Certain Botulinum Toxin Products, Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to Same and Certain Products Containing Same Commission Decision To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding a Violation of Section 337; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions, 60489-60490 [2020-21158]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 187 / Friday, September 25, 2020 / Notices
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1145]
Certain Botulinum Toxin Products,
Processes for Manufacturing or
Relating to Same and Certain Products
Containing Same Commission
Decision To Review in Part a Final
Initial Determination Finding a
Violation of Section 337; Schedule for
Filing Written Submissions
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to review
in part a final initial determination
(‘‘FID’’) of the presiding administrative
law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) finding a violation of
section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended. The Commission also
requests written submissions, under the
schedule set forth below, on remedy, the
public interest, and bonding.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Houda Morad, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
708–4716. Copies of non-confidential
documents filed in connection with this
investigation may be viewed on the
Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS)
at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help
accessing EDIS, please email
EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. 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: On March
6, 2019, the Commission instituted this
investigation under section 337 of the
Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19
U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section 337’’), based on a
complaint filed by Medytox Inc. of
Seoul, South Korea; Allergan plc of
Dublin, Ireland; and Allergan, Inc. of
Irvine, California (collectively,
‘‘Complainants’’). See 84 FR 8112–13
(Mar. 6, 2019). The complaint, as
supplemented, alleges a violation of
section 337 based upon the importation
into the United States, the sale for
importation, and the sale within the
United States after importation of
certain botulinum toxin products,
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:25 Sep 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
processes for manufacturing or relating
to same and certain products containing
same by reason of misappropriation of
trade secrets, the threat or effect of
which is to destroy or substantially
injure a domestic industry in the United
States. See id. The notice of
investigation names as respondents
Daewoong Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd.
(‘‘Daewoong’’) of Seoul, South Korea
and Evolus, Inc. (‘‘Evolus’’) of Irvine,
California (collectively, ‘‘Respondents’’).
See id. The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) is also a party to
the investigation. See id.
On July 6, 2020, the ALJ issued the
FID finding a violation of section 337
based on the importation into the
United States, the sale for importation,
or the sale within the United States after
importation of certain botulinum
neurotoxin products by reason of the
misappropriation of trade secrets, the
threat or effect of which is to destroy or
substantially injure an industry in the
United States. See FID at 273.
The FID also includes a recommended
determination (‘‘RD’’) recommending
that, if a violation is found, the
Commission issue: (1) A limited
exclusion order barring entry of certain
botulinum toxin products that are
imported, sold for importation, and/or
sold after importation by respondents
Daewoong and Evolus; and (2) a cease
and desist order against Evolus. The RD
also recommends that the Commission
impose a bond based on price
differential during the period of
Presidential review.
On July 20, 2020, Respondents filed a
petition for Commission review of the
FID. On July 28, 2020, Complainants
and OUII filed responses to
Respondents’ petition. On September
18, 2020, Respondents filed a motion for
leave to file a notice of new factual
development. The Commission has
determined to accept Respondents’
filing.
The Commission has determined to
review the FID in part. Specifically, the
Commission has determined to review
the FID’s findings with respect to
subject matter jurisdiction, standing,
trade secret existence and
misappropriation, and domestic
industry, including the existence of
such domestic industry as well as any
actual or threatened injury thereto. The
Commission has determined not to
review the remainder of the FID. The
Commission has also determined to
allow Complainants to respond to
Respondents’ notice of new factual
development in their written
submissions to the Commission
pursuant to the present notice.
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60489
In connection with its review, the
Commission requests that the parties
brief their positions with reference to
the applicable law and the evidentiary
record regarding the following
questions:
1. Describe the differences between
the Medytox strain and other Hall Ahyper strains and explain the relevance
of those differences to Complainants’
trade secrets misappropriation claim.
2. Discuss the availability in the
marketplace of Hall A-hyper strains
since Dr. Hall’s discovery in the 1920s
and the U.S. Army’s development in the
1940s (i.e., not just during the 2009–
2010 timeframe and thereafter).
3. For the alleged domestic industry
costs regarding activities related to
regulatory approvals and compliance
(including costs for activities such as
relevant research and development or
testing): (A) Which of those regulatory
activities are of a nature that can only
be performed in the United States (for
either legal or practical reasons), and
which could have been carried out in
another country; and (B) does the record
permit allocation of costs between those
two categories?
4. What is the federal legal standard
for determining what constitutes a
misappropriation of trade secrets
sufficient to establish an ‘‘unfair method
of competition’’ under Section 337?
5. Is injury to the complainant an
element of a federal trade secret
misappropriation cause of action that is
necessary to establish an ‘‘unfair
method of competition’’ under Section
337(a)(1)(A) (distinct from the ‘‘threat or
effect’’ requirements of Section
337(a)(1)(A)(i)–(iii))?
6. Please explain whether, consistent
with the federal common law, the injury
requirement discussed in the FID (see
FID at 45 (‘‘(4) that the respondent has
used or disclosed the trade secret
causing injury to the complainant.’’)
(emphasis added)) refers to injury
within the meaning of section
337(a)(1)(A)(i)–(iii) (i.e., ‘‘threat or
effect’’ subsections) and not a separate
‘‘injury’’ requirement for establishing
trade secret misappropriation.
In seeking briefing on these issues, the
Commission has not determined to
excuse any party’s noncompliance with
Commission rules and the ALJ’s
procedural requirements, including
requirements to present issues in
submissions to the ALJ and in petitions
for Commission review. The
Commission may, for example, decline
to disturb certain findings in the FID
upon finding that issue was not
presented in a timely manner to the ALJ
or to the Commission.
E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM
25SEN1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
60490
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 187 / Friday, September 25, 2020 / Notices
In addition, in connection with the
final disposition of this investigation,
the Commission may (1) issue an order
that could result in the exclusion of the
subject articles from entry into the
United States, and/or (2) issue one or
more cease and desist orders that could
result in the respondent(s) being
required to cease and desist from
engaging in unfair acts in the
importation and sale of such articles.
Accordingly, the Commission is
interested in receiving written
submissions that address the form of
remedy, if any, that should be ordered.
If a party seeks exclusion of an article
from entry into the United States for
purposes other than entry for
consumption, the party should so
indicate and provide information
establishing that activities involving
other types of entry either are adversely
affecting it or likely to do so. For
background, see Certain Devices for
Connecting Computers via Telephone
Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, USITC
Pub. No. 2843 (Dec. 1994) (Comm’n
Op.).
If the Commission contemplates some
form of remedy, it must consider the
effects of that remedy upon the public
interest. The factors the Commission
will consider include the effect that an
exclusion order and/or cease and desist
orders would have on (1) the public
health and welfare, (2) competitive
conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S.
production of articles that are like or
directly competitive with those that are
subject to investigation, and (4) U.S.
consumers. The Commission is
therefore interested in receiving written
submissions that address the
aforementioned public interest factors
in the context of this investigation.
If the Commission orders some form
of remedy, the U.S. Trade
Representative, as delegated by the
President, has 60 days to approve,
disapprove, or take no action on the
Commission’s determination. See
Presidential Memorandum of July 21,
2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005).
During this period, the subject articles
would be entitled to enter the United
States under bond, in an amount
determined by the Commission and
prescribed by the Secretary of the
Treasury. The Commission is therefore
interested in receiving submissions
concerning the amount of the bond that
should be imposed if a remedy is
ordered.
Written Submissions: The parties to
the investigation are requested to file
written submissions on the questions
identified in this notice. Parties to the
investigation, interested government
agencies, and any other interested
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:25 Sep 24, 2020
Jkt 250001
parties are encouraged to file written
submissions on the issues of remedy,
the public interest, and bonding. Such
submissions should also address the
recommended determination by the ALJ
on remedy and bonding. Complainants
and the Commission Investigative
Attorney are also requested to submit
proposed remedial orders for the
Commission’s consideration.
Complainants are further requested to
provide the HTSUS numbers under
which the accused products are
imported, and to supply the names of
known importers of the products at
issue in this investigation.
Written submissions and proposed
remedial orders must be filed no later
than close of business on October 9,
2020. Reply submissions must be filed
no later than the close of business on
October 16, 2020. Initial written
submissions may not exceed 60 pages in
length, exclusive of any exhibits, while
reply submissions may not exceed 30
pages in length, exclusive of any
exhibits. No further submissions on any
of these issues will be permitted unless
otherwise ordered by the Commission.
Persons filing written submissions
must file the original document
electronically on or before the deadlines
stated above. The Commission’s paper
filing requirements in 19 CFR 210.4(f)
are currently waived. 85 FR 15798
(March 19, 2020). Submissions should
refer to the investigation number (‘‘Inv.
No. 337–TA–1145’’) in a prominent
place on the cover page and/or the first
page. (See Handbook for Electronic
Filing Procedures, https://
www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_
on_filing_procedures.pdf). 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 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,
and evaluations relating to the
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
programs, personnel, and operations of
the Commission including under 5
U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S.
government employees and contract
personnel,1 solely for cybersecurity
purposes. All non-confidential written
submissions will be available for public
inspection at the Office of the Secretary
and on EDIS.
The Commission’s vote on this
determination took place on September
21, 2020.
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: September 21, 2020.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020–21158 Filed 9–24–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
[OMB Number 1140–0080]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed eCollection
eComments Requested; Extension
Without Change of a Currently
Approved Collection; Notification of
Change of Mailing or Premise Address
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives, Department of
Justice.
ACTION: 60-Day notice.
AGENCY:
The Department of Justice
(DOJ), Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives (ATF), will
submit the following information
collection request to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
The proposed information collection
(IC) is also being published to obtain
comments from the public and affected
agencies.
DATES: Comments are encouraged and
will be accepted for 60 days until
November 24, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have additional comments,
regarding the estimated public burden
or associated response time,
suggestions, or need a copy of the
proposed information collection
instrument with instructions, or
additional information, please contact:
SUMMARY:
1 All contract personnel will sign appropriate
nondisclosure agreements.
E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM
25SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 187 (Friday, September 25, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60489-60490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-21158]
[[Page 60489]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1145]
Certain Botulinum Toxin Products, Processes for Manufacturing or
Relating to Same and Certain Products Containing Same Commission
Decision To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding a
Violation of Section 337; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to review in part a final initial
determination (``FID'') of the presiding administrative law judge
(``ALJ'') finding a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930,
as amended. The Commission also requests written submissions, under the
schedule set forth below, on remedy, the public interest, and bonding.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Houda Morad, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-4716. Copies of non-
confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may
be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email
[email protected]. 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: On March 6, 2019, the Commission instituted
this investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (``section 337''), based on a complaint filed
by Medytox Inc. of Seoul, South Korea; Allergan plc of Dublin, Ireland;
and Allergan, Inc. of Irvine, California (collectively,
``Complainants''). See 84 FR 8112-13 (Mar. 6, 2019). The complaint, as
supplemented, alleges a violation of section 337 based upon the
importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the
sale within the United States after importation of certain botulinum
toxin products, processes for manufacturing or relating to same and
certain products containing same by reason of misappropriation of trade
secrets, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially
injure a domestic industry in the United States. See id. The notice of
investigation names as respondents Daewoong Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd.
(``Daewoong'') of Seoul, South Korea and Evolus, Inc. (``Evolus'') of
Irvine, California (collectively, ``Respondents''). See id. The Office
of Unfair Import Investigations (``OUII'') is also a party to the
investigation. See id.
On July 6, 2020, the ALJ issued the FID finding a violation of
section 337 based on the importation into the United States, the sale
for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation
of certain botulinum neurotoxin products by reason of the
misappropriation of trade secrets, the threat or effect of which is to
destroy or substantially injure an industry in the United States. See
FID at 273.
The FID also includes a recommended determination (``RD'')
recommending that, if a violation is found, the Commission issue: (1) A
limited exclusion order barring entry of certain botulinum toxin
products that are imported, sold for importation, and/or sold after
importation by respondents Daewoong and Evolus; and (2) a cease and
desist order against Evolus. The RD also recommends that the Commission
impose a bond based on price differential during the period of
Presidential review.
On July 20, 2020, Respondents filed a petition for Commission
review of the FID. On July 28, 2020, Complainants and OUII filed
responses to Respondents' petition. On September 18, 2020, Respondents
filed a motion for leave to file a notice of new factual development.
The Commission has determined to accept Respondents' filing.
The Commission has determined to review the FID in part.
Specifically, the Commission has determined to review the FID's
findings with respect to subject matter jurisdiction, standing, trade
secret existence and misappropriation, and domestic industry, including
the existence of such domestic industry as well as any actual or
threatened injury thereto. The Commission has determined not to review
the remainder of the FID. The Commission has also determined to allow
Complainants to respond to Respondents' notice of new factual
development in their written submissions to the Commission pursuant to
the present notice.
In connection with its review, the Commission requests that the
parties brief their positions with reference to the applicable law and
the evidentiary record regarding the following questions:
1. Describe the differences between the Medytox strain and other
Hall A-hyper strains and explain the relevance of those differences to
Complainants' trade secrets misappropriation claim.
2. Discuss the availability in the marketplace of Hall A-hyper
strains since Dr. Hall's discovery in the 1920s and the U.S. Army's
development in the 1940s (i.e., not just during the 2009-2010 timeframe
and thereafter).
3. For the alleged domestic industry costs regarding activities
related to regulatory approvals and compliance (including costs for
activities such as relevant research and development or testing): (A)
Which of those regulatory activities are of a nature that can only be
performed in the United States (for either legal or practical reasons),
and which could have been carried out in another country; and (B) does
the record permit allocation of costs between those two categories?
4. What is the federal legal standard for determining what
constitutes a misappropriation of trade secrets sufficient to establish
an ``unfair method of competition'' under Section 337?
5. Is injury to the complainant an element of a federal trade
secret misappropriation cause of action that is necessary to establish
an ``unfair method of competition'' under Section 337(a)(1)(A)
(distinct from the ``threat or effect'' requirements of Section
337(a)(1)(A)(i)-(iii))?
6. Please explain whether, consistent with the federal common law,
the injury requirement discussed in the FID (see FID at 45 (``(4) that
the respondent has used or disclosed the trade secret causing injury to
the complainant.'') (emphasis added)) refers to injury within the
meaning of section 337(a)(1)(A)(i)-(iii) (i.e., ``threat or effect''
subsections) and not a separate ``injury'' requirement for establishing
trade secret misappropriation.
In seeking briefing on these issues, the Commission has not
determined to excuse any party's noncompliance with Commission rules
and the ALJ's procedural requirements, including requirements to
present issues in submissions to the ALJ and in petitions for
Commission review. The Commission may, for example, decline to disturb
certain findings in the FID upon finding that issue was not presented
in a timely manner to the ALJ or to the Commission.
[[Page 60490]]
In addition, in connection with the final disposition of this
investigation, the Commission may (1) issue an order that could result
in the exclusion of the subject articles from entry into the United
States, and/or (2) issue one or more cease and desist orders that could
result in the respondent(s) being required to cease and desist from
engaging in unfair acts in the importation and sale of such articles.
Accordingly, the Commission is interested in receiving written
submissions that address the form of remedy, if any, that should be
ordered. If a party seeks exclusion of an article from entry into the
United States for purposes other than entry for consumption, the party
should so indicate and provide information establishing that activities
involving other types of entry either are adversely affecting it or
likely to do so. For background, see Certain Devices for Connecting
Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337-TA-360, USITC Pub. No. 2843
(Dec. 1994) (Comm'n Op.).
If the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must
consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The
factors the Commission will consider include the effect that an
exclusion order and/or cease and desist orders would have on (1) the
public health and welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S.
economy, (3) U.S. production of articles that are like or directly
competitive with those that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S.
consumers. The Commission is therefore interested in receiving written
submissions that address the aforementioned public interest factors in
the context of this investigation.
If the Commission orders some form of remedy, the U.S. Trade
Representative, as delegated by the President, has 60 days to approve,
disapprove, or take no action on the Commission's determination. See
Presidential Memorandum of July 21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005).
During this period, the subject articles would be entitled to enter the
United States under bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and
prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is
therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of
the bond that should be imposed if a remedy is ordered.
Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation are requested
to file written submissions on the questions identified in this notice.
Parties to the investigation, interested government agencies, and any
other interested parties are encouraged to file written submissions on
the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. Such
submissions should also address the recommended determination by the
ALJ on remedy and bonding. Complainants and the Commission
Investigative Attorney are also requested to submit proposed remedial
orders for the Commission's consideration. Complainants are further
requested to provide the HTSUS numbers under which the accused products
are imported, and to supply the names of known importers of the
products at issue in this investigation.
Written submissions and proposed remedial orders must be filed no
later than close of business on October 9, 2020. Reply submissions must
be filed no later than the close of business on October 16, 2020.
Initial written submissions may not exceed 60 pages in length,
exclusive of any exhibits, while reply submissions may not exceed 30
pages in length, exclusive of any exhibits. No further submissions on
any of these issues will be permitted unless otherwise ordered by the
Commission.
Persons filing written submissions must file the original document
electronically on or before the deadlines stated above. The
Commission's paper filing requirements in 19 CFR 210.4(f) are currently
waived. 85 FR 15798 (March 19, 2020). Submissions should refer to the
investigation number (``Inv. No. 337-TA-1145'') in a prominent place on
the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic
Filing Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_on_filing_procedures.pdf). 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
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,
and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of
the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S.
government employees and contract personnel,\1\ solely for
cybersecurity purposes. All non-confidential written submissions will
be available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and
on EDIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure
agreements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission's vote on this determination took place on September
21, 2020.
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: September 21, 2020.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020-21158 Filed 9-24-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P