International Trade Commission December 2015 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

Notice is hereby given that the presiding administrative law judge has issued a final initial determination and recommended determination on remedy and bonding in the above-captioned investigation. The Commission is soliciting comments on public interest issues raised by the recommended relief, specifically a limited exclusion order against certain three-dimensional cinema systems and components thereof imported by respondents MasterImage 3D, Inc. of Sherman Oaks, California, and MasterImage 3D Asia, LLC of Seoul, Republic of Korea, and a cease and desist order against the domestic respondent. This notice is soliciting public interest comments from the public only. Parties are to file public interest submissions pursuant to 19 CFR 210.50(a)(4).

Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission (``the Commission'') has determined to review in part and, on review, to reverse in part and to vacate in part the final initial determination (``ID'') issued by the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') on October 22, 2015. The Commission has also determined to remand the investigation in part to the ALJ.

Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on November 17, 2015, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of FeraDyne Outdoors LLC of Cartersville, Georgia and Out RAGE LLC of Cartersville, Georgia. A supplement was filed on December 4, 2015. The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations 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 arrowheads with deploying blades and components thereof and packaging therefor by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. RE44,144 (``the '144 patent''); U.S. Patent No. 6,517,454 (``the '454 patent''); U.S. Patent No. 8,758,176 (``the '176 patent''); U.S. Patent No. 8,986,141 (``the '141 patent''); U.S. Patent No. 9,068,806 (``the '806 patent''); U.S. Patent No. 7,771,298 (``the '298 patent''); U.S. Patent No. D710,962 (``the D'962 patent''); U.S. Patent No. D711,489 (``the D'489 patent''); and of U.S. Trademark Registration No. 4,812,058 (``the '058 mark''). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The complainants request that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a general exclusion order and cease and desist orders.

The Commission hereby gives notice that it will proceed with full reviews pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty orders on chlorinated isocyanurates from China and Spain would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time. A schedule for the reviews will be established and announced at a later date.

Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on October 1, 2015, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of AAVN, Inc. of Richardson, Texas. Supplements were filed on October 9 and 13, 2015. An amended complaint was filed on October 20, 2015. A second amended complaint was filed on November 12, 2015. A further supplementation was filed on December 4, 2015. The second amended complaint alleges violations 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 woven textile fabrics and products containing same by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,131,790 (``the '790 patent''), and that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The second amended complaint further alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation into the United States, or in the sale of certain woven textile fabrics and products containing same by reason of false advertising, the threat or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the United States. The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a general exclusion order, or in the alternative a limited exclusion order, and cease and desist orders.

Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined not to review the final initial determination (ID) issued on October 9, 2015, which found no violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in this investigation.

The Commission hereby gives notice of the scheduling of an expedited review pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930 (``the Act'') to determine whether revocation of the antidumping duty order on potassium permanganate from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury within a reasonably foreseeable time.

Following receipt on November 24, 2015, of a request from the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), under authority delegated by the President and pursuant to section 104 of the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 4014), the Commission instituted investigation No. CAFTA-DR-103- 028, Probable Economic Effects of Certain Modifications to the CAFTA-DR Rules of Origin.

Correction is made to the deadline to submit statements on the public interest specified in notice 80 FR 76574-75 which was published on Wednesday, December 9, 2015. The deadline to submit statements on the public interest is extended to Friday, December 18, 2015.

Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on November 6, 2015, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of HYDOR USA Inc. of Sacramento, California. Letters supplementing the complaint were filed on November 25, 2015. The complaint alleges violations 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 aquarium fittings and parts thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,191,846 (``the '846 patent''). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a general exclusion order, or in the alternative, a limited exclusion order and a cease and desist order.

Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to review an initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 17) granting respondents' motion for summary determination of patent invalidity due to indefiniteness.

Notice is hereby given that a complaint was filed with the U.S. International Trade Commission on November 2, 2015, under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, on behalf of Fitbit, Inc. of San Francisco, California. The complaint alleges violations 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 wearable activity tracking devices, systems, and components thereof by reason of infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,920,332 (``the '332 patent''); U.S. Patent No. 8,868,377 (``the '377 patent''); and U.S. Patent No. 9,089,760 (``the '760 patent''). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by subsection (a)(2) of section 337. The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders.

The Commission hereby gives notice of the schedule for issuance of a consistency determination following receipt on November 6, 2015, of a request from the United States Trade Representative (USTR) for a determination under section 129(a)(4) of the URAA that would render the Commission's action in connection with its countervailing duty investigation regarding imports of hot-rolled steel products from India, in Inv. No. 701- TA-405, not inconsistent with the recommendations and rulings of the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in United StatesCountervailing Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India (DS436).