Certain Bone Cements and Bone Cement Accessories; Commission Determination To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on the Issues Under Review and on Remedy, Public Interest, and Bonding, 20200-20202 [2021-07765]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
20200
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 72 / Friday, April 16, 2021 / Notices
products infringe claim 2 of the ’228
patent. The Commission has also
determined to reverse the ID’s finding
that Philips’ BX–100 Biosensor Device
does not practice all limitations of the
’228 patent, and therefore finds that
Philips satisfies the technical prong of
the domestic industry requirement with
respect to this patent. The Commission
takes no position on the ID’s finding
that claim 2 of the ’228 patent is not
unenforceable based on patent
exhaustion. With respect to the ’464
patent, the Commission has determined
to take no position on the ID’s analysis
and finding regarding an industry in the
process of being established, and
therefore takes no position on whether
Philips has met the economic prong
requirement.
Accordingly, as the Commission does
not disturb the ID’s other findings with
respect to the ’228 and ’464 patents, the
Commission has determined to affirm
the final ID’s finding of no violation of
section 337 with respect to these two
patents.
The Commission previously
determined to review two IDs the ALJ
issued on October 1, 2020: (1) Order No.
34 granting Philips’ motion for partial
summary determination that
complainants satisfied the economic
prong of the domestic industry
requirement as to the BX–100 Biosensor
Device with respect to the ’228 patent;
and (2) Order No. 35 granting
Respondents’ motion for summary
determination that Respondents’
accused products do not infringe (i)
asserted claims 1 and 6 of the ’698
patent, and (ii) asserted claims 1 and 6
of the ’464 patent with respect to the
accused heart rate monitoring
functionalities. Comm’n Notice (Nov.
16, 2020). On review of the first ID
(Order No. 34), the Commission has
determined to take no position on the
ID’s finding that Philips has satisfied the
economic prong of the domestic
industry requirement by showing that a
domestic industry is in the process of
being established. The Commission has
determined to affirm the finding in
Order No. 34 that an industry exists in
the United States as to the BX–100
Biosensor Device with respect to the
’228 patent. The Commission has also
determined to affirm the findings in the
second ID (Order No. 35) of noninfringement with respect to the ’698
patent, and non-infringement with
respect to the ’464 patent for the heart
rate monitoring functionalities in the
accused Fitbit and Garmin devices. The
’698 patent therefore is terminated from
the investigation with a finding of no
violation of section 337.
The investigation is terminated.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:57 Apr 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
The Commission vote for this
determination took place on April 12,
2021.
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: April 12, 2021.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021–07797 Filed 4–15–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1175]
Certain Bone Cements and Bone
Cement Accessories; Commission
Determination To Review in Part a
Final Initial Determination Finding No
Violation of Section 337; Schedule for
Filing Written Submissions on the
Issues Under Review and on Remedy,
Public Interest, and Bonding
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission (‘‘Commission’’) has
determined to review in part a final
initial determination (‘‘FID’’) of the
presiding administrative law judge
(‘‘ALJ’’) finding no violation of section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, in the above-captioned
investigation. The Commission requests
briefing from the parties on certain
issues under review, as indicated in this
notice. The Commission also requests
briefing from the parties, interested
government agencies, and interested
persons on the issues of remedy, the
public interest, and bonding.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lynde Herzbach, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–3228. 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.
Hearing-impaired persons are advised
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
that information on this matter can be
obtained by contacting the
Commission’s TDD terminal, telephone
202–205–1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
September 23, 2019, the Commission
instituted this investigation based on a
complaint filed on behalf of Zimmer,
Inc. and Zimmer US, Inc. both of
Warsaw, Indiana (collectively,
‘‘Complainants’’). 84 FR 49764 (Sept.
23, 2019). The complaint alleges
violations of section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337
(‘‘section 337’’), based on the
importation into the United States, the
sale for importation, and the sale within
the United States after importation of
certain bone cements and bone cement
accessories by reason of the
misappropriation of trade secrets, false
advertising, and tortious interference,
the threat or effect of which is to destroy
or substantially injure an industry in the
United States. The complaint also
alleges the existence of a domestic
industry. The Commission’s notice of
investigation names the following as
respondents: Heraeus Medical GmbH of
Wehrheim, Germany and Heraeus
Medical LLC of Yardley, Pennsylvania
(collectively, ‘‘Respondents’’). Id. The
Office of Unfair Import Investigations
(‘‘OUII’’) is named as a party in this
investigation. Id.
On February 11, 2021, the ALJ issued
the FID, finding no violation of section
337. More particularly, the FID finds,
inter alia, that: (1) The Commission has
subject matter and personal jurisdiction;
(2) Respondents sold for importation
into the United States, imported, or sold
after importation accused bone cements
and bone cement accessories; (3) a
domestic industry exists with respect to
Complainants’ accessory products under
section 337(a)(1)(A)(i) (19 U.S.C.
1337(a)(1)(A)(i)); (4) Complainants own
the asserted trade secrets; (5) trade
secrets (‘‘TS’’) 10, 15, and 28 are
protectable, but TS 11 is not protectable;
(6) Respondents did not misappropriate
any asserted TS; (6) Respondents did
not engage in false advertising; (7)
Respondents did not tortiously
interference with Complainants’
contracts or prospective business
relationships; and (6) Complainants
failed to show a substantial injury or
threat of injury to their domestic
industry.
The FID includes the ALJ’s
recommended determination (‘‘RD’’),
which recommends that, if the
Commission finds a violation of section
337, the Commission should issue a
limited exclusion order and a cease and
desist order directed to Respondents.
E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM
16APN1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 72 / Friday, April 16, 2021 / Notices
The RD further recommends imposing a
bond of five and a half (5.5) percent
during the period of Presidential review.
On February 23, 2021, Complainants
filed a petition for review that seeks
review of most of the FID’s findings. On
March 3, 2021, Respondents and OUII
filed responses to Complainants’
petition.
On March 15, 2021, Respondents filed
a submission on the public interest
pursuant to Commission Rule
210.50(a)(4) (19 CFR 210.50(a)(4)).
Complainants and OUII did not file a
statement on the public interest. The
Commission received no filings in
response to its Federal Register notice
calling for public interest comments.
See 86 FR 12029.
Having examined the record in this
investigation, including the FID, the
petitions for review, and the responses
thereto, the Commission has determined
to review the FID in part. In particular,
the Commission has determined to
review the following:
(1) The FID’s findings and
conclusions as to the alleged
misappropriation of the asserted trade
secrets, including the finding that
Respondents independently developed
their own data compilation;
(2) The FID’s findings and
conclusions as to Respondents’ alleged
tortious interference with Complainants’
prospective business advantages; and
(3) The FID’s findings on domestic
industry and injury.
The Commission has determined not to
review the remainder of the FID.
In connection with its review, the
Commission requests that the parties
brief their positions regarding the
following questions with reference to
the applicable law and the evidentiary
record:
(A) When evaluating the
misappropriation of a trade secret,
identify and discuss the proper legal
standard for wrongful disclosure or use
of a trade secret that is a compilation.
Please consider whether any particular
amount of disclosure or use is required
to support a finding of
misappropriation, i.e., de minimis,
substantial, or the entirety of the trade
secret compilation. Discuss whether
there are any differences in the
application of the legal standard for
disclosure or use if a trade secret
compilation includes publicly available
information.
(B) Given the legal standard identified
in response to (A), please analyze the
alleged disclosure and use of TS 10, 15,
and 28.
(C) Please discuss and provide a
timeline detailing the background and
development of Heraeus Medical LLC
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:57 Apr 15, 2021
Jkt 253001
from 2017 through 2018, including the
dates that relevant employees were
hired, the relevant employees’ positions,
the dates of alleged disclosures and/or
use of TS 10, 15, and 28, and the dates
and relevant facts regarding
Respondents’ interactions with third
parties.
(D) What criteria should the
Commission apply to determine
whether activities related to meeting
FDA requirements constitute activities
of a ‘‘mere importer’’? For example,
should one criterion be that the
activities are required to be performed
in the United States or that the activities
differ from those that a wholly domestic
company would perform? Please apply
the appropriate criteria to the facts of
this investigation. Are any of
Complainants’ FDA-related activities
different from what a wholly domestic
company would need to undertake?
Which, if any, of a Complainants’ FDA
activities could be conducted abroad?
In connection with the final
disposition of this investigation, the
statute authorizes issuance of: (1) An
exclusion order that could result in the
exclusion of the subject articles from
entry into the United States, and/or (2)
one or more cease and desist orders that
could result in the respondents 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 are likely to do so. For
background, see Certain Devices for
Connecting Computers via Telephone
Lines, Inv. No. 337- TA–360, USITC
Pub. No. 2843, Comm’n Op. at 7–10
(Dec. 1994). In addition, if a party seeks
issuance of any cease and desist orders,
the written submissions should address
that request in the context of recent
Commission opinions, including those
in Certain Arrowheads with Deploying
Blades and Components Thereof and
Packaging Therefor, Inv. No. 337–TA–
977, Comm’n Op. (Apr. 28, 2017) and
Certain Electric Skin Care Devices,
Brushes and Chargers Therefor, and Kits
Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337–TA–
959, Comm’n Op. (Feb. 13, 2017).
The statute requires the Commission
to consider the effects of that remedy
upon the public interest. The public
interest factors the Commission will
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
20201
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 action. 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
initial written submissions should
include views on the ALJ’s RD on
remedy and bonding.
In their initial written submission,
Complainants are also requested to
identify the form of the remedy sought,
and Complainants and OUII are
requested to submit proposed remedial
orders for the Commission’s
consideration. Complainants are also
requested to state the HTSUS
subheadings under which the accused
articles are imported, and to supply
identification information for all known
importers of the accused products.
Written submissions, including
proposed remedial orders must be filed
no later than the close of business on
April 30, 2021. Reply submissions must
be filed no later than the close of
business on May 7, 2021. No further
submissions on 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
E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM
16APN1
20202
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 72 / Friday, April 16, 2021 / Notices
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
(March 19, 2020). Submissions should
refer to the investigation number (‘‘Inv.
No. 337–TA–1175’’) 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 at (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, solely for cybersecurity
purposes. All contract personnel will
sign appropriate nondisclosure
agreements. All non-confidential
written submissions will be available for
public inspection at the Office of the
Secretary and on EDIS.
The Commission vote for this
determination took place on April 12,
2021.
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: April 12, 2021.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021–07765 Filed 4–15–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:13 Apr 15, 2021
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 731–TA–1474 (Final)]
Ultra-High Molecular Weight
Polyethylene From Korea
Determination
On the basis of the record 1 developed
in the subject investigation, the United
States International Trade Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) determines, pursuant
to the Tariff Act of 1930 (‘‘the Act’’),
that an industry in the United States is
not materially injured or threatened
with material injury, and the
establishment of an industry in the
United States is not materially retarded
by reason of imports of ultra-high
molecular weight polyethylene from
Korea, provided for in subheadings
3901.10.10 and 3901.20.10 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States, that have been found by
the U.S. Department of Commerce
(‘‘Commerce’’) to be sold in the United
States at less than fair value (‘‘LTFV’’).2
Background
The Commission instituted this
investigation effective March 4, 2020,
following receipt of a petition filed with
the Commission and Commerce by
Celanese Corporation, Irving, Texas. The
Commission scheduled the final phase
of the investigation following
notification of a preliminary
determination by Commerce that
imports of ultra-high molecular weight
polyethylene from Korea were being
sold at LTFV within the meaning of
section 733(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C.
1673b(b)). Notice of the scheduling of
the final phase of the Commission’s
investigation and of a public hearing to
be held in connection therewith was
given by posting copies of the notice in
the Office of the Secretary, U.S.
International Trade Commission,
Washington, DC, and by publishing the
notice in the Federal Register of
October 20, 2020 (85 FR 66576). In light
of the restrictions on access to the
Commission building due to the
COVID–19 pandemic, the Commission
conducted its hearing through written
testimony and video conference on
February 18, 2021. All persons who
requested the opportunity were
permitted to participate.
The Commission made this
determination pursuant to section
735(b) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1673d(b)).
It completed and filed its determination
1 The record is defined in § 207.2(f) of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19
CFR 207.2(f)).
2 86 FR 11497 (February 25, 2021).
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
in this investigation on April 12, 2021.
The views of the Commission are
contained in USITC Publication 5178
(April 2021), entitled Ultra-High
Molecular Weight Polyethylene from
Korea: Investigation No. 731–TA–1474
(Final).
By order of the Commission.
Issued: April 12, 2021.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021–07758 Filed 4–15–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of Proposed
Consent Decree Under the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act
On April 12, 2021, the Department of
Justice lodged a proposed Consent
Decree with the United States District
Court for the Western District of
Louisiana in the lawsuit entitled United
States of America v. Axiall Corp.,
CITGO Petroleum Corporation,
Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations,
LLC, Bridgestone Americas, Inc.,
Firestone Polymers, LLC, Occidental
Chemical Corporation, OXY USA Inc.,
PPG Industries, Inc. and Westlake
Polymers LLC, Civil Action No. 2:21–
cv–00970–JDC–KK.
The Consent Decree resolves the
claims of the United States against the
Defendants for response costs incurred
by the United States for response
actions to investigate and address
contamination within the Calcasieu
Estuary Site (Site) in Louisiana. The
United States’ Complaint seeks to
recover its response costs incurred in
connection with the Site pursuant to
Section 107(a) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act, 42
U.S.C. 9607(a). The Consent Decree
provides for payment by the Defendants
of $5.5 million in reimbursement of the
United States’ past response costs.
The publication of this notice opens
a period for public comment on the
proposed Consent Decree. Comments
should be addressed to the Assistant
Attorney General, Environment and
Natural Resources Division, and should
refer to United States of America v.
Axiall Corp., et al., D.J. Ref. No. 90–11–
2–1284/2. All comments must be
submitted no later than thirty (30) days
after the publication date of this notice.
Comments may be submitted either by
email or by mail:
E:\FR\FM\16APN1.SGM
16APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 72 (Friday, April 16, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20200-20202]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-07765]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-1175]
Certain Bone Cements and Bone Cement Accessories; Commission
Determination To Review in Part a Final Initial Determination Finding
No Violation of Section 337; Schedule for Filing Written Submissions on
the Issues Under Review and on Remedy, Public Interest, and Bonding
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission (``Commission'') has determined to review in part a final
initial determination (``FID'') of the presiding administrative law
judge (``ALJ'') finding no violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended, in the above-captioned investigation. The
Commission requests briefing from the parties on certain issues under
review, as indicated in this notice. The Commission also requests
briefing from the parties, interested government agencies, and
interested persons on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and
bonding.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynde Herzbach, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205-3228. 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. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on
this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD
terminal, telephone 202-205-1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 23, 2019, the Commission
instituted this investigation based on a complaint filed on behalf of
Zimmer, Inc. and Zimmer US, Inc. both of Warsaw, Indiana (collectively,
``Complainants''). 84 FR 49764 (Sept. 23, 2019). The complaint alleges
violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19
U.S.C. 1337 (``section 337''), based on the importation into the United
States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States
after importation of certain bone cements and bone cement accessories
by reason of the misappropriation of trade secrets, false advertising,
and tortious interference, the threat or effect of which is to destroy
or substantially injure an industry in the United States. The complaint
also alleges the existence of a domestic industry. The Commission's
notice of investigation names the following as respondents: Heraeus
Medical GmbH of Wehrheim, Germany and Heraeus Medical LLC of Yardley,
Pennsylvania (collectively, ``Respondents''). Id. The Office of Unfair
Import Investigations (``OUII'') is named as a party in this
investigation. Id.
On February 11, 2021, the ALJ issued the FID, finding no violation
of section 337. More particularly, the FID finds, inter alia, that: (1)
The Commission has subject matter and personal jurisdiction; (2)
Respondents sold for importation into the United States, imported, or
sold after importation accused bone cements and bone cement
accessories; (3) a domestic industry exists with respect to
Complainants' accessory products under section 337(a)(1)(A)(i) (19
U.S.C. 1337(a)(1)(A)(i)); (4) Complainants own the asserted trade
secrets; (5) trade secrets (``TS'') 10, 15, and 28 are protectable, but
TS 11 is not protectable; (6) Respondents did not misappropriate any
asserted TS; (6) Respondents did not engage in false advertising; (7)
Respondents did not tortiously interference with Complainants'
contracts or prospective business relationships; and (6) Complainants
failed to show a substantial injury or threat of injury to their
domestic industry.
The FID includes the ALJ's recommended determination (``RD''),
which recommends that, if the Commission finds a violation of section
337, the Commission should issue a limited exclusion order and a cease
and desist order directed to Respondents.
[[Page 20201]]
The RD further recommends imposing a bond of five and a half (5.5)
percent during the period of Presidential review.
On February 23, 2021, Complainants filed a petition for review that
seeks review of most of the FID's findings. On March 3, 2021,
Respondents and OUII filed responses to Complainants' petition.
On March 15, 2021, Respondents filed a submission on the public
interest pursuant to Commission Rule 210.50(a)(4) (19 CFR
210.50(a)(4)). Complainants and OUII did not file a statement on the
public interest. The Commission received no filings in response to its
Federal Register notice calling for public interest comments. See 86 FR
12029.
Having examined the record in this investigation, including the
FID, the petitions for review, and the responses thereto, the
Commission has determined to review the FID in part. In particular, the
Commission has determined to review the following:
(1) The FID's findings and conclusions as to the alleged
misappropriation of the asserted trade secrets, including the finding
that Respondents independently developed their own data compilation;
(2) The FID's findings and conclusions as to Respondents' alleged
tortious interference with Complainants' prospective business
advantages; and
(3) The FID's findings on domestic industry and injury.
The Commission has determined not to review the remainder of the FID.
In connection with its review, the Commission requests that the
parties brief their positions regarding the following questions with
reference to the applicable law and the evidentiary record:
(A) When evaluating the misappropriation of a trade secret,
identify and discuss the proper legal standard for wrongful disclosure
or use of a trade secret that is a compilation. Please consider whether
any particular amount of disclosure or use is required to support a
finding of misappropriation, i.e., de minimis, substantial, or the
entirety of the trade secret compilation. Discuss whether there are any
differences in the application of the legal standard for disclosure or
use if a trade secret compilation includes publicly available
information.
(B) Given the legal standard identified in response to (A), please
analyze the alleged disclosure and use of TS 10, 15, and 28.
(C) Please discuss and provide a timeline detailing the background
and development of Heraeus Medical LLC from 2017 through 2018,
including the dates that relevant employees were hired, the relevant
employees' positions, the dates of alleged disclosures and/or use of TS
10, 15, and 28, and the dates and relevant facts regarding Respondents'
interactions with third parties.
(D) What criteria should the Commission apply to determine whether
activities related to meeting FDA requirements constitute activities of
a ``mere importer''? For example, should one criterion be that the
activities are required to be performed in the United States or that
the activities differ from those that a wholly domestic company would
perform? Please apply the appropriate criteria to the facts of this
investigation. Are any of Complainants' FDA-related activities
different from what a wholly domestic company would need to undertake?
Which, if any, of a Complainants' FDA activities could be conducted
abroad?
In connection with the final disposition of this investigation, the
statute authorizes issuance of: (1) An exclusion order that could
result in the exclusion of the subject articles from entry into the
United States, and/or (2) one or more cease and desist orders that
could result in the respondents 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 are
likely to do so. For background, see Certain Devices for Connecting
Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337- TA-360, USITC Pub. No.
2843, Comm'n Op. at 7-10 (Dec. 1994). In addition, if a party seeks
issuance of any cease and desist orders, the written submissions should
address that request in the context of recent Commission opinions,
including those in Certain Arrowheads with Deploying Blades and
Components Thereof and Packaging Therefor, Inv. No. 337-TA-977, Comm'n
Op. (Apr. 28, 2017) and Certain Electric Skin Care Devices, Brushes and
Chargers Therefor, and Kits Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-959,
Comm'n Op. (Feb. 13, 2017).
The statute requires the Commission to consider the effects of that
remedy upon the public interest. The public interest 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 action. 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 initial
written submissions should include views on the ALJ's RD on remedy and
bonding.
In their initial written submission, Complainants are also
requested to identify the form of the remedy sought, and Complainants
and OUII are requested to submit proposed remedial orders for the
Commission's consideration. Complainants are also requested to state
the HTSUS subheadings under which the accused articles are imported,
and to supply identification information for all known importers of the
accused products.
Written submissions, including proposed remedial orders must be
filed no later than the close of business on April 30, 2021. Reply
submissions must be filed no later than the close of business on May 7,
2021. No further submissions on 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
[[Page 20202]]
(March 19, 2020). Submissions should refer to the investigation number
(``Inv. No. 337-TA-1175'') 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 at
(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, solely for cybersecurity
purposes. All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure
agreements. All non-confidential written submissions will be available
for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.
The Commission vote for this determination took place on April 12,
2021.
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: April 12, 2021.
Lisa Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021-07765 Filed 4-15-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
