Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From China and Taiwan; Determinations, 50678-50679 [2017-23797]

Download as PDF 50678 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 210 / Wednesday, November 1, 2017 / Notices INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–945 (Modification Proceeding)] Certain Network Devices, Related Software and Components Thereof (II) Institution of Modification Proceeding U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to institute a modification proceeding in the abovecaptioned investigation. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amanda P. 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 at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) at https:// edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal on (202) 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation on January 27, 2015, based on a Complaint filed by Cisco Systems, Inc. of San Jose, California (‘‘Cisco’’). 80 FR 4313–14 (Jan. 27, 2015). The Complaint alleges violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section 337’’), by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,023,853 (‘‘the ’853 patent’’); 6,377,577 (‘‘the ’577 patent’’); 7,460,492 (‘‘the ’492 patent’’); 7,061,875 (‘‘the ’875 patent’’); 7,224,668 (‘‘the ’668 patent’’); and 8,051,211 (‘‘the ’211 patent’’). The Complaint further alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The Commission’s Notice of Investigation named Arista Networks, Inc. of Santa Clara, California (‘‘Arista’’) as the respondent. The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) was also named as a party to the investigation. The Commission terminated the investigation in part as to certain claims sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:16 Oct 31, 2017 Jkt 244001 of the asserted patents. Notice (Nov. 18, 2015) (see Order No. 38 (Oct. 27, 2015)); Notice (Dec. 1, 2015) (see Order No. 47 (Nov. 9, 2015)). On May 4, 2017, the Commission found a violation of section 337 with respect to certain of the asserted claims of the ’577 and ’668 patents. Notice (May 4, 2017); 82 FR 21827–29 (May 10, 2017); see also Notice of Correction (May 30, 2017); 82 FR 25811 (June 5, 2017). The Commission issued a limited exclusion order (‘‘LEO’’) and a cease and desist order (‘‘CDO’’) against Arista. Id. The Commission did not find a violation with respect to the ’853, ’875, ’492, and ’211 patents. Id. On June 30, 2017, Cisco filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (‘‘Federal Circuit’’), seeking review of the Commission’s finding of no violation. Cisco Sys., Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Appeal No. 17–2289. On July 21, 2017, Arista filed a notice of appeal with the Federal Circuit, seeking review of the Commission’s finding of violation. Arista Networks, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Appeal No. 17–2336. On August 3, 2017, the Federal Circuit consolidated the Arista and Cisco appeals. Cisco Sys., Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Appeal No. 17–2289, Dkt. No. 20. The consolidated appeal is currently pending before the Federal Circuit. On August 25, 2017, Arista filed a motion with the Federal Circuit seeking to stay the Commission’s remedial orders pending resolution of the appeal on the merits. On September 22, 2017, the Federal Circuit denied this request ‘‘subject to the condition that the product redesign on which Cisco relies to deny irreparable harm must be permitted to enter the country, without being blocked by the Commission order under review in this case, unless and until Commission proceedings are initiated and completed to produce an enforceable determination that such a redesign is barred by the order here under review or by a new or amended order.’’ Cisco Sys, Inc. v. ITC; Arista Networks, Inc. v. ITC, Appeal Nos. 2017–2289, –2351, Order at 3 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 22, 2017). On September 27, 2017, Cisco petitioned for a modification proceeding to determine whether Arista’s redesigned switches infringe the patent claims that are the subject of the LEO and CDO issued in this investigation and for modification of the remedial orders to specify the status of these redesigned products. On October 10, 2017, Arista filed its opposition to Cisco’s petition. On October 17, 2017, Cisco filed a Motion for Leave to Submit a Reply in Support of Its Petition for a PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Modification Proceeding. The Commission grants Cisco’s motion to file a reply. The Commission has determined that the request complies with the requirements for institution of a modification proceeding under Commission Rule 210.76. Accordingly, the Commission has determined to institute a modification proceeding and has delegated the proceeding to the Chief Administrative Law Judge to designate a presiding Administrative Law Judge. Cisco, Arista, and OUII are named as parties to the proceeding. 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: October 27, 2017. Lisa R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission. [FR Doc. 2017–23785 Filed 10–31–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7020–02–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation Nos. 731–TA–1186–1187 (Review)] Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From China and Taiwan; Determinations On the basis of the record 1 developed in the subject five-year reviews, the United States International Trade Commission (‘‘Commission’’) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’), that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on certain stilbenic optical brightening agents from China and Taiwan would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. Background The Commission, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), instituted these reviews on April 3, 2017 (82 FR 16226) and determined on July 7, 2017 that it would conduct expedited reviews (82 FR 37237, August 9, 2017). The Commission made these determinations pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It completed and filed its determinations 1 The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)). E:\FR\FM\01NON1.SGM 01NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 210 / Wednesday, November 1, 2017 / Notices Commission’s TDD terminal on (202) 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission has received a complaint and a submission pursuant to § 210.8(b) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure filed on behalf of LG Chem, Ltd.; LG Chem Michigan Inc.; LG By order of the Commission. Chem Power Inc.; and Toray Industries, Issued: October 27, 2017. Inc. on October 25, 2017. The complaint Lisa R. Barton, alleges violations of section 337 of the Secretary to the Commission. Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337) in [FR Doc. 2017–23797 Filed 10–31–17; 8:45 am] the importation into the United States, BILLING CODE 7020–02–P the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain batteries and INTERNATIONAL TRADE electrochemical devices containing COMMISSION composite separators, components thereof, and products containing same. Notice of Receipt of Complaint; The complaint names as respondents Solicitation of Comments Relating to Amperex Technology Limited of Hong the Public Interest Kong; DJI Technology Co., Ltd. of China; DJI Technology, Inc. of Burbank, CA; AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Guangdong OPPO Mobile Commission. Telecommunications Corp., Ltd. of ACTION: Notice. China; and OPPO Digital, Inc. of Menlo Park, CA. The complainant requests that SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Commission issue a limited the U.S. International Trade exclusion order, cease and desist orders, Commission has received a complaint and impose a bond upon respondents’ entitled Certain Batteries and alleged infringing articles during the 60Electrochemical Devices Containing day Presidential review period pursuant Composite Separators, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, to 19 U.S.C. 1337(j). Proposed respondents, other DN 3269; the Commission is soliciting interested parties, and members of the comments on any public interest issues public are invited to file comments, not raised by the complaint or to exceed five (5) pages in length, complainant’s filing pursuant to the inclusive of attachments, on any public Commission’s Rules of Practice and interest issues raised by the complaint Procedure. or § 210.8(b) filing. Comments should FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa address whether issuance of the relief R. Barton, Secretary to the Commission, specifically requested by the U.S. International Trade Commission, complainant in this investigation would 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC affect the public health and welfare in 20436, telephone (202) 205–2000. The the United States, competitive public version of the complaint can be conditions in the United States accessed on the Commission’s economy, the production of like or Electronic Document Information directly competitive articles in the System (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov, United States, or United States and will be available for inspection consumers. during official business hours (8:45 a.m. In particular, the Commission is to 5:15 p.m.) in the Office of the interested in comments that: Secretary, U.S. International Trade (i) Explain how the articles Commission, 500 E Street SW., potentially subject to the requested Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) remedial orders are used in the United 205–2000. States; (ii) identify any public health, safety, General information concerning the or welfare concerns in the United States Commission may also be obtained by relating to the requested remedial accessing its Internet server at United orders; States International Trade Commission (iii) identify like or directly (USITC) at https://www.usitc.gov. The competitive articles that complainant, public record for this investigation may its licensees, or third parties make in the be viewed on the Commission’s United States which could replace the Electronic Document Information subject articles if they were to be System (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. excluded; Hearing-impaired persons are advised (iv) indicate whether complainant, that information on this matter can be complainant’s licensees, and/or third obtained by contacting the sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES in these reviews on October 27, 2017. The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4737 (October 2017), entitled Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from China and Taiwan: Investigation Nos. 731–TA–1186–1187 (Review). VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:26 Oct 31, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 50679 party suppliers have the capacity to replace the volume of articles potentially subject to the requested exclusion order and/or a cease and desist order within a commercially reasonable time; and (v) explain how the requested remedial orders would impact United States consumers. Written submissions must be filed no later than by close of business, eight calendar days after the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register. There will be further opportunities for comment on the public interest after the issuance of any final initial determination in this investigation. Persons filing written submissions must file the original document electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit 8 true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next day pursuant to § 210.4(f) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the docket number (‘‘Docket No. 3269’’) in a prominent place on the cover page and/ or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures, Electronic Filing Procedures.) 1 Persons with questions regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202–205–2000). Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All such requests should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All information, including confidential business information and documents for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews, 1 Handbook for Electronic Filing Procedures: https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_ filing_procedures.pdf. E:\FR\FM\01NON1.SGM 01NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 210 (Wednesday, November 1, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50678-50679]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23797]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1186-1187 (Review)]


Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From China and 
Taiwan; Determinations

    On the basis of the record \1\ developed in the subject five-year 
reviews, the United States International Trade Commission 
(``Commission'') determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (``the 
Act''), that revocation of the antidumping duty orders on certain 
stilbenic optical brightening agents from China and Taiwan would be 
likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an 
industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    The Commission, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 
1675(c)), instituted these reviews on April 3, 2017 (82 FR 16226) and 
determined on July 7, 2017 that it would conduct expedited reviews (82 
FR 37237, August 9, 2017).
    The Commission made these determinations pursuant to section 751(c) 
of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It completed and filed its 
determinations

[[Page 50679]]

in these reviews on October 27, 2017. The views of the Commission are 
contained in USITC Publication 4737 (October 2017), entitled Certain 
Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents from China and Taiwan: 
Investigation Nos. 731-TA-1186-1187 (Review).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: October 27, 2017.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2017-23797 Filed 10-31-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7020-02-P