14688 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 52 / Thursday, March 17, 2011 / Notices 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–716] 

In the Matter of Certain Large Scale 

Integrated Circuit Semiconductor 

Chips and Products Containing the 

Same; Notice of a Commission 

Determination Not To Review an Initial 

Determination Terminating the 

Investigation; Termination of the 

Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined not to 

review an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) 

(Order No. 35) of the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) 

terminating the above-captioned 

investigation based on a settlement 

agreement. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Clint Gerdine, Esq., Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–2310. Copies of non-confidential 

documents filed in connection with this 

investigation are or will be available for 

inspection during official business 

hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the 

Office of the Secretary, U.S. 

International Trade Commission, 500 E 

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20436, 

telephone (202) 205–2000. General 

information concerning the Commission 

may also be obtained by accessing its 

Internet server at http://www.usitc.gov. 

The public record for this investigation 

may be viewed on the Commission’s 

electronic docket (EDIS) at http:// 

edis.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: The 

Commission instituted this investigation 

on May 5, 2010, based on a complaint 

filed by Panasonic Corporation of Japan. 

75 FR 24742–43. The complaint alleges 

violations of section 337 of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 

1337, in the importation into the United 

States, the sale for importation, and the 

sale within the United States after 

importation of certain large scale 

integrated circuit semiconductor chips 

and products containing same by reason 

of infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patent Nos. 5,933,364 and 6,834,336. 

The complaint further alleges the 

existence of a domestic industry. The 

Commission’s notice of investigation 

named several respondents including 

the following: Freescale Semiconductor 

Xiqing Integrated Semiconductor 

Manufacturing Site (‘‘Freescale Xiqing’’) 

of China; Freescale Semiconductor 

Innovation Center (‘‘Freescale 

Innovation’’) of China; Freescale 

Semiconductor Pte. Ltd. of Singapore; 

Premier Farnell Corporation d/b/a 

Newark (‘‘Newark’’) of Independence, 

Ohio; Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. of 

Austin, Texas; Freescale Semiconductor 

Japan Ltd. of Japan; Freescale 

Semiconductor Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. of 

Malaysia; Freescale Semiconductor Pte. 

Ltd. of Singapore; Mouser Electronics, 

Inc. of Mansfield, Texas; and Motorola 

Inc. of Schaumburg, Illinois. 

On August 16, 2010, the Commission 

issued notice of its determination not to 

review the ALJ’s ID granting 

complainant’s unopposed motion to 

amend the complaint and notice of 

investigation. The notice of 

investigation was amended to substitute 

Freescale Qiangxin (Tianjin) IC Design 

Co., Ltd. of China; Freescale 

Semiconductor (China) Limited of 

China; and Newark Electronics 

Corporation and Newark Corporation of 

Chicago, Illinois for respondents 

Freescale Xiqing, Freescale Innovation, 

and Newark, respectively. 75 FR 51843 

(August 23, 2010). 

On February 11 and 16, 2011, 

respectively, complainant and 

respondents filed a joint motion, and a 

supplemental joint motion, to terminate 

the investigation as to all respondents 

based on a settlement agreement. The 

Commission investigative attorney filed 

a response in support of the motion. 

The ALJ issued the subject ID on 

February 28, 2011, granting the motion 

for termination. He found that the 

motion for termination satisfies 

Commission rule 210.21(b). He further 

found, pursuant to Commission rule 

210.50(b)(2), that termination of this 

investigation by settlement agreement is 

in the public interest. No party 

petitioned for review of the ID. The 

Commission has determined not to 

review the ID, and the investigation is 

terminated. 

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 

sections 210.21 and 210.42(h) of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.21, 210.42(h). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: March 11, 2011. 

William R. Bishop, 

Acting Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6141 Filed 3–16–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Importer of Controlled Substances; 

Notice of Application 

Pursuant to Title 21 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations § 1301.34(a), this is 

notice that on May 6, 2010, Aptuit, 

10245 Hickman Mills Drive, Kansas 

City, Missouri 64137, made application 

by renewal to the Drug Enforcement 

Administration (DEA) for registration as 

an importer of the basic classes of 

controlled substances listed in 

schedules I and II: 

Drug Schedule 

Marihuana (7360) ......................... I 

Poppy Straw Concentrate (9670) II 

The company plans to import a 

finished pharmaceutical product 

containing cannabis extracts in dosage 

form for packaging for a clinical trial 

study. In addition, the company also 

plans to import an ointment for the 

treatment of wounds which contain 

trace amounts of the controlled 

substances normally found in poppy 

straw concentrate for packaging and 

labeling for clinical trials. 

No comments, objections, or requests 

for any hearings will be accepted on any 

application for registration or reregistration to import crude opium, 

poppy straw, concentrate of poppy 

straw or coca leaves. As explained in 

the Correction to Notice of Application 

pertaining to Rhodes Technologies, 72 

FR 3417 (2007), comments and requests 

for hearings on applications to import 

narcotic raw material are not 

appropriate. 

Any bulk manufacturer who is 

presently, or is applying to be, 

registered with DEA to manufacture 

such basic classes of controlled 

substances listed in schedule I or II, 

which fall under the authority of section 

1002(a)(2)(B) of the Act (21 U.S.C. 

952(a)(2)(B)) may, in the circumstances 

set forth in 21 U.S.C. 958(i), file 

comments or objections to the issuance 

of the proposed registration and may, at 

the same time, file a written request for 

a hearing on such application pursuant 

to 21 CFR 1301.43 and in such form as 

prescribed by 21 CFR 1316.47. 

Any such comments or objections 

should be addressed, in quintuplicate, 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES