International Trade Administration January 25, 2011 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

On June 16, 2010, the Department of Commerce (``the Department'') published in the Federal Register a notice of initiation of a changed circumstances review (``CCR'') of the antidumping duty order on certain new pneumatic off-the-road tires (``OTR tires'') from the People's Republic of China (``PRC'') in order to determine whether Shandong Linglong Tyre Co., Ltd. (``Shandong Linglong'') is the successor-in-interest to Zhaoyuan Leo Rubber Co., Ltd. (``Leo Rubber'') for the purpose of determining antidumping duty liability.\1\ On December 8, 2010, Ling Long North America LLC, doing business as Atlas Tire, an affiliated importer of record and the requesting party, submitted a request to rescind this CCR. The Department is now rescinding this CCR.

On January 3, 2011, the United States Court of International Trade (``CIT'') sustained in an unpublished judgment the Department of Commerce's (``the Department'') results of redetermination as applied to respondents China First Pencil Co., Ltd. (``China First'') and Shanghai Three Star Stationery Industry Corp. (``Three Star'') and separate rate company Orient International Holding Shanghai Foreign Trade Co., Ltd. (``SFTC'') pursuant to the CIT's remand order in China First Pencil Co., Ltd. v. United States, 721 F. Supp. 2d 1369 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2010) (``China First''). See Final Results of Redetermination Pursuant to Remand, Court No. 09-00325, dated December 20, 2010, available at https://ia.ita.doc.gov/remands (``Remand Results''); China First Pencil Co., Ltd. v. United States, Court No. 09-00325 (Ct. Int'l Trade January 3, 2011) (judgment). Consistent with the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') in Timken Co. v. United States, 893 F.2d 337 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (``Timken''), as clarified by Diamond Sawblades Mfrs. Coalition v. United States,F.3dCourt No. 2010-1024, -1090 (Fed. Cir. December 9, 2010) (``Diamond Sawblades''), the Department is notifying the public that the final judgment in this case is not in harmony with the Department's final determination and is amending the final results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain cased pencils (``pencils'') from the People's Republic of China covering the period of review (``POR'') of December 1, 2006, through November 30, 2007 with respect to China First, Three Star, and SFTC. See Certain Cased Pencils from the People's Republic of China: Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 33406 (July 13, 2009) (``Final Results''), and accompanying Issues and Decision Memorandum (``I&D Memorandum''), as amended by Certain Cased Pencils from the People's Republic of China: Amended Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR 45177 (September 1, 2009).

On November 10, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the ``Department'') published the Preliminary Results of the first administrative review of the antidumping duty order on uncovered innerspring units (``innersprings'') from the People's Republic of China (``PRC''), covering the period of review (``POR'') August 6, 2008, through January 31, 2010.\1\ The Department received no comments on the Preliminary Results. We have made no changes to our margin calculations for the final results of this review. The final weighted- average margins are listed below in the ``Final Results of the Review'' section of this notice.

In response to a request for administrative review received on August 31, 2010, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated an administrative review of the countervailing duty order on corrosion- resistant carbon steel flat products from the Republic of Korea covering the period January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2009. See Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Requests for Revocation in Part, 75 FR 60078 (September 29, 2010) (Initiation). As a result of withdrawals of request for review, we are rescinding this review, in part, with respect to Dongbu Steel (Dongbu) and Pohang Iron & Steel Co., Ltd. (POSCO).