Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 38 / Tuesday, February 27, 2007 / Notices 8789 

(see 5 CFR 1320.8(d)). This notice 

identifies information collections that 

OSM will be submitting to OMB for 

extension. These collections are 

contained in 30 CFR part 784. 

OSM has revised burden estimates, 

where appropriate, to reflect current 

reporting levels or adjustments based on 

reestimates of burden or respondents 

and costs. OSM will request a 3-year 

term of approval for this information 

collection activity. 

Comments are invited on: (1) The 

need for the collection of information 

for the performance of the functions of 

the agency; (2) the accuracy of the 

agency’s burden estimates; (3) ways to 

enhance the quality, utility and clarity 

of the information collection; and (4) 

ways to minimize the information 

collection burden on respondents, such 

as use of automated means of collection 

of the information. A summary of the 

public comments will accompany 

OSM’s submission of the information 

collection request to OMB. 

This notice provides the public with 

60 days in which to comment on the 

following information collection 

activity: 

Title: 30 CFR Part 784, Underground 

Mining Permit Applications—Minimum 

requirements for Reclamation and 

Operation Plans. 

OMB Control Number: 1029–0039. 

Summary: Sections 507(b), 508(a) and 

516(b) of Public Law 95–87 require 

underground coal mine permit 

applicants to submit an operations and 

reclamation plan and establish 

performance standards for the mining 

operation. Information submitted is 

used by the regulatory authority to 

determine if the applicant can comply 

with the applicable performance and 

environmental standards required by 

the law. 

Bureau Form Number: None. 

Frequency of Collection: Once. 

Description of Respondents: 63 

underground coal mining permit 

applicants and 24 State regulatory 

authorities. 

Total Annual Responses: 790. 

Total Annual Burden Hours: 65,159. 

Total Annual Cost Burden: $537,105. 

Dated: February 21, 2007. 

John R. Craynon, 

Chief, Division of Regulatory Support. 

[FR Doc. 07–871 Filed 2–26–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–559] 

In the Matter of Certain Digital 

Processors and Digital Processing 

Systems, Components Thereof, and 

Products Containing Same; Notice of 

Commission Decision Not To Review 

an Initial Determination Granting 

Complainant’s Motion To Amend the 

Complaint and Notice of 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. 19) issued by the presiding 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) 

granting complainant’s motion to amend 

the complaint and notice of 

investigation. 

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: This 

investigation was instituted on January 

9, 2006, based on a complaint filed by 

Biax Corporation (‘‘Biax’’) of Boulder, 

Colorado. The complaint alleges 

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 digital processors or digital 

processing systems, components 

thereof, or products containing the same 

by reason of infringement of various 

claims of United States Patent Nos. 

5,021,945 (‘‘the ‘945 patent’’), 5,517,628 

(‘‘the ‘628 patent’’), and 6,253,313 (‘‘the 

‘313 patent’’). The complaint originally 

named four respondents: Philips 

Semiconductors B.V. of the 

Netherlands; Philips Consumer 

Electronics Services B.V. of the 

Netherlands; Philips Consumer 

Electronics North America Corp. of 

Atlanta, Georgia; and 2Wire, Inc. of San 

Jose, California. Biax previously 

amended the complaint and notice of 

investigation to remove Philips 

Consumer Electronics North America 

Corp. and Philips Consumer Electronics 

Services B.V. and to add Philips 

Electronics North America Corp., 

Philips Semiconductors, Inc., and 

Philips Consumer Electronics B.V. as 

respondents. 

On January 23, 2007, Biax moved to 

amend the complaint and notice of 

investigation to remove respondent 

Philips Semiconductors B.V. and to add 

NXP B.V. of the Netherlands as a 

respondent. Biax stated that it had 

recently learned that Philips 

Semiconductors B.V. was spun off into 

a new business entity NXP B.V. Biax 

also moved to withdraw claims 3, 4, 8, 

and 12 of the ‘945 patent and all of the 

asserted claims of the ‘628 patent and 

the ‘313 patent from the investigation to 

reduce the number of issues. None of 

the current respondents or the 

Commission investigative attorney 

opposed Biax’s motion. 

On February 2, 2007, the ALJ issued 

an ID (Order No. 19) granting Biax’s 

motion to amend the complaint and 

notice of investigation. The ALJ found 

that, pursuant to Commission Rule 

210.14(b)(1) (19 CFR 210.14(b)(1)), there 

was good cause to remove respondent 

Philips Semiconductors B.V. and to add 

NXP B.V. as a respondent and to 

withdraw claims 3, 4, 8, and 12 of the 

‘945 patent and the asserted claims of 

the ‘628 patent and the ‘313 patent from 

the investigation. No petitions for 

review of the ID were filed. 

Having examined the record of this 

investigation, the Commission has 

determined not to review the ALJ’s ID. 

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 

section 210.42 of the Commission’s 

Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 

210.42). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: February 22, 2007. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. E7–3386 Filed 2–26–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES