Department of Commerce December 14, 2009 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

The Department of Commerce (``the Department'') is conducting an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on chlorinated isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China (``PRC'') covering the period June 1, 2007, through May 31, 2008. We invited interested parties to comment on our preliminary results. Based on our analysis of the comments received, we have made changes to our margin calculations. Therefore, the final results differ from the preliminary results.

On June 8, 2009, the Department published its preliminary results in the antidumping duty administrative review of pure magnesium from the PRC.\1\ The period of review (``POR'') for the administrative review is May 1, 2007, through April 30, 2008. We have determined that Tianjin Magnesium International Co., Ltd. (``TMI''), the only respondent in this review, made sales in the United States at prices below normal value (``NV''). There are no other respondents covered by this review. We invited interested parties to comment on our preliminary results in this review. Based on our analysis of the comments we received in the administrative review, we made certain changes to our Preliminary Results. The final dumping margins for this review are listed in the ``Final Results Margins'' section below.

The Department of Commerce, as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing information collections, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is considering changes to the procedure for handling notices of appeal and appeal briefs that identify fewer than all of the rejected claims as being appealed. Under the proposed procedure, if appellant files a notice of appeal, or an appeal brief, that clearly identifies fewer than all of the rejected claims as being appealed, the non-appealed rejected claims would be deemed canceled by operation of this action on the part of the appellant as of the date on which such a notice of appeal, or appeal brief, is filed, regardless of whether the appellant also files an amendment canceling the non-appealed rejected claims. The USPTO is requesting comments from the public regarding the proposed procedure set forth in this notice.