Certain Beverage Brewing Capsules, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Determination To Institute a Rescission Proceeding; Rescission of a Limited Exclusion Order and Three Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the Rescission Proceeding, 53489-53490 [2022-18752]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 31, 2022 / Notices
Authority: These reviews are being
conducted under authority of title VII of
the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is
published pursuant to section 207.62 of
the Commission’s rules.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: August 19, 2022.
Katherine Hiner,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2022–18804 Filed 8–30–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation Nos. 701–TA–554 and 731–
TA–1309 (Review)]
Biaxial Integral Geogrid Products From
China; Scheduling of Expedited FiveYear Reviews
United States International
Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Commission hereby gives
notice of the scheduling of expedited
reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of
1930 (‘‘the Act’’) to determine whether
revocation of the countervailing and
antidumping duty orders on biaxial
integral geogrid products from China
would be likely to lead to continuation
or recurrence of material injury within
a reasonably foreseeable time.
DATES: May 9, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Caitlyn Hendricks-Costello (202–205–
2058), Office of Investigations, U.S.
International Trade Commission, 500 E
Street SW, Washington, DC 20436.
Hearing-impaired persons can obtain
information on this matter by contacting
the Commission’s TDD terminal on 202–
205–1810. Persons with mobility
impairments who will need special
assistance in gaining access to the
Commission should contact the Office
of the Secretary at 202–205–2000.
General information concerning the
Commission may also be obtained by
accessing its internet server (https://
www.usitc.gov). The public record for
this review may be viewed on the
Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS)
at https://edis.usitc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background.—On May 9, 2022, the
Commission determined that the
domestic interested party group
response to its notice of institution (87
FR 5508, February 1, 2022) of the
subject five-year reviews was adequate
and that the respondent interested party
group response was inadequate. The
Commission did not find any other
circumstances that would warrant
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Aug 30, 2022
Jkt 256001
conducting full reviews.1 Accordingly,
the Commission determined that it
would conduct expedited reviews
pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)(3)).
For further information concerning
the conduct of these reviews and rules
of general application, consult the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, part 201, subparts A and B
(19 CFR part 201), and part 207,
subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part
207).
Please note the Secretary’s Office will
accept only electronic filings at this
time. Filings must be made through the
Commission’s Electronic Document
Information System (EDIS, https://
edis.usitc.gov). No in-person paperbased filings or paper copies of any
electronic filings will be accepted until
further notice.
Staff report.—A staff report
containing information concerning the
subject matter of the reviews has been
placed in the nonpublic record, and will
be made available to persons on the
Administrative Protective Order service
list for these reviews on August 25,
2022. A public version will be issued
thereafter, pursuant to section
207.62(d)(4) of the Commission’s rules.
Written submissions.—As provided in
section 207.62(d) of the Commission’s
rules, interested parties that are parties
to the reviews and that have provided
individually adequate responses to the
notice of institution,2 and any party
other than an interested party to the
reviews may file written comments with
the Secretary on what determinations
the Commission should reach in the
reviews. Comments are due on or before
September 1, 2022 and may not contain
new factual information. Any person
that is neither a party to the five-year
reviews nor an interested party may
submit a brief written statement (which
shall not contain any new factual
information) pertinent to the reviews by
September 1, 2022. However, should the
Department of Commerce (‘‘Commerce’’)
extend the time limit for its completion
of the final results of its reviews, the
deadline for comments (which may not
contain new factual information) on
Commerce’s final results is three
business days after the issuance of
Commerce’s results. If comments
1 A record of the Commissioners’ votes is
available from the Office of the Secretary and at the
Commission’s website.
2 The Commission has found the response to its
notice of institution filed on behalf of Tensar
Corporation, a domestic producer of biaxial and
triaxial integrated geogrid products, to be
individually adequate. Comments from other
interested parties will not be accepted (see 19 CFR
207.62(d)(2)).
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
53489
contain business proprietary
information (BPI), they must conform
with the requirements of sections 201.6,
207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission’s
rules. The Commission’s Handbook on
Filing Procedures, available on the
Commission’s website at https://
www.usitc.gov/documents/handbook_
on_filing_procedures.pdf, elaborates
upon the Commission’s procedures with
respect to filings.
In accordance with sections 201.16(c)
and 207.3 of the rules, each document
filed by a party to the reviews must be
served on all other parties to the reviews
(as identified by either the public or BPI
service list), and a certificate of service
must be timely filed. The Secretary will
not accept a document for filing without
a certificate of service.
Determination.—The Commission has
determined these reviews are
extraordinarily complicated and
therefore has determined to exercise its
authority to extend the review period by
up to 90 days pursuant to 19 U.S.C.
1675(c)(5)(B).
Authority: These reviews are being
conducted under authority of title VII of
the Tariff Act of 1930; this notice is
published pursuant to section 207.62 of
the Commission’s rules.
By order of the Commission.
Issued: August 26, 2022.
Katherine Hiner,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2022–18799 Filed 8–30–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–929 (Rescission)]
Certain Beverage Brewing Capsules,
Components Thereof, and Products
Containing the Same; Notice of
Commission Determination To Institute
a Rescission Proceeding; Rescission
of a Limited Exclusion Order and Three
Cease and Desist Orders; Termination
of the Rescission 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 rescission proceeding and to rescind a
limited exclusion order (‘‘LEO’’) three
cease and desist orders (‘‘CDOs’’) issued
in the underlying investigation. The
rescission proceeding is terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Needham, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\31AUN1.SGM
31AUN1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with NOTICES1
53490
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 31, 2022 / Notices
Commission, 500 E Street SW,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
708–5468. 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
that information on this matter can be
obtained by contacting the
Commission’s TDD terminal on (202)
205–1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
September 9, 2014, the Commission
instituted an investigation under section
337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as
amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (‘‘section
337’’) based a complaint filed by
complainants Adrian Rivera and Adrian
Rivera Maynez Enterprises, Inc.
(together, ‘‘ARM’’) alleging a violation of
section 337 by reason of infringement of
claims 5–8 and 18–20 of U.S. Patent No.
8,720,320 (‘‘the ’320 patent’’). 79 FR
53445–46 (Sept. 9, 2014). The notice of
institution of the investigation named
the following entities as respondents:
Solofill, Inc. (‘‘Solofill’’); DongGuan Hai
Rui Precision Mould Co., Inc.
(‘‘DongGuan’’); Eko Brands, Inc. (‘‘Eko
Brands’’); Evermuch Technology Co.,
Ltd. (‘‘Evermuch Technology’’); Ever
Much Company Ltd. (‘‘Evermuch
Company’’); Melitta USA, Inc.
(‘‘Melitta’’); Spark Innovators Corp.
(‘‘Spark’’); LBP Manufacturing Inc. and
LBP Packaging (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd.
(together, ‘‘LBP’’); B. Marlboros
International Ltd. (HK) (‘‘B.
Marlboros’’); and Amazon.com, Inc.
(‘‘Amazon’’). 79 FR 53445. The Office of
Unfair Import Investigations was also
named as a party to the investigation. Id.
The Commission terminated the
investigation with respect to Melitta,
Spark, LBP, and B. Marlboros based on
the entry of consent orders and
terminated the investigation with
respect to Amazon based on a
settlement agreement. Order No. 10
(Nov. 19, 2014), unreviewed by Notice
(Dec. 18, 2014); Order No. 12 (Dec. 16,
2014), unreviewed by Notice (Jan. 13,
2015); Order No. 14 (Feb. 26, 2015),
unreviewed by Notice (Mar. 27, 2015);
Order No. 16 (Mar. 18, 2015),
unreviewed by Notice (Apr. 13, 2015).
The Commission also found Eko Brands,
Evermuch Technology, and Evermuch
Company in default for failing to
respond to the complaint and notice of
investigation. Order No. 19 (Apr. 22,
2015), unreviewed by Notice (May 18,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:59 Aug 30, 2022
Jkt 256001
2015). ARM later withdrew its
allegations with respect to claims 8 and
19 of the ’320 patent. See Order No. 18
(Mar. 24, 2015), unreviewed by Notice
(Apr. 21, 2015). Accordingly, the only
allegations remaining against active
respondents were that Solofill and
DongGuan violated section 337 with
respect to claims 5–7, 18, and 20 of the
’320 patent.
On March 17, 2016, the Commission
issued a final determination of no
violation by Solofill and DongGuan
based on its finding that claims 5–7, 18,
and 20 of the ’320 patent are invalid. 81
FR 15742–43 (Mar. 24, 2016). The
Commission, however, found that ARM
satisfied the requirements of section
337(g)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)) with
respect to Eko Brands, Evermuch
Technology, and Evermuch Company
regarding claims 8 and 19 of the ’320
patent, and issued an LEO and three
CDOs against those entities based on
those patent claims. Id. Espresso
Supply, Inc. purchased Eko Brands in
November of 2015 and became subject
to the orders against Eko Brands.
On June 14, 2018, in litigation
between Eko Brands and ARM, the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of
Washington entered an order finding
that claims 5, 8, and 18–19 of the ’320
patent are invalid as obvious. Eko
Brands, LLC v. Adrian Rivera Maynez
Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 2:15–cv–
00522–JPD, 2018 WL 2984691 (W.D.
Was. Jun. 14, 2018). On July 30, 2018,
the Commission temporarily rescinded
the LEO and CDOs regarding claims 8
and 19 pending the resolution of any
appeal of the district court decision. 83
FR 38178–79 (Aug. 3, 2018). The U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
affirmed the district court findings of
invalidity of claims 5, 8, and 18–19 of
the ’320 patent on January 13, 2020, and
issued its mandate on February 19,
2020. Eko Brands, LLC v. Adrian Rivera
Maynez Enterprises, Inc., 946 F.3d 1367
(Fed. Cir. 2020).
On July 26, 2022, Eko Brands and
Espresso Supply, Inc. filed an
unopposed petition pursuant to
Commission Rule 210.76(a) (19 CFR
210.76(a)) to permanently rescind the
LEO and CDO issued against them. They
state that, as claims 8 and 19 of the ’320
patent have been found invalid by the
Federal Circuit and the time for further
appeal has passed, the Commission
should permanently rescind the LEO
and CDO. No party responded to the
petition.
Having reviewed the petition seeking
to rescind the LEO and CDO based on
a subsequent finding that claims 8 and
19 of the ’320 patent are invalid, the
Commission finds that the conditions
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
which led to the issuance of the LEO
and CDO no longer exist, and therefore,
granting the petition to rescind is
warranted under section 337(k) (19
U.S.C. 1337(k)) and the requirements of
Commission Rule 210.76(a) are satisfied.
The Commission issued the orders
under the presumption that those claims
were valid (35 U.S.C. 282), which is a
condition that no longer exists in light
of the district court and Federal Circuit
rulings. That changed condition also
applies with respect to Evermuch
Technology and Evermuch Company.
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined to institute a rescission
proceeding, and to rescind the LEO and
three CDOs issued against Eko Brands,
Evermuch Technology, and Evermuch
Company. The rescission proceeding is
terminated.
The Commission vote for this
determination took place on August 25,
2022.
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: August 25, 2022.
Katherine Hiner,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2022–18752 Filed 8–30–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms
and Explosives
[OMB Number 1140–0011]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Proposed eCollection of
eComments Requested; Application To
Make and Register a Firearm—ATF
Form 1 (5320.1)
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives, Department of
Justice.
ACTION: 30-Day notice.
AGENCY:
The Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
(ATF), Department of Justice (DOJ) 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) OMB 1140–0011 (Application to
Make and Register a Firearm—ATF
Form 1 (5320.1)) is being revised to
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\31AUN1.SGM
31AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 31, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53489-53490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-18752]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337-TA-929 (Rescission)]
Certain Beverage Brewing Capsules, Components Thereof, and
Products Containing the Same; Notice of Commission Determination To
Institute a Rescission Proceeding; Rescission of a Limited Exclusion
Order and Three Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the Rescission
Proceeding
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to institute a rescission proceeding and to
rescind a limited exclusion order (``LEO'') three cease and desist
orders (``CDOs'') issued in the underlying investigation. The
rescission proceeding is terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Needham, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
[[Page 53490]]
Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-
5468. 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
on (202) 205-1810.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 9, 2014, the Commission
instituted an investigation under section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337 (``section 337'') based a complaint
filed by complainants Adrian Rivera and Adrian Rivera Maynez
Enterprises, Inc. (together, ``ARM'') alleging a violation of section
337 by reason of infringement of claims 5-8 and 18-20 of U.S. Patent
No. 8,720,320 (``the '320 patent''). 79 FR 53445-46 (Sept. 9, 2014).
The notice of institution of the investigation named the following
entities as respondents: Solofill, Inc. (``Solofill''); DongGuan Hai
Rui Precision Mould Co., Inc. (``DongGuan''); Eko Brands, Inc. (``Eko
Brands''); Evermuch Technology Co., Ltd. (``Evermuch Technology'');
Ever Much Company Ltd. (``Evermuch Company''); Melitta USA, Inc.
(``Melitta''); Spark Innovators Corp. (``Spark''); LBP Manufacturing
Inc. and LBP Packaging (Shenzhen) Co. Ltd. (together, ``LBP''); B.
Marlboros International Ltd. (HK) (``B. Marlboros''); and Amazon.com,
Inc. (``Amazon''). 79 FR 53445. The Office of Unfair Import
Investigations was also named as a party to the investigation. Id.
The Commission terminated the investigation with respect to
Melitta, Spark, LBP, and B. Marlboros based on the entry of consent
orders and terminated the investigation with respect to Amazon based on
a settlement agreement. Order No. 10 (Nov. 19, 2014), unreviewed by
Notice (Dec. 18, 2014); Order No. 12 (Dec. 16, 2014), unreviewed by
Notice (Jan. 13, 2015); Order No. 14 (Feb. 26, 2015), unreviewed by
Notice (Mar. 27, 2015); Order No. 16 (Mar. 18, 2015), unreviewed by
Notice (Apr. 13, 2015). The Commission also found Eko Brands, Evermuch
Technology, and Evermuch Company in default for failing to respond to
the complaint and notice of investigation. Order No. 19 (Apr. 22,
2015), unreviewed by Notice (May 18, 2015). ARM later withdrew its
allegations with respect to claims 8 and 19 of the '320 patent. See
Order No. 18 (Mar. 24, 2015), unreviewed by Notice (Apr. 21, 2015).
Accordingly, the only allegations remaining against active respondents
were that Solofill and DongGuan violated section 337 with respect to
claims 5-7, 18, and 20 of the '320 patent.
On March 17, 2016, the Commission issued a final determination of
no violation by Solofill and DongGuan based on its finding that claims
5-7, 18, and 20 of the '320 patent are invalid. 81 FR 15742-43 (Mar.
24, 2016). The Commission, however, found that ARM satisfied the
requirements of section 337(g)(1) (19 U.S.C. 1337(g)(1)) with respect
to Eko Brands, Evermuch Technology, and Evermuch Company regarding
claims 8 and 19 of the '320 patent, and issued an LEO and three CDOs
against those entities based on those patent claims. Id. Espresso
Supply, Inc. purchased Eko Brands in November of 2015 and became
subject to the orders against Eko Brands.
On June 14, 2018, in litigation between Eko Brands and ARM, the
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington entered an
order finding that claims 5, 8, and 18-19 of the '320 patent are
invalid as obvious. Eko Brands, LLC v. Adrian Rivera Maynez
Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-00522-JPD, 2018 WL 2984691 (W.D.
Was. Jun. 14, 2018). On July 30, 2018, the Commission temporarily
rescinded the LEO and CDOs regarding claims 8 and 19 pending the
resolution of any appeal of the district court decision. 83 FR 38178-79
(Aug. 3, 2018). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
affirmed the district court findings of invalidity of claims 5, 8, and
18-19 of the '320 patent on January 13, 2020, and issued its mandate on
February 19, 2020. Eko Brands, LLC v. Adrian Rivera Maynez Enterprises,
Inc., 946 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2020).
On July 26, 2022, Eko Brands and Espresso Supply, Inc. filed an
unopposed petition pursuant to Commission Rule 210.76(a) (19 CFR
210.76(a)) to permanently rescind the LEO and CDO issued against them.
They state that, as claims 8 and 19 of the '320 patent have been found
invalid by the Federal Circuit and the time for further appeal has
passed, the Commission should permanently rescind the LEO and CDO. No
party responded to the petition.
Having reviewed the petition seeking to rescind the LEO and CDO
based on a subsequent finding that claims 8 and 19 of the '320 patent
are invalid, the Commission finds that the conditions which led to the
issuance of the LEO and CDO no longer exist, and therefore, granting
the petition to rescind is warranted under section 337(k) (19 U.S.C.
1337(k)) and the requirements of Commission Rule 210.76(a) are
satisfied. The Commission issued the orders under the presumption that
those claims were valid (35 U.S.C. 282), which is a condition that no
longer exists in light of the district court and Federal Circuit
rulings. That changed condition also applies with respect to Evermuch
Technology and Evermuch Company. Accordingly, the Commission has
determined to institute a rescission proceeding, and to rescind the LEO
and three CDOs issued against Eko Brands, Evermuch Technology, and
Evermuch Company. The rescission proceeding is terminated.
The Commission vote for this determination took place on August 25,
2022.
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: August 25, 2022.
Katherine Hiner,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2022-18752 Filed 8-30-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
