6172 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 23 / Thursday, February 5, 2009 / Notices 

submitting comments by e-mail please 

add the OMB Control Number 1615– 

0048 in the subject box. 

During this 60-day period USCIS will 

be evaluating whether to revise the 

Form I–907. Should USCIS decide to 

revise the Form I–907 it will advise the 

public when it publishes the 30-day 

notice in the Federal Register in 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act. The public will then 

have 30-days to comment on any 

revisions to the Form I–907. 

Written comments and suggestions 

from the public and affected agencies 

concerning the proposed collection of 

information should address one or more 

of the following four points: 

(1) Evaluate whether the collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

collection of information, including the 

validity of the methodology and 

assumptions used; 

(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

(4) Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques, or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

Overview of This Information 

Collection 

(1) Type of Information Collection: 

Extension of an existing information 

collection. 

(2) Title of the Form/Collection: 

Request for Premium Processing 

Service. 

(3) Agency form number, if any, and 

the applicable component of the 

Department of Homeland Security 

sponsoring the collection: Form I–907. 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 

Services. 

(4) Affected public who will be asked 

or required to respond, as well as a brief 

abstract: 

Primary: Individuals and households. 

This form will be used by USCIS to 

provide employers the opportunity to 

request faster processing of certain 

employment-based petitions and 

applications. 

(5) An estimate of the total number of 

respondents and the amount of time 

estimated for an average respondent to 

respond: 

• Filing by Mail: 97,000 responses at 

30 minutes (.50) per response. 

• Electronically: 3,000 responses at 20 

minutes (.333) per response. 

(6) An estimate of the total public 

burden (in hours) associated with the 

collection: 49,500 annual burden hours. 

If you have additional comments, 

suggestions, or need a copy of the 

information collection instrument, 

please visit: http://www.regulations.gov. 

We may also be contacted at: USCIS, 

Regulatory Management Division, 111 

Massachusetts Avenue, NW., Suite 

3008, Washington, DC 20529–2210, 

telephone number 202–272–8377. 

Dated: January 30, 2009. 

Sunday Aigbe, 

Chief, Regulatory Management Division, U.S. 

Citizenship and Immigration Services. 

[FR Doc. E9–2377 Filed 2–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9111–97–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–623] 

In the Matter of Certain R–134a Coolant 

(Otherwise Known As 1,1,1,2– 

Tetrafluoroethane); Notice of 

Commission Determination To Review 

the Final Initial Determination in Part 

and To Remand the Investigation; 

Schedule for Written Submissions on 

Remand Determination and on 

Remedy, the Public Interest, and 

Bonding 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined to review a 

portion of the final initial determination 

(‘‘ID’’) issued by the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on 

December 1, 2008, in the abovecaptioned investigation and to remand 

the investigation to the ALJ. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michelle Walters, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

708–5468. 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 December 31, 2007, based on a 

complaint filed by INEOS Fluor 

Holdings Ltd., INEOS Fluor Ltd., and 

INEOS Fluor Americas LLC. The 

complaint alleged violations of section 

337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (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 R–134a coolant 

(otherwise known as 1,1,1,2– 

tetrafluoroethane) by reason of 

infringement of various claims of United 

States Patent No. 5,744,658. 

Complainants subsequently added 

allegations of infringement with regard 

to United States Patent Nos. 5,382,722 

and 5,559,276 (‘‘the ‘276 patent’’), but 

only claim 1 of the ‘276 patent remains 

at issue in this investigation. The 

complaint named two respondents, 

Sinochem Modern Environmental 

Protection Chemicals (Xi’an) Co., Ltd. 

and Sinochem Ningbo Ltd. Two 

additional respondents were 

subsequently added: Sinochem 

Environmental Protection Chemicals 

(Taicang) Co., Ltd. and Sinochem 

(U.S.A.) Inc. All four respondents are 

collectively referred to as ‘‘Sinochem.’’ 

On December 1, 2008, the ALJ issued 

his final ID, finding that Sinochem 

violated section 337. He concluded that 

respondents’ ‘‘new’’ process infringed 

claim 1 of the ‘276 patent and that the 

domestic industry requirement had been 

met. He also found that claim 1 was not 

invalid and that it was not 

unenforceable. The ALJ recommended 

that the Commission issue a limited 

exclusion order prohibiting the 

importation into the United States of 

products made by the infringing 

process, but did not recommend issuing 

a cease and desist order. The ALJ also 

recommended that the bond to permit 

importation during the Presidential 

review period be set at 100% of the 

entered value of the products 

concerned. 

On December 15, 2008, Sinochem 

filed a petition for review, challenging 

the findings of the ALJ’s final ID. On 

December 23, 2008, complainants and 

the Commission investigative attorney 

(‘‘IA’’) each filed a response to 

respondents’ petition for review of the 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 23 / Thursday, February 5, 2009 / Notices 6173 

final ID. On January 5, 2009, 

respondents filed a motion for leave to 

file a reply in support of their petition 

for review of the final ID. On January 9, 

2009, complainants filed an opposition 

to respondents’ motion. On January 15, 

2009, the IA also filed an opposition to 

respondents’ motion. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s ID 

and the submissions of the parties, the 

Commission has determined to review 

the ALJ’s determination regarding the 

effective filing date of claim 1 of the 

‘276 patent and to affirm his 

determination with additional 

reasoning. In addition, the Commission 

has determined to review the ALJ’s ID 

with regard to whether claim 1 of the 

‘276 patent is invalid for anticipation or 

obviousness with respect to certain 

references and to issue an order 

remanding the investigation to the ALJ 

for further proceedings related to 

anticipation and obviousness with 

respect to those references. The 

Commission has determined not to 

review any other determination in the 

ALJ’s ID. 

To accommodate the remand 

proceedings, the Commission has 

extended the target date of the abovecaptioned investigation to June 1, 2009, 

and instructed the ALJ to make his 

determination on remand by April 1, 

2009. The parties are invited to file 

written submissions on the ALJ’s 

remand determination within fourteen 

days after service of the ALJ’s 

determination and to file responses to 

the written submissions within seven 

days after service of the written 

submissions. The parties should also 

address remedy, the public interest, and 

bonding in their submissions. Finally, 

the Commission has determined to deny 

respondents’ motion for leave to file a 

reply in support of their petition for 

review of the final ID. 

In connection with the final 

disposition of this investigation, the 

Commission may (1) issue an order that 

could result in the exclusion of the 

subject articles from entry into the 

United States, and/or (2) issue one or 

more cease and desist orders that could 

result in the respondent 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, the party 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). 

If 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 include the effect that an 

exclusion order and/or cease and desist 

orders 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 U.S. Trade 

Representative, as delegated by the 

President, has 60 days to approve or 

disapprove the Commission’s action. 

See Presidential Memorandum of July 

21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). 

During this period, the subject articles 

would be entitled to enter the United 

States under 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 if a remedy is 

ordered. 

Written Submissions: The parties to 

the investigation are requested to file 

written submissions on the issues 

identified in this notice. Parties to the 

investigation, interested government 

agencies, and any other interested 

parties are encouraged to file written 

submissions on the issues of remedy, 

the public interest, and bonding. Such 

submissions should address the 

recommended determination by the ALJ 

on remedy and bonding. Complainants 

and the Commission investigative 

attorney are also requested to submit 

proposed remedial orders for the 

Commission’s consideration. 

Complainants are also requested to state 

the dates that the patents expire and the 

HTSUS numbers under which the 

accused products are imported. The 

written submissions and proposed 

remedial orders must be filed no later 

than the close of business fourteen days 

after service of the ALJ’s remand 

determination. Reply submissions must 

be filed no later than the close of 

business seven days after service of the 

written submissions. The written 

submissions may be no longer than 50 

pages and the reply submissions may be 

no longer than 25 pages. No further 

submissions on these issues will be 

permitted unless otherwise ordered by 

the Commission. 

Persons filing written submissions 

must file the original document and 12 

true copies thereof on or before the 

deadlines stated above with the Office 

of the Secretary. Any person desiring to 

submit a document 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 

why the Commission should grant such 

treatment. See 19 CFR 210.6. 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 210.42–46 of the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

210.42–46). 

Issued: January 30, 2009. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E9–2426 Filed 2–4–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation Nos. 731–TA–394–A & 399– 

A (Second Review) (Remand)] 

Ball Bearings From Japan and the 

United Kingdom 

AGENCY: United States International 

Trade Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of remand proceedings. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. International Trade 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) hereby 

gives notice of the resumption of its 

remand proceedings with respect to its 

affirmative determinations in the fiveyear reviews of the antidumping duty 

orders on ball bearings from Japan and 

the United Kingdom. For further 

information concerning the conduct of 

this proceeding and rules of general 

application, consult the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure, part 

201, subparts A through E (19 CFR part 

201), and part 207, subpart A (19 CFR 

part 207). 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES