36498 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Notices

the United States believes that, in

addition to the previous claims,

Argentina:

• Fails to protect against unfair

commercial use of undisclosed test or

other data, submitted as a requirement

for market approval of pharmaceutical

or agricultural chemical products;

• Improperly excludes certain subject

matter, including micro-organisms, from

patentability;

• Fails to provide prompt and

effective provisional measures, such as

preliminary injunctions, for purposes of

preventing infringements of patent

rights from occurring;

• Denies certain exclusive rights for

patents, such as the protection of

products produced by patented

processes and the right of importation;

• Fails to provide certain safeguards

for the granting of compulsory licenses,

including timing and justification

safeguards for compulsory licenses

granted on the basis of inadequate

working;

• Improperly limits the authority of

its judiciary to shift the burden of proof

in civil proceedings involving the

infringements of process patent rights;

and

• Places impermissible limitations on

certain transitional patents so as to limit

the exclusive rights conferred by these

patents, and to deny the opportunity for

patentees to amend pending

applications in order to claim certain

enhanced protection provided by the

TRIPS Agreement.

As such, these new concerns appear

to be inconsistent with Argentina’s

obligations under the TRIPS Agreement,

including Articles 27, 28, 31, 34, 39, 50,

62, 65, and 70 of the Agreement.

Public Comment: Requirements for

Submissions

Interested persons are invited to

submit written comments concerning

the issues raised in the dispute.

Comments must be in English and

provided in fifteen copies. A person

requesting that information contained in

a comment submitted by that person be

treated as confidential business

information must certify that such

information is business confidential and

would not customarily be released to

the public by the commenter.

Confidential business information must

be clearly marked ‘‘BUSINESS

CONFIDENTIAL’’ in a contrasting color

ink at the top of each page of each copy.

Information or advice contained in a

comment submitted, other than business

confidential information, may be

determined by USTR to be confidential

in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of

the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.

2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that

information or advice may qualify as

such, the submitter—

(1) Must so designate the information

or advice;

(2) Must clearly mark the material as

‘‘SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE’’ in a

contrasting color ink at the top of each

page of each copy; and

(3) Is encouraged to provide a nonconfidential summary of the

information or advice.

Pursuant to section 127(3) of the

URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR will

maintain a file on this dispute

settlement proceeding, accessible to the

public, in the USTR Reading Room:

Room 101, Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20508. The public

file will include a listing of any

comments received by USTR from the

public with respect to the dispute; if a

dispute settlement panel is convened,

the U.S. submissions to that panel, the

submissions, or non-confidential

summaries of submissions, to the panel

received from other participants in the

dispute, as well as the report of the

panel; and, if applicable, the report of

the Appellate Body. An appointment to

review the public file (Docket WTO/D–

196, Argentina—Patent and Test Data

Protection Dispute) may be made by

calling Brenda Webb, (202) 395–6186.

The USTR Reading Room is open to the

public from 9:30 a.m. to 12 noon and 1

p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

A. Jane Bradley,

Assistant United States Trade Representative

for Monitoring and Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 00–14510 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3190–01–M

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/D–199]

WTO Consultation Regarding Brazil—

Patent Protection

AGENCY: Office of the United States

Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

SUMMARY: The Office of the United

States Trade Representative (USTR) is

providing notice that on May 31, 2000,

the United States requested consultants

with Brazil under the Marrakesh

Agreement Establishing the World

Trade Organization (WTO), regarding

provisions in Brazil’s patent regime that

establish a ‘‘local working’’ requirement

for the enjoyment of exclusive patent

rights that can only be satisfied by the

local production—and not the

importation—of the patented subject

matter. The United States considers that

such a requirement is inconsistent with

Brazil’s obligations under Articles 27

and 28 of the Trade-Related Aspects of

Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS

Agreement), and Article III of the

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

1994 (GATT 1994). Pursuant to Article

4.3 of the WTO Dispute Settlement

Understanding (DSU), such

consultations are to take place within a

period of 30 days from the date of the

request, or within a period otherwise

mutually agreed between the United

States and Brazil. USTR invites written

comments from the public concerning

the issues raised on this dispute.

DATES: Although USTR will accept any

comments received during the course of

the dispute settlement proceedings,

comments should be submitted on or

before July 28, 2000, to be assured of

timely consideration by USTR.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to Sandy

McKinzy, Monitoring and Enforcement

Unit, Office of the General Counsel,

Room 122, Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

N.W.,, Washington, DC, 20508, Attn:

Brazil—Patent Protection Dispute.

Telephone: (202) 395–3582.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephen Kho, Assistant General

Counsel, Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

N.W., Washington, DC, (202) 395–3581.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

127(b) of the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C.

3537(b)(1)) requires that notice and

opportunity for comment be provided

after the United States submits or

receives a request for the establishment

of a WTO dispute settlement panel.

Consistent with this obligation, but in

an effort to provide additional

opportunity for comment, USTR is

providing notice that consultations have

been requested pursuant to the WTO

Dispute Settlement Understanding. If

such consultations should fail to resolve

the matter and a dispute settlement

panel is established pursuant to the

DSU, such panel, which would hold its

meetings in Geneva, Switzerland, would

be expected to issue a report on its

findings and recommendations within

six to nine months after it is established.

Major Issues Raised by the United

States

Although Brazil has a largely WTOconsistent patent regime that has been

in place for some time, there remains a

longstanding difference of views

between the United States and Brazil

over a narrow provision in the TRIPS

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 111 / Thursday, June 8, 2000 / Notices 36499

Agreement that the United States

considers Brazil to be violating.

Specifically, the United States is

concerned about provisions of Brazil’s

1996 industrial property law (Law No.

9,279 of May 14, 1996; effective may

1997) and other related statutes and

regulations, which establish a ‘‘local

working ’’ requirement for the

enjoyment of exclusive patent rights

that can only be satisfied by the local

production—and not the importation—

of the patented subject matter.

Brazil’s ‘‘local working’’ requirement

stipulates that a patent shall be subject

to compulsory licensing if the subject

matter of the patent is not ‘‘worked’’ in

the territory of Brazil. Brazil then

explicitly defines ‘‘failure to be

worked’’as ‘‘failure to manufacture or

incomplete manufacture of the

product,’’ or ‘‘failure to make full use of

the patented process.’’ The United

States considers that such a requirement

is inconsistent with Brazil’s obligations

under Articles 27 and 28 of the TRIPS

Agreement, and Article III of the GATT

1994.

Having been unable to resolve this

difference over the past five years, the

United States decided to resort to WTO

dispute settlement procedures and on

May 31, 2000, requested consultations

with Brazil.

Public Comment: Requirements for

Submissions

Interested persons are invited to

submit written comments concerning

the issues raised in the dispute.

Comments must be in English and

provided in fifteen copies. A person

requesting that information contained in

a comment submitted by that person be

treated as confidential business

information must certify that such

information is business confidential and

would not customarily be released to

the public by the commenter.

Confidential business information must

be clearly marked ‘‘BUSINESS

CONFIDENTIAL’’ in a contrasting color

ink at the top of each page of each copy.

Information or advice contained in a

comment submitted, other than business

confidential information, may be

determined by USTR to be confidential

in accordance with section 135(g)(2) of

the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.

2155(g)(2)). If the submitter believes that

information or advice may qualify as

such, the submitter—

(1) Must so designate the information

or advice;

(2) Must clearly mark the material as

‘‘SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE’’ in a

contrasting color ink at the top of each

page of each copy; and

(3) Is encouraged to provide a nonconfidential summary of the

information or advice.

Pursuant to section 127(e) of the

URAA (19 U.S.C. 3537(e)), USTR will

maintain a file on this dispute

settlement proceeding, accessible to the

public, in the USTR Reading Room:

Room 101, Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

N.W., Washington, D.C. 20508. The

public file will include a listing of any

comments received by USTR from the

public with respect to the dispute; if a

dispute settlement panel is convened,

the U.S. submissions to that panel, the

submissions, or non-confidential

summaries of submissions, to the panel

received from other participants in the

dispute, as well as the report of the

panel; and, if applicable, the report of

the Appellate Body. An appointment to

review the public file (Docket WTO/D–

199, Brazil—Patent Protection) may be

made by calling Brenda Webb, (202)

395–6186. The USTR Reading Room is

open to the public from 9:30 a.m. to 12

noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday.

A. Jane Bradley,

Assistant United States Trade Representative

for Monitoring and Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 00–14511 Filed 6–7–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3190–01–M

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES

TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

[Docket No. WTO/D–198]

WTO Consultations Regarding

Romania’s Use of Minimum Import

Prices for Customs Valuation

Purposes

AGENCY: Office of the United States

Trade Representative.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

SUMMARY: The Office of the United

States Trade Representative (USTR) is

providing notice that on May 31, 2000,

the United States requested

consultations with Romania under the

Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the

World Trade Organization (WTO),

regarding Romania’s 1997 Customs

Code (L141/1997) and Ministry of

Finance General Customs Directive

(Ordinance No. 5, 4 August 1998) and

other related statutes and regulations.

The United States alleges that

Romania’s customs code, directives,

regulations and practice arbitrarily

establish minimum and maximum

import prices for such products as meat,

eggs, fruits and vegetables, clothing,

footwear, and certain distilled spirits.

Additionally, Romania has instituted

burdensome procedures for

investigating import prices when the

C.I.F. value falls below the minimum

import price. The United States

considers that this practice is

inconsistent with Articles 1 through 7,

and 12 of the Agreement on Customs

Valuation (‘‘CVA’’); general notes 1, 2,

and 4 of Annex 1 of the CVA; Articles

II, X, and XI of the GATT 1994; Article

4.2 of the Agreement on Agriculture;

and Articles 2 and 7 of the Agreement

of Textiles and Clothing. Pursuant to

Article 4.3 of the WTO Dispute

Settlement Understanding (‘‘DSU’’),

such consultations are to take place

within a period of 30 days from the date

of the request, or within a period

otherwise mutually agreed between the

United States and Romania. USTR

invites written comments from the

public concerning the issues raised in

this dispute.

DATES: Although the USTR will accept

any comments received during the

course of the dispute settlement

proceedings, comments should be

submitted on or before July 31 to be

assured of timely consideration by

USTR.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments to Sandy

McKinzy, Monitoring and Enforcement

Unit, Office of the General Counsel,

Room 122, Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street,

N.W., Washington, D.C., 20508, Attn:

Romania Customs Valuation Dispute.

Telephone: (202) 395–3581.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Melida N. Hodgson, Associate General

Counsel, Office of the United States

Trade Representative, 600 17th Street

N.W., Washington, D.C., (202) 395–

3582.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

127(b) of the Uruguay Round

Agreements Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C.

3537(b)(1)) requires that notice and

opportunity for comment be provided

after the United States submits or

receives a request for the establishment

of a WTO dispute settlement panel.

Consistent with this obligation, but in

an effort to provide additional

opportunity for comment, USTR is

providing notice that consultations have

been requested pursuant to the WTO

Dispute Settlement Understanding. If

such consultations should fail to resolve

the matter and a dispute settlement

panel is established pursuant to the

DSU, such panel, which would hold its

meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, would

be expected to issue a report on its

findings and recommendations within

six to nine months after it is established.