Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof; Notice of Commission Determination Not to Review an Initial Determination Granting a Joint Motion To Terminate the Advisory Opinion Proceeding Based on a Settlement Agreement; Termination of the Advisory Opinion Proceeding, 58652-58653 [2017-26826]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
58652
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 13, 2017 / Notices
Compact for Regulation of Class III
Gaming between the Confederated
Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community
of Oregon and the State of Oregon
governing Class III gaming; this notice
announces approval of the amended
Compact.
This compact takes effect on
December 13, 2017.
DATES:
Ms.
Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of Indian
Gaming, Office of the Assistant
Secretary—Indian Affairs, Washington,
DC 20240, (202) 219–4066.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Section 11
of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
(IGRA) requires the Secretary of the
Interior to publish in the Federal
Register notice of approved Tribal-State
compacts that are for the purpose of
engaging in Class III gaming activities
on Indian lands. See Public Law 100–
497, 25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq. All TribalState Class III compacts, including
amendments, are subject to review and
approval by the Secretary under 25 CFR
293.4. The Amendment to the Amended
and Restated Tribal-State Compact for
Regulation of Class III Gaming between
the Confederated Tribes of the Grand
Ronde Community of Oregon and the
State of Oregon amends the previous
compact, revises parts of the definition
section, clarifies procedures for offering
new types of video lottery terminals,
and moves certain language regarding
cooperation between Tribal and State
law enforcement to another section of
the Compact. The Amendment to the
Amended and Restated Tribal-State
Compact for Regulation of Class III
Gaming between the Confederated
Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community
of Oregon and the State of Oregon is
approved. See 25 U.S.C. 2710(d)(8)(A).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: November 9, 2017.
John Tahsuda,
Acting Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2017–26816 Filed 12–12–17; 8:45 am]
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 12, 2017
Jkt 244001
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 337–TA–565/946;
(Advisory Opinion Proceeding)]
Certain Ink Cartridges and
Components Thereof; Notice of
Commission Determination Not to
Review an Initial Determination
Granting a Joint Motion To Terminate
the Advisory Opinion Proceeding
Based on a Settlement Agreement;
Termination of the Advisory Opinion
Proceeding
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined not to
review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’)
(Order No. 6) granting a joint motion to
terminate the consolidated advisory
opinion proceeding in the abovecaptioned investigations based on a
settlement agreement. The consolidated
advisory opinion proceeding is
terminated.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Cathy Chen, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–2392. 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 Inv. No. 337–
TA–565 on March 23, 2006, based on a
complaint filed by Epson Portland, Inc.
of Hillsboro, Oregon, Epson America,
Inc. of Long Beach, California, and
Seiko Epson Corporation of NaganoKen, Japan (collectively, ‘‘Epson’’). 71
FR 14720 (Mar. 23, 2006). The
complaint alleged violations of section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, by reason of
infringement of certain claims of U.S.
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Patent Nos. 5,615,957; 5,622,439;
5,158,377; 5,221,148; 5,156,472;
5,488,401; 6,502,917; 6,550,902;
6,955,422; 7,008,053; and 7,011,397.
The Commission’s notice of
investigation named 24 respondents
including Ninestar Technology
Company Ltd. of Montclair, California
(‘‘Ninestar’’). The Office of Unfair
Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’)
participated in the investigation. Several
respondents were terminated from the
investigation on the basis of settlement
agreements or consent orders or were
found in default. On October 19, 2007,
the Commission issued a general
exclusion order (‘‘GEO’’) and a limited
exclusion order. The Commission also
issued cease and desist orders (‘‘CDO’’)
directed to several domestic
respondents.
The Commission instituted Inv. No.
337–TA–946 on January 27, 2015, based
on a complaint filed by Epson. 80 FR
4314–16 (Jan. 27, 2015). That complaint
alleged violations of section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19
U.S.C. 1337, by reason of infringement
of certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos.
8,366,233; 8,454,116; 8,794,749;
8,801,163; and 8,882,513. The
Commission’s notice of investigation
named numerous respondents. OUII
participated in the investigation. All the
participating respondents were
terminated from the investigation as a
result of settlement agreements and/or
consent motion stipulations. A number
of the named respondents defaulted. On
October 28, 2015, the presiding
administrative law judge (ALJ) issued an
initial determination granting Epson’s
motion for summary determination of
violation of section 337 by the
defaulting respondents. Based on
evidence of a pattern of violation and
difficulty ascertaining the source of the
infringing products, the Commission
issued a GEO and CDOs directed to two
defaulted domestic respondents on May
26, 2016.
On April 26, 2017, Ninestar, Ninestar
Image Tech. Ltd., and Apex Microtech
Ltd. (collectively, ‘‘Requesters’’) filed a
request for a consolidated advisory
opinion proceeding in both
investigations pursuant to Commission
Rule 210.79 (19 CFR 210.79).
Specifically, Requesters seek an
advisory opinion that will declare that
their refurbished Epson ink cartridges
remanufactured using empty Epson ink
cartridges collected from the United
States are outside the scope of the GEOs
and CDOs issued in both investigations.
Requesters also ask that the
consolidated advisory opinion
proceeding be conducted in an
expedited manner pursuant to
E:\FR\FM\13DEN1.SGM
13DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 238 / Wednesday, December 13, 2017 / Notices
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Commission Rule 210.2 (19 CFR 210.2),
without a formal hearing or discovery.
Epson filed a timely response opposing
the request. Thereafter, Requesters filed
a motion for leave to file a reply to
Epson’s response.
On June 16, 2017, the Commission
determined to institute a consolidated
advisory opinion proceeding in both
investigations and referred the request
to the Chief ALJ to designate a presiding
ALJ. 82 FR 27723 (Jun. 16, 2017). Epson,
the Requesters, and OUII were named as
parties to the proceeding. The
Commission also determined to deny
Requesters’ motion for leave to file a
reply.
On November 17, 2017, Epson and the
Requesters filed a joint motion to
terminate the consolidated advisory
opinion proceeding based on a
settlement agreement. The joint motion
included a confidential version of the
settlement agreement. A public version
of the agreement was filed with the
public version of the joint motion. That
same day, OUII filed a response in
support of the joint motion. On
November 22, 2017, the ALJ issued the
subject ID (Order No. 6) granting the
joint motion to terminate the
consolidated advisory opinion
proceeding. No petitions for review
were filed.
The Commission has determined not
to review the subject ID. The
Commission agrees with the ALJ that
the joint motion to terminate the
consolidated advisory opinion
proceeding complies with the
Commission’s rules for termination and
that there is no evidence that
termination of the proceeding will
adversely affect the public interest.
Order No. 6 at 2–3.
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.
Dated: December 7, 2017.
William R. Bishop,
Supervisory Hearings and Information
Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017–26826 Filed 12–12–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:53 Dec 12, 2017
Jkt 244001
JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE
UNITED STATES
Hearings of the Judicial Conference
Advisory Committees on the Federal
Rules of Appellate and Criminal
Procedure and Rules of Evidence
Advisory Committees on the
Federal Rules of Appellate and Criminal
Procedure, and Rules of Evidence,
Judicial Conference of the United States.
ACTION: Notice of cancellation of public
hearings.
AGENCY:
The January 5, 2018 public
hearings in Phoenix, Arizona, on
proposed amendments to the Appellate,
Criminal and Evidence Rules, the Rules
Governing Section 2254 Cases in the
United States District Courts, and the
Rules Governing Section 2255
Proceedings for the United States
District Courts have been canceled.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rebecca A. Womeldorf, Rules
Committee Secretary, Rules Committee
Staff, Administrative Office of the
United States Courts, Washington, DC
20544, telephone (202) 502–1820.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Announcement for this hearing was
previously published in 82 FR 37610.
SUMMARY:
Dated: December 7, 2017.
Rebecca A. Womeldorf,
Rules Committee Secretary.
58653
Also, ArcSoft Inc., Freemont, CA;
ASD Electronics, Kowloon, HONG
KONG–CHINA; EDC GmbH,
Langenhagen, GERMANY; Orion
Electric Co., Ltd., Fukui, JAPAN; Pixela
Corporation, Osaka, JAPAN; TEAC
Corporation, Tokyo, JAPAN; and
Yamaha Corporation, Hamamatsu,
JAPAN, have withdrawn as parties to
this venture.
No other changes have been made in
either the membership or planned
activity of the group research project.
Membership in this group research
project remains open, and DVD CCA
intends to file additional written
notifications disclosing all changes in
membership.
On April 11, 2001, DVD CCA filed its
original notification pursuant to Section
6(a) of the Act. The Department of
Justice published a notice in the Federal
Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the
Act on August 3, 2001 (66 FR 40727).
The last notification was filed with
the Department on August 23, 2017. A
notice was published in the Federal
Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the
Act on September 29, 2017 (82 FR
45611).
Patricia A. Brink,
Director of Civil Enforcement, Antitrust
Division.
[FR Doc. 2017–26891 Filed 12–12–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
[FR Doc. 2017–26789 Filed 12–12–17; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
BILLING CODE 2210–55–P
Antitrust Division
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Antitrust Division
Notice Pursuant to the National
Cooperative Research and Production
Act of 1993—DVD Copy Control
Association
Notice is hereby given that, on
November 21, 2017, pursuant to Section
6(a) of the National Cooperative
Research and Production Act of 1993,
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), DVD
Copy Control Association (‘‘DVD CCA’’)
has filed written notifications
simultaneously with the Attorney
General and the Federal Trade
Commission disclosing changes in its
membership. The notifications were
filed for the purpose of extending the
Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of
antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages
under specified circumstances.
Specifically, Cinram GmbH, Oliphant,
PA; Kaleidescape, Inc., Mountain View,
CA; and Lite-On Technology Corp.,
Taipei, TAIWAN, have been added as
parties to this venture.
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notice Pursuant to the National
Cooperative Research and Production
Act of 1993—Cooperative Research
Group on CHEDE–VII
Notice is hereby given that, on
November 8, 2017, pursuant to Section
6(a) of the National Cooperative
Research and Production Act of 1993,
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’),
Southwest Research Institute—
Cooperative Research Group on
CHEDE–VII (‘‘CHEDE–VII’’) has filed
written notifications simultaneously
with the Attorney General and the
Federal Trade Commission disclosing
changes in its membership. The
notifications were filed for the purpose
of extending the Act’s provisions
limiting the recovery of antitrust
plaintiffs to actual damages under
specified circumstances. Specifically,
General Motors, Detroit, MI, has
withdrawn as a party to this venture.
No other changes have been made in
either the membership or planned
activity of the group research project.
Membership in this group research
E:\FR\FM\13DEN1.SGM
13DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 13, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58652-58653]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26826]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 337-TA-565/946; (Advisory Opinion Proceeding)]
Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof; Notice of
Commission Determination Not to Review an Initial Determination
Granting a Joint Motion To Terminate the Advisory Opinion Proceeding
Based on a Settlement Agreement; Termination of the Advisory Opinion
Proceeding
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined not to review an initial determination
(``ID'') (Order No. 6) granting a joint motion to terminate the
consolidated advisory opinion proceeding in the above-captioned
investigations based on a settlement agreement. The consolidated
advisory opinion proceeding is terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cathy Chen, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-2392. 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 Inv. No. 337-TA-
565 on March 23, 2006, based on a complaint filed by Epson Portland,
Inc. of Hillsboro, Oregon, Epson America, Inc. of Long Beach,
California, and Seiko Epson Corporation of Nagano-Ken, Japan
(collectively, ``Epson''). 71 FR 14720 (Mar. 23, 2006). The complaint
alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, by reason of infringement of certain claims of
U.S. Patent Nos. 5,615,957; 5,622,439; 5,158,377; 5,221,148; 5,156,472;
5,488,401; 6,502,917; 6,550,902; 6,955,422; 7,008,053; and 7,011,397.
The Commission's notice of investigation named 24 respondents including
Ninestar Technology Company Ltd. of Montclair, California
(``Ninestar''). The Office of Unfair Import Investigations (``OUII'')
participated in the investigation. Several respondents were terminated
from the investigation on the basis of settlement agreements or consent
orders or were found in default. On October 19, 2007, the Commission
issued a general exclusion order (``GEO'') and a limited exclusion
order. The Commission also issued cease and desist orders (``CDO'')
directed to several domestic respondents.
The Commission instituted Inv. No. 337-TA-946 on January 27, 2015,
based on a complaint filed by Epson. 80 FR 4314-16 (Jan. 27, 2015).
That complaint alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, by reason of infringement of certain
claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,366,233; 8,454,116; 8,794,749; 8,801,163;
and 8,882,513. The Commission's notice of investigation named numerous
respondents. OUII participated in the investigation. All the
participating respondents were terminated from the investigation as a
result of settlement agreements and/or consent motion stipulations. A
number of the named respondents defaulted. On October 28, 2015, the
presiding administrative law judge (ALJ) issued an initial
determination granting Epson's motion for summary determination of
violation of section 337 by the defaulting respondents. Based on
evidence of a pattern of violation and difficulty ascertaining the
source of the infringing products, the Commission issued a GEO and CDOs
directed to two defaulted domestic respondents on May 26, 2016.
On April 26, 2017, Ninestar, Ninestar Image Tech. Ltd., and Apex
Microtech Ltd. (collectively, ``Requesters'') filed a request for a
consolidated advisory opinion proceeding in both investigations
pursuant to Commission Rule 210.79 (19 CFR 210.79). Specifically,
Requesters seek an advisory opinion that will declare that their
refurbished Epson ink cartridges remanufactured using empty Epson ink
cartridges collected from the United States are outside the scope of
the GEOs and CDOs issued in both investigations. Requesters also ask
that the consolidated advisory opinion proceeding be conducted in an
expedited manner pursuant to
[[Page 58653]]
Commission Rule 210.2 (19 CFR 210.2), without a formal hearing or
discovery. Epson filed a timely response opposing the request.
Thereafter, Requesters filed a motion for leave to file a reply to
Epson's response.
On June 16, 2017, the Commission determined to institute a
consolidated advisory opinion proceeding in both investigations and
referred the request to the Chief ALJ to designate a presiding ALJ. 82
FR 27723 (Jun. 16, 2017). Epson, the Requesters, and OUII were named as
parties to the proceeding. The Commission also determined to deny
Requesters' motion for leave to file a reply.
On November 17, 2017, Epson and the Requesters filed a joint motion
to terminate the consolidated advisory opinion proceeding based on a
settlement agreement. The joint motion included a confidential version
of the settlement agreement. A public version of the agreement was
filed with the public version of the joint motion. That same day, OUII
filed a response in support of the joint motion. On November 22, 2017,
the ALJ issued the subject ID (Order No. 6) granting the joint motion
to terminate the consolidated advisory opinion proceeding. No petitions
for review were filed.
The Commission has determined not to review the subject ID. The
Commission agrees with the ALJ that the joint motion to terminate the
consolidated advisory opinion proceeding complies with the Commission's
rules for termination and that there is no evidence that termination of
the proceeding will adversely affect the public interest. Order No. 6
at 2-3.
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.
Dated: December 7, 2017.
William R. Bishop,
Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2017-26826 Filed 12-12-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
