasterImage. The
Commission has determined the public
interest factors enumerated in section
337(d)(1) and (f)(1) do not preclude
issuance of the limited exclusion order
or cease and desist orders.
In view of the PTAB’s Final Written
Decision finding certain claims of the
’934 patent unpatentable, the
Commission has determined to suspend
the enforcement of the limited exclusion
order and cease and desist orders as to
claims 1, 6, and 11 of the ’934 patent
pending final resolution of the PTAB’s
Final Written Decision. See 35 U.S.C.
318(b). The Commission has also
determined to set a bond in the amount
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Jul 26, 2016
Jkt 238001
of 100 percent of the entered value of
excluded products imported during the
period of Presidential review (19 U.S.C.
1337(j)). The Commission’s orders and
opinion were delivered to the President
and to 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: July 21, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016–17711 Filed 7–26–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1014]
Certain Intermediate Bulk Containers;
Institution of Investigation
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that a
complaint was filed with the U.S.
International Trade Commission on June
22, 2016, under section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C.
¨
1337, on behalf of Schutz Container
Systems Inc. of North Branch, New
Jersey. The complaint was
supplemented on June 29 and July 7,
2016. The complaint, as supplemented,
alleges violations of section 337 based
upon the importation into the United
States or sale of certain composite
intermediate bulk containers by reason
of infringement of certain trade dress,
the threat or effect of which is to
substantially destroy or injure a
domestic industry.
The complainant requests that the
Commission institute an investigation
and, after the investigation, issue a
limited exclusion order and a cease and
desist order.
ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for
any confidential information contained
therein, is 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., Room
112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone
(202) 205–2000. Hearing impaired
individuals are advised that information
on this matter can be obtained by
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
49265
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 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Office of Unfair Import Investigations,
U.S. International Trade Commission,
telephone (202) 205–2560.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Scope of Investigation: Having
considered the complaint, the U.S.
International Trade Commission, on
July 21, 2016, ordered that—
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, an investigation be instituted
to determine whether there is a
violation of subsection (a)(1)(A) of
section 337 in the importation into the
United States or sale of certain
composite intermediate bulk containers,
the threat or effect of which is to
substantially destroy or injure a
domestic industry;
(2) For the purpose of the
investigation so instituted, the following
are hereby named as parties upon which
this notice of investigation shall be
served:
¨
(a) The complainant is: Schutz
Container Systems Inc., 200 Aspen Hill
Road, North Branch, NJ 08876–5950.
(b) The respondent is the following
entity alleged to be in violation of
section 337, and is the party upon
which the complaint is to be served:
Zhenjiang Runzhou Jinshan Packaging
Factory, Road Dantu City Industrial
Park, Hengshun Zhenjiang, China.
(c) The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW., Suite
401, Washington, DC 20436; and
(3) For the investigation so instituted,
the Chief Administrative Law Judge,
U.S. International Trade Commission,
shall designate the presiding
Administrative Law Judge.
Responses to the complaint and the
notice of investigation must be
submitted by the named respondent in
accordance with section 210.13 of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to
19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such
responses will be considered by the
Commission if received not later than 20
days after the date of service by the
Commission of the complaint and the
E:\FR\FM\27JYN1.SGM
27JYN1
49266
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 144 / Wednesday, July 27, 2016 / Notices
notice of investigation. Extensions of
time for submitting responses to the
complaint and the notice of
investigation will not be granted unless
good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of the respondent to file a
timely response to each allegation in the
complaint and in this notice may be
deemed to constitute a waiver of the
right to appear and contest the
allegations of the complaint and this
notice, and to authorize the
administrative law judge and the
Commission, without further notice to
the respondent, to find the facts to be as
alleged in the complaint and this notice
and to enter an initial determination
and a final determination containing
such findings, and may result in the
issuance of an exclusion order or a cease
and desist order or both directed against
the respondent.
Authority: The authority for institution of
this investigation is contained in section 337
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and
in section 210.10 of the Commission’s Rules
of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10
(2016).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: July 22, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016–17745 Filed 7–26–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Geoffrey D. Peterson, N.P.; Decision
and Order
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
On April 14, 2015, the Deputy
Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement
Administration, issued an Order to
Show Cause to Geoffrey D. Peterson,
N.P. (hereinafter, Registrant), of Hixson,
Tennessee. The Show Cause Order
proposed the revocation of Registrant’s
DEA Certificate of Registration
MP3330545,1 pursuant to which he is
authorized to dispense controlled
substances in schedules II through V, as
a mid-level practitioner, and the denial
1 While Government also alleges that Registrant
holds an additional registration (MP1971731) and
seeks its revocation as well, in its Request for Final
Agency Action, the Government acknowledges that
this registration had expired shortly before the
issuance of the Show Cause Order. To ensure that
Registrant did not file a renewal application for this
registration, I have taken official notice of
Registrant’s registration record with the Agency.
See 5 U.S.C. 556(e). That record shows that
Registrant allowed this registration to expire and
did not file an application to renew it whether
timely or not. Accordingly, I find that this
proceeding is moot insofar as it seeks the revocation
of this registration.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:01 Jul 26, 2016
Jkt 238001
of any applications on two grounds. GX
1, at 1.
First, the Show Cause Order alleged
that effective January 27, 2015, the
Tennessee Nursing Board had
summarily suspended Registrant’s nurse
practitioner license. Id. at 2. The Order
thus alleged that Registrant is currently
without authority to dispense controlled
substances in the State in which he is
registered with the Agency and
therefore, his registration is subject to
revocation. Id. (citing 21 U.S.C. 802(21),
823(f), 824(a)(3)).
Second, the Show Cause Order
alleged that Registrant materially
falsified his October 7, 2014 application
for the above registration. Id. (citing 21
U.S.C. 824(a)(1)). More specifically, the
Show Cause Order alleged that on
February 17, 2014, Registrant was
arrested by local authorities and charged
with the ‘‘unlawful possession of
marijuana.’’ Id. The Order then alleged
that the charge was still pending at the
time Registrant submitted his renewal
application, and that ‘‘[o]n this
application, [he] did not answer ‘yes’ to
the . . . liability question: ‘Has the
applicant ever been convicted of a crime
in connection with controlled
substance(s) under state or federal law,
or is any action pending?’ ’’ Id. The
Government thus alleged that Registrant
violated 21 U.S.C. 824(a)(1).2
The Show Cause Order also notified
Registrant of his right to request a
hearing on the allegations or to submit
a written statement while waiving his
right to a hearing, the procedure for
electing either option, and the
consequence of failing to elect either
option. Id. at 2–3 (citing 21 CFR
1301.43, 1301.46). On April 23, 2015,
the Show Cause Order was personally
served on Registrant by a DEA Diversion
Investigator. GX 3.
On April 7, 2016, the Government
forwarded a Request for Final Agency
Action. Therein, the Government
represented that neither Registrant ‘‘nor
anyone representing him has requested
a hearing or sent any other
correspondence to DEA.’’ Req. for Final
Agency Action, at 7. Based on the
Government’s representation, I find that
30 days have now passed since the
Show Cause Order was served on
Registrant and that he has neither
2 While the Government contends that Registrant
violated section 824(a)(1), this provision is simply
a grant of authority to the Attorney General to
revoke or suspend a registration and does not itself
impose a substantive rule of conduct. Rather, the
rule of conduct is imposed by 21 U.S.C. 843(a)(4)(A)
(‘‘It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or
intentionally . . . to furnish false or fraudulent
material information in, or omit any material
information from, any application . . . filed under
this subchapter[.]’’).
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
requested a hearing nor submitted a
written statement in lieu of hearing. 21
CFR 1301.43(b) & (c). Accordingly, I
find that Registrant has waived his right
to a hearing or to submit a written
statement and issue this Decision and
Order based on the evidence submitted
by the Government. Id. § 1301.43(d) &
(e). I make the following findings.
Findings
Registrant is the holder of DEA
Certificate of Registration MP3330545,
pursuant to which he is authorized to
dispense controlled substances in
schedules II through V, as a mid-level
practitioner, at the registered address of
Hormone Replacement Specialists, 5550
Highway 153, Suite 103, Hixson,
Tennessee. GX 7, at 1. Registrant
renewed this registration on October 7,
2014, at which time he was required to
answer the following question: ‘‘Has the
applicant ever been convicted of a crime
in connection with controlled
substance(s) under state or federal law,
or been excluded or directed to be
excluded from participation in a
medicare or state health care program,
or any [sic] such action pending?’’ GX
6. Registrant entered ‘‘N’’ for no. Id.
On February 17, 2014, Registrant was
arrested by a member of the Sequatchie
County Sheriff’s Department and
charged with felony possession of
marijuana, an offense under Tenn. Code
Ann. § 39–17–415. GX 5, at 1, 3, 6.
According to a March 31, 2015 letter
from the Clerk of the General Sessions
Court of Sequatchie County, criminal
charges were pending against Registrant
‘‘as of October 31, 2014.’’ GX 8. The
Clerk’s letter further states that the
‘‘[c]harges were expunged on 11/21/
2014.’’ Id.
Registrant was also previously
licensed by the Tennessee Board of
Nursing (Board) as an advanced practice
nurse (APN) and held a Certificate of
Fitness to prescribe. GX 4, at 2.
However, on January 27, 2015, the
Board ordered the summary suspension
of Registrant’s advance practice nurse
license and Certificate of Fitness to
Prescribe. Id. at 7. The Board based its
order on findings which included that
on December 19, 2014, a search warrant
was executed at Registrant’s residence
during which the search team found
‘‘prefilled syringes of morphine, vials of
morphine, shopping bags full of used
needles, a bottle of prednisone, and a
bottle of animal morphine,’’ and that
‘‘[t]he syringes of morphine are of
unknown origin with no identifying
prescription information.’’ Id. at 3. The
search team also found a pipe
containing marijuana residue. Id.
E:\FR\FM\27JYN1.SGM
27JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 144 (Wednesday, July 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49265-49266]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17745]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1014]
Certain Intermediate Bulk Containers; Institution of
Investigation
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the
U.S. International Trade Commission on June 22, 2016, under section 337
of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of
Sch[uuml]tz Container Systems Inc. of North Branch, New Jersey. The
complaint was supplemented on June 29 and July 7, 2016. The complaint,
as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 based upon the
importation into the United States or sale of certain composite
intermediate bulk containers by reason of infringement of certain trade
dress, the threat or effect of which is to substantially destroy or
injure a domestic industry.
The complainant requests that the Commission institute an
investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion
order and a cease and desist order.
ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for any confidential information
contained therein, is 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., Room 112, Washington,
DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2000. Hearing impaired individuals are
advised that information on this matter can be obtained 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 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone (202)
205-2560.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Scope of Investigation: Having considered the complaint, the U.S.
International Trade Commission, on July 21, 2016, ordered that--
(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended, an investigation be instituted to determine whether
there is a violation of subsection (a)(1)(A) of section 337 in the
importation into the United States or sale of certain composite
intermediate bulk containers, the threat or effect of which is to
substantially destroy or injure a domestic industry;
(2) For the purpose of the investigation so instituted, the
following are hereby named as parties upon which this notice of
investigation shall be served:
(a) The complainant is: Sch[uuml]tz Container Systems Inc., 200
Aspen Hill Road, North Branch, NJ 08876-5950.
(b) The respondent is the following entity alleged to be in
violation of section 337, and is the party upon which the complaint is
to be served: Zhenjiang Runzhou Jinshan Packaging Factory, Road Dantu
City Industrial Park, Hengshun Zhenjiang, China.
(c) The Office of Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. International
Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Suite 401, Washington, DC 20436;
and
(3) For the investigation so instituted, the Chief Administrative
Law Judge, U.S. International Trade Commission, shall designate the
presiding Administrative Law Judge.
Responses to the complaint and the notice of investigation must be
submitted by the named respondent in accordance with section 210.13 of
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13.
Pursuant to 19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), such responses will be
considered by the Commission if received not later than 20 days after
the date of service by the Commission of the complaint and the
[[Page 49266]]
notice of investigation. Extensions of time for submitting responses to
the complaint and the notice of investigation will not be granted
unless good cause therefor is shown.
Failure of the respondent to file a timely response to each
allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to
constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations
of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative
law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent,
to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and
to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing
such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or
a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.
Authority: The authority for institution of this investigation
is contained in section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended,
and in section 210.10 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2016).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: July 22, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016-17745 Filed 7-26-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-PDEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE