[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 214 (Friday, November 5, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64587-64588]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-24695]



[[Page 64587]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337-TA-494]


In the Matter of Certain Automotive Measuring Devices, Products 
Containing Same, and Bezels for Such Devices; Notice of Commission 
Determination To Review in Part and on Review To Modify Administrative 
Law Judge Order No. 41; Commission Determination Not To Review 
Administrative Law Judge Order No. 42; Termination of the Investigation 
as to Respondent GSN Automotive, Inc., on the Basis of a Settlement 
Agreement and Consent Order; Issuance of Consent Order; Termination of 
the Investigation in Its Entirety; Schedule for Written Submissions on 
Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding Regarding the Respondents 
Found in Default

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade 
Commission has determined to review in part ALJ Order No 41. Order No. 
41 denied complainant's motion for summary determination with respect 
to domestic industry, injury, and violation of section 337 and its 
request for recommendations concerning remedy, public interest, and 
bonding. On review, the Commission has determined to modify Order No. 
41 by declining to adopt the ALJ's comments concerning Commission rules 
210.42(a)(1)(i) and (ii), which comments are unnecessary to support the 
denial of complainant's motion. The Commission has further determined 
not to review Order No. 42, which terminated the investigation as to 
respondent GSN Automotive, Inc. (``GSN'') on the basis of a settlement 
agreement and consent order, as well as terminated the investigation in 
its entirety. The Commission also determined to call for written 
submissions on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding 
regarding the respondents that have been found in default.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Liberman, Esq., Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street, 
SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-3115. Copies of the public 
version of the IDs and all nonconfidential 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. Hearing-
impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be 
obtained by contacting the Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. 
General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by 
accessing its Internet server (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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation 
on June 20, 2003, based on a complaint filed by Auto Meter Products, 
Inc. (``Auto Meter'') of Sycamore, Illinois. 68 FR 37023. The complaint 
alleged violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the 
importation and sale of certain automotive measuring devices, products 
containing same, and bezels for such devices, by reason of infringement 
of U.S. Registered Trademark Nos. 1,732,643 and 1,497,472, and U.S. 
Supplemental Register No. 1,903,908, and infringement of the 
complainant's trade dress. The complaint alleged that twelve 
respondents violated section 337. Subsequently, seven more firms were 
added as respondents.
    On August 18, 2004, Auto Meter filed a paper styled ``Motion For 
Summary Determination With Respect to Domestic Industry, Injury, and 
Violation of Section 337 and Request for Recommendations Concerning 
Remedy, Public Interest, and Bonding.'' The motion requested that the 
ALJ recommend the issuance of a general exclusion order. At the time 
that the motion was filed, five of the nineteen respondents in this 
investigation had defaulted, viz.: Tenzo R, dba Autotech Systems and 
Accessories, of Santa Clarita, California; Auto Gauge (Taiwan) Co., 
Ltd., of Taipei, Taiwan; Dynamik Exhaust Industry Co., Ltd., of Taipei, 
Taiwan; Modern Work, Inc., of Taipei, Taiwan, and LPL Trans Trade Co. 
of Taipei, Taiwan (collectively, ``defaulted respondents''). All but 
one of the remaining respondents had settled with Auto Meter on the 
basis of consent orders and/or settlement agreements at the time that 
Auto Meter filed its motion for summary determination and request for 
recommendations. On August 25, 2004, complainant and the remaining 
respondent GSN filed a joint motion to terminate the investigation as 
to GSN based on a settlement agreement and consent order.
    On September 15, 2004, the presiding administrative law judge (ALJ) 
issued Order Nos. 41 and 42. Order No. 41 denied complainant's motion 
for summary determination with respect to domestic industry, injury and 
violation of section 337 and denied complainant's request for 
recommendations concerning remedy, the public interest and bonding. In 
denying complainant's motion for summary determination the ALJ relied 
on his finding that complainant's motion was untimely under Commission 
rule 210.18(a). Order No. 42 terminated the investigation both as to 
respondent GSN on the basis of a settlement agreement and consent 
order, and in its entirety.
    On September 27, 2004, Auto Meter filed a petition for review of 
the subject orders. On October 7, 2004, the Commission investigative 
attorneys (IAs) filed their response opposing Auto Meter's petition. On 
October 15, 2004, Auto Meter filed a motion for leave to reply to the 
IAs' response. On October 25, 2004, the IAs filed a motion for leave to 
file a surreply.
    The Commission has determined to review in part the ALJ's Order No. 
41 and to modify the Order by declining to adopt the Order's comments 
concerning Commission rules 210.42(a)(1)(i) and (ii), comments which 
the Commission finds unnecessary to support the ALJ's determination to 
deny complainant's motion for summary determination. The Commission has 
also determined to deny Auto Meter's motion for leave to file a reply 
to the IAs' response and the IAs' motion to file a surreply.
    In connection with the final disposition of this investigation in 
regard to the defaulted respondents, the Commission may issue orders 
that could result in the exclusion of articles from entry into the 
United States, and/or issue cease and desist orders that could result 
in the defaulted respondents being required to cease and desist from 
engaging in unfair acts in the importation and sale of such articles. 
Accordingly, the Commission is interested in receiving written 
submissions that address the form of remedy, if any, that should be 
ordered. If a party seeks exclusion of an article from entry into the 
United States for purposes other than entry for consumption, it should 
so indicate and provide information establishing that activities 
involving other types of entry either are adversely affecting it or 
likely to do so. For background, see In the Matter of Certain Devices 
for Connecting Computers via Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337-TA-360, 
USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994) (Commission Opinion).

[[Page 64588]]

    When the Commission contemplates some form of remedy, it must 
consider the effects of that remedy upon the public interest. The 
factors the Commission will consider in this investigation include the 
effect that an exclusion order would have on (1) the public health and 
welfare, (2) competitive conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S. 
production of articles that are like or directly competitive with those 
that are subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. consumers. The 
Commission is therefore interested in receiving written submissions 
that address the aforementioned public interest factors in the context 
of this investigation.
    If the Commission orders some form of remedy, the President has 60 
days to approve or disapprove the Commission's action. During this 
period, the subject articles would be entitled to enter the United 
States under a bond, in an amount determined by the Commission and 
prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. The Commission is 
therefore interested in receiving submissions concerning the amount of 
the bond that should be imposed.
    Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation, interested 
government agencies, and any other interested parties are encouraged to 
file written submissions on remedy, the public interest, and bonding. 
Complainant and the Commission's investigative attorneys are also 
requested to submit proposed orders for the Commission's consideration. 
The written submissions and proposed orders must be filed no later than 
close of business on November 12, 2004. Reply submissions, if any, must 
be filed no later than the close of business on November 19, 2004. No 
further submissions on these issues will be permitted unless otherwise 
ordered by the Commission.
    Persons filing written submissions must file with the Office of the 
Secretary the original document and 14 true copies thereof on or before 
the deadlines stated above. Any person desiring to submit a document 
(or portion thereof) to the Commission in confidence must request 
confidential treatment unless the information has already been granted 
such treatment during the proceedings. All such requests should be 
directed to the Secretary of the Commission and must include a full 
statement of the reasons that the Commission should grant such 
treatment. See section 201.6 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and 
Procedure, 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment by 
the Commission is sought will be treated accordingly. All 
nonconfidential written submissions will be available for public 
inspection at the Office of the Secretary.
    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 210.16, 210.42, 210.43, 210.45 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210.16, 210.42, 210.43, 210.45).

    Issued: November 1, 2004.

    By order of the Commission.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 04-24695 Filed 11-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P