Certain Stilbenic Optical Brightening Agents From China and Taiwan; Determinations, 50678-50679 [2017-23797]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
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
