45446 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 1997 / Notices

responses will be considered by the

Commission if received not later than 20

days after the date of service by the

Commission of the complaint and the

notice of investigation. Extensions of

time for submitting responses to the

complaint will not be granted unless

good cause therefor is shown.

Failure of a respondent to file a timely

response to each allegation in the

complaint and in this notice may be

deemed to constitute a waiver of the

right to appear and contest the

allegations of the complaint and this

notice, and to authorize the

administrative law judge and the

Commission, without further notice to

the respondent, to find the facts to be as

alleged in the complaint and this notice

and to enter both an initial

determination and a final determination

containing such findings, and may

result in the issuance of a limited

exclusion order or a cease and desist

order or both directed against such

respondent.

Issued: August 20, 1997.

By order of the Commission.

Donna R. Koehnke,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–22787 Filed 8–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P

INTERNATIONAL TRADE

COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337–TA–334 (Remand)]

Notice of Issuance of Limited

Exclusion Order and Termination of

Investigation; Denial of Petition for

Reconsideration

In the matter of Certain condensers, parts

thereof and products containing same,

including air conditioners for automobiles.

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade

Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that

the U.S. International Trade

Commission has issued a limited

exclusion order in the above-captioned

investigation and terminated the

investigation. The Commission has also

determined to deny respondents’

petition for reconsideration of the

Commission’s January 16, 1997,

determination that a violation of section

337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 has

occurred. (62 FR 3525–6) (January 23,

1997).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean

Jackson, Esq., Office of the General

Counsel, U.S. International Trade

Commission, 500 E Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20436, telephone 202–

205–3104.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

December 12, 1991, Modine

Manufacturing Co. filed a complaint

with the Commission alleging a

violation of section 337 by respondents

Showa Aluminum Corporation (Japan),

Showa Aluminum Corporation of

America, Mitsubishi Motors

Corporation, Mitsubishi Motors Sales of

America, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries,

Ltd., and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries

America, Inc. (collectively referred to

herein as respondents). Modine alleged

that respondents had infringed claims of

Modine’s patent, U.S. Letters Patent

4,998,580 (the ’580 patent). The

Commission concluded the

investigation with a finding of no

infringement, and hence a

determination of no violation of section

337.

Modine appealed the Commission’s

determination to the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal

Circuit). On February 5, 1996, the

Federal Circuit reversed the

Commission’s claim interpretation and

remanded the investigation to the

Commission for redetermination of the

issues of literal infringement and

infringement under the doctrine of

equivalents. Modine Manufacturing Co.

v. U.S.I.T.C., 75 F.3d 1545, 1549 (Fed.

Cir. 1996). The court affirmed the

Commission’s determination in all other

respects. Id.

On May 31, 1996, the Commission

issued an order remanding the

Condensers investigation to the Office of

Administrative Law Judges. The

Commission’s order also directed the

ALJ to issue a recommended

determination (RD) on the issues of

remedy and bonding two weeks after the

issuance of the ID. On December 2,

1996, Judge Luckern issued an ID

finding a violation of section 337 by

respondents. On December 12, 1996,

respondents and the Commission

investigative attorney (IA) filed separate

petitions for review. Complainant

Modine filed a petition for review

contingent on the Commission’s

decision either to grant another party’s

petition for review or to review the ID

on its own motion. All parties filed

responses to each petition on December

19, 1996. The ALJ issued his RD on

remedy and bonding on December 16,

1996.

On January 16, 1997, the Commission

determined to review only the reasoning

supporting the ALJ’s determination that

the range of equivalents was limited by

the 0.4822 inch hydraulic diameter

given for the prior art Cat condenser. 62

FR 3525–6 (Jan. 23, 1997). Since the

Commission did not review the ID’s

determination of the range of

equivalents, the ALJ’s determination

that there had been a violation with

respect to two models of the accused

condensers, the Mazda 929 and the

Audi 90, became the Commission’s

determination by operation of law. 19

C.F.R. 210.42(h). The Commission’s

notice of review requested written

submissions on the issue under review,

and on remedy, the public interest, and

bonding. Submissions were received

from Modine, the Showa respondents,

the Mitsubishi respondents, and the IA

on January 30, 1997. Complainant, the

Showa respondents, and the IA filed

reply submissions on February 6, 1997.

On March 10, 1997, respondents filed

a petition for reconsideration of the

Commission’s determination not to

review the ALJ’s determination that

section 337 had been violated.

Respondents’ petition was based on the

recent Supreme Court decision in

Warner-Jenkinson, Inc. v. Hilton-Davis

Chemical Company, 117 S.Ct. 1040

(U.S. Mar. 3, 1997), involving the

doctrine of equivalents. Respondents

argued that the case is controlling

authority which is contrary to the law

applied by the Federal Circuit in the

Modine decision. Complainant Modine

and the IA filed oppositions to the

petition on March 17, 1997. The

Commission has determined to deny

respondents’ petition.

After having reviewed the record in

this investigation, including the written

submissions of the parties, the

Commission made its determinations on

the issues of remedy, the public interest,

and bonding. The Commission

determined that the appropriate form of

relief is a limited exclusion order

prohibiting the unlicensed importation

for consumption of infringing

condensers, parts thereof, and products

containing same manufactured and/or

imported by or on behalf of the Showa

respondents. The order applies to any of

the affiliated companies, parents,

subsidiaries, licensees, contractors, or

other related business entities, or their

successors or assigns of Showa.

The Commission also determined that

the public interest factors enumerated in

19 U.S.C. 1337(d) do not preclude the

issuance of the limited exclusion order,

and that the bond during the

Presidential review period shall be in

the amount of five percent of the

entered value of the condensers in

question. Condenser parts and products

containing condensers are entitled to

entry into the United States without

bond during the Presidential review

period.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 166 / Wednesday, August 27, 1997 / Notices 45447

This action is taken under the

authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act

of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337),

and section 210.58 of the Commission’s

Interim Rules of Practice and Procedure

(19 C.F.R. 210.58)(1994).

Copies of the Commission order, the

Commission opinion in support thereof,

and all other 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, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20436,

telephone 202–205–2000. Hearingimpaired persons are advised that

information on this matter can be

obtained by contacting the

Commission’s TDD terminal on 202–

205–1810.

Issued: August 20, 1997.

By order of the Commission.

Donna R. Koehnke,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–22786 Filed 8–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020–04–P

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training

Administration

Proposed Information Collection

Request Submitted for Public

Comment and Recommendations;

Forms for Agricultural Recruitment

System

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as

part of its continuing effort to reduce

paperwork and respondent burden

conduct a preclearance consultation

program to provide the general public

and Federal agencies with an

opportunity to comment on proposed

and/or continuing collections of

information in accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(PRA95) (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). This

program helps to ensure that requested

data can be provided in the desired

format, reporting burden (time and

financial resources) is minimized,

collection instruments are clearly

understood, and the impact of collection

requirements on respondents can be

properly assessed. Currently, the

Employment and Training

Administration is soliciting comments

concerning the proposed extension of

the information collection of the

Agricultural and Food Processing

Clearance Order, Form ETA–790,

Agricultural and Food Processing

Clearance Memorandum, Form ETA–

795, Migrant Worker Itinerary, Form

ETA–785, and Job Service Manifest

Record, Form ETA–785A.

A copy of the proposed information

collection request can be obtained by

contacting the employee listed below in

the contact section of this notice.

DATES: Written comments must be

submitted on or before October 27,

1997. Written comments should

evaluate whether the proposed

information collection is necessary for

the proper performance of the functions

of the agency, including whether the

information will have practical utility;

evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s

estimate of the burden of the proposed

collection of information including the

validity of the methodology and

assumptions used; enhance the quality,

utility, and clarity of the information to

be collected; and 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.

ADDRESSES: Pearl Wah, U.S.

Employment Service, Employment and

Training Administration, Department of

Labor Room N–4470, 200 Constitution

Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20210,

202–219–5185 (This is not a toll-free

number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Migrant and Seasonal

Farmworker regulations at 20 CFR

653.500 established procedures for

agricultural clearance to all local offices

to use the interstate clearance forms as

prescribed by ETA. Local and State

Employment offices use the Agricultural

and Food Processing Clearance Order to

extend job orders beyond their

jurisdictions. Applicant holding local

offices use the Agricultural Clearance

Memorandum to give notice of action on

a clearance order, request additional

information, report results, and to

accept or reject the extended job order.

State agencies use the Migrant Worker

Itinerary to transmit employment and

supportive service information to labordemand areas, and to assist migrant

workers in obtaining employment. The

Job Service Manifest Record shows

names, addresses, and characteristics of

all people name on the Migrant Worker

Itinerary.

II. Current Actions

This is a request for OMB approval

under the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A) of an

extension to an existing collection of

information previously approved and

assigned OMB Control No. 1205–0134.

This is no change in burden.

Type of Review: Extension.

Agency: Employment and Training

Administration, Labor.

Titles: Agricultural and Food

Processing Clearance Order,

Agricultural Clearance Memorandum,

Migrant Worker Itinerary, and Job

Service Manifest Record.

OMB Number: 1205–0134.

Frequency: On occasion.

Affected Public: Individuals and

households, employers, and State

Governments.

Number of Respondents: 52.

Estimated Time Per Respondent:

Form Volume

per year

Hours per

response

Hours per

year

ETA–790 2,000 1.0 2,000

ETA–795 3,000 .5 1,500

ETA–785 3,500 .5 1,750

ETA–

785A .. 2,500 .5 1,250

Estimated Burden Hours: 6,500.

Total Estimated Cost: None.

Comments submitted in response to

this will be summarized and/or

included in the request for Office of

Management and Budget approval of the

information collection request; they will

also become a matter of public record.

Dated: August 22, 1997.

John R. Beverly, III,

Director, U.S. Employment Service.

[FR Doc. 97–22794 Filed 8–26–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–30–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment Standards

Administration; Wage and Hour

Division

Minimum Wages for Federal and

Federally Assisted Construction;

General Wage Determination Decisions

General wage determination decisions

of the Secretary of Labor are issued in

accordance with applicable law and are

based on the information obtained by

the Department of Labor from its study

of local wage conditions and data made

available from other sources. They

specify the basic hourly wage rates and

fringe benefits which are determined to

be prevailing for the described classes of

laborers and mechanics employed on

construction projects of a similar