Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 54 / Friday, March 20, 2015 / Notices 14941 

Whereas, the Board adopted the 

alternative site framework (ASF) (15 

CFR Sec. 400.2(c)) as an option for the 

establishment or reorganization of 

zones; 

Whereas, the World Trade Center 

Savannah, LLC, grantee of FTZ 104, 

submitted an application to the Board 

(FTZ Docket B–9–2014, docketed 02– 

04–2014) for authority to expand the 

service area of the zone to include the 

Counties of Burke, Candler, Emanuel, 

Jefferson, Jenkins, Johnson, Laurens, 

Montgomery, Tattnall, Telfair, Toombs, 

Treutlen, Washington and Wheeler, as 

described in the application, adjacent to 

the Savannah Customs and Border 

Protection port of entry; 

Whereas, notice inviting public 

comment was given in the Federal 

Register (79 FR 7642–7643, 02–10– 

2014) and the application has been 

processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and 

the Board’s regulations; and, 

Whereas, the Board adopts the 

findings and recommendations of the 

examiner’s report (including 

addendum), and finds that the 

requirements of the FTZ Act and the 

Board’s regulations are satisfied with 

regard to expanding the service area of 

FTZ 104 to include Candler, Emanuel, 

Jenkins, Tattnall, Toombs, and Treutlen 

Counties, Georgia. 

Now, therefore, the Board hereby 

orders: 

The application to reorganize FTZ 104 

to expand the service area under the 

ASF is approved with regard to the 

inclusion of Candler, Emanuel, Jenkins, 

Tattnall, Toombs, and Treutlen 

Counties, Georgia, subject to the FTZ 

Act and the Board’s regulations, 

including Section 400.13, and to the 

Board’s standard 2,000-acre activation 

limit for the zone. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this day of 

March 12, 2015. 

Ronald K. Lorentzen, 

Acting Assistant Secretary of Commerce for 

Enforcement and Compliance, Alternate 

Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board. 

Andrew McGilvray, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06470 Filed 3–19–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

United States Patent and Trademark 

Office 

Patent Reexaminations 

AGENCY: United States Patent and 

Trademark Office, Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed collection; comment 

request. 

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and 

Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its 

continuing effort to reduce paperwork 

and respondent burden, invites the 

general public and other Federal 

agencies to comment on proposed and/ 

or continuing information collections, 

as required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995, Public Law 104–13 (44 

U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before May 19, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be 

submitted by any of the following 

methods: 

• Email: InformationCollection@

uspto.gov. Include ‘‘0651–0064 Patent 

Reexaminations’’ in the subject line of 

the message. 

• Mail: Marcie Lovett, Records 

Management Division Director, Office of 

the Chief Information Officer, United 

States Patent and Trademark Office, 

P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313– 

1450. 

• Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information 

should be directed to Raul Tamayo, 

Senior Legal Advisor, Office of Patent 

Legal Administration, United States 

Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box 

1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450; by 

telephone at 571–272–7728; or by email 

to Raul.Tamayo@uspto.gov with 

‘‘Paperwork’’ in the subject line. 

Additional information about this 

collection is also available at http://

www.reginfo.gov under ‘‘Information 

Collection Review.’’ 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

The United States Patent and 

Trademark Office (USPTO) is required 

by 35 U.S.C. 131 and 151 to examine 

applications and, when appropriate, 

allow applications and issue them as 

patents. Chapter 30 of Title 35 U.S.C. 

provides that any person at any time 

may file a request for reexamination by 

the USPTO of any claim of a patent on 

the basis of prior art patents or printed 

publications. Once initiated, the 

reexamination proceedings under 

Chapter 30 are substantially ex parte 

and do not permit input from third 

parties. The rules outlining ex parte 

reexaminations are found at 37 CFR 

1.510–1.570. 

35 U.S.C. 257 permits a patent owner 

to request supplemental examination of 

a patent by the USPTO to consider, 

reconsider, or correct information 

believed to be relevant to the patent. 

The rules outlining supplemental 

examination are found at 37 CFR 1.601– 

1.625. 

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act 

terminated inter partes reexamination 

effective September 16, 2012. However, 

inter partes reexamination proceedings 

based on inter partes reexamination 

requests filed before September 16, 

2012, continue to be prosecuted. 

Therefore, this collection continues to 

include items related to the prosecution 

of inter partes reexamination 

proceedings. The rules outlining inter 

partes reexaminations are found at 37 

CFR 1.903–1.931. 

Thus, the items included in this 

collection cover (i) requests for ex parte 

reexamination, (ii) requests for 

supplemental examination, and (iii) 

information that may be submitted by 

patent owners and third party requesters 

in relation to the prosecution of an ex 

parte or inter partes reexamination 

proceeding. It should be noted that the 

Requests for Ex Parte Reexamination 

and Supplemental Examination are 

distinct collections from the Request for 

Ex Parte Reexamination and 

Supplemental Examination Transmittal 

Forms, respectively. Whereas the 

transmittal forms are used by a requester 

(patent owner or third party) as a 

checklist to ensure compliance with the 

requirements of the statutes and rules 

for ex parte reexaminations and 

supplemental examinations, the 

requests themselves represent the 

substantive analysis undertaken by 

requesters of ex parte reexamination 

and supplemental examination. 

The public uses this information 

collection to request ex parte 

reexamination and supplemental 

examination, to prosecute 

reexamination proceedings, and to 

ensure that the associated 

documentation is submitted to the 

USPTO. 

II. Method of Collection 

By mail, facsimile, hand delivery, or 

electronically to the USPTO. 

III. Data 

OMB Number: 0651–0064. 

Form Number(s): PTO/SB/57 and 

PTO/SB/59. 

Type of Review: Renewal of an 

existing collection. 

Affected Public: Individuals or 

households; businesses or other forprofits; and not-for-profit institutions. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

4,170 responses per year. 

Estimated Time per Response: The 

USPTO estimates that it will take the 

public from 0.30 hours (18 minutes) to 

55 hours to gather the necessary 

information, prepare the appropriate 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

14942 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 54 / Friday, March 20, 2015 / Notices 

form or other documents, and submit 

the information to the USPTO. The time 

per response, estimated annual 

responses, and estimated annual hour 

burden associated with each instrument 

in this information collection is shown 

in the table below. 

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 

95,290 hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost Burden 

(Hourly): $37,067,810 per year. The 

USPTO expects that the information in 

this collection will be prepared by 

attorneys. Using the professional rate of 

$389 per hour for attorneys in private 

firms, the USPTO estimates that the 

respondent cost burden for this 

collection will be approximately 

$37,067,810 per year. 

IC No. Information collection instrument 

Estimated 

time for 

response 

Estimated 

annual 

responses 

Estimated annual 

burden hours 

Rate 

($/hr) Total cost 

(a) (b) (a) × (b) = (c) (c) × (d) = (e) 

1 ........................ Request for Supplemental Examination Transmittal Form (PTO/

SB/59).

18 minutes ..... 50 15 $389.00 $5,835 

2 ........................ Request for Supplemental Examination.25 hours ......... 50 1,250 389.00 486,250 

3 ........................ Request for Ex Parte Reexamination Transmittal Form (PTO/SB/

57).

18 minutes ..... 450 135 389.00 52,515 

4 ........................ Request for Ex Parte Reexamination.55 hours ......... 450 24,750 389.00 9,627,750 

5 ........................ Petition in a Reexamination Proceeding (except for those specifically enumerated in 37 CFR 

1.550(i) and 1.937(d)).

23 hours ......... 1,250 28,750 389.00 11,183,750 

6 ........................ Patent Owner’s 37 CFR 1.530 

Statement.

8 hours ........... 160 1,280 389.00 497,920 

7 ........................ Third Party Requester’s 37 CFR 

1.535 Reply.

8 hours ........... 50 400 389.00 155,600 

8 ........................ Amendment in Ex Parte or Inter 

Partes Reexamination.

33 hours ......... 700 23,100 389.00 8,985,900 

9 ........................ Third Party Requester’s 37 CFR 

1.947 Comments in Inter Partes 

Reexamination.

41 hours ......... 10 410 389.00 159,490 

10 ...................... Response to Final Rejection in Ex 

Parte Reexamination.

17 hours ......... 400 6,800 389.00 2,645,200 

11 ...................... Patent Owner’s 37 CFR 1.951 

Response in Inter Partes Reexamination.

41 hours ......... 100 4,100 389.00 1,594,900 

12 ...................... Third Party Requester’s 37 CFR 

1.951 Comments in Inter Partes 

Reexamination.

41 hours ......... 100 4,100 389.00 1,594,900 

13 ...................... Petition to Request Extension of 

Time in Ex Parte or Inter Partes 

Reexamination.

30 minutes ..... 400 200 389.00 77,800 

Total .......... ....................................................... ........................ 4,170 95,290 ........................ 37,067,810 

Estimated Total Annual Cost Burden 

(Non-Hourly): $929.80 per year. There 

are no capital start-up, recordkeeping, or 

maintenance costs associated with this 

information collection. However, this 

collection does have annual (non-hour) 

costs in the form of postage costs. 

Postage 

The USPTO expects that 

approximately 95 percent of the 

responses in this collection will be 

submitted electronically. Of the 

remaining 5 percent, the vast majority— 

98 percent—will be submitted by mail, 

for a total of 204 mailed submissions. 

The documentation for requests for 

supplemental examination and requests 

for ex parte reexamination will typically 

be mailed to the USPTO with the 

appropriate transmittal form, reducing 

the number of unique mailings to 180. 

The USPTO estimates that the average 

postage cost for a mailed submission 

will be $0.49 cents for Petitions to 

Request Extension of Time and $5.75 for 

all other mailed submissions. Therefore, 

the USPTO estimates a total postage cost 

of approximately $929.80 per year. 

The total non-hour respondent cost 

burden for this collection in the form of 

postage costs is approximately $929.80 

per year. 

Filing Fees 

The fees in 0651–0064 were moved 

into collection 0651–0072 (America 

Invents Act Section 10 Patent Fee 

Adjustments). As a result, this 

collection no longer includes any filing 

or processing fees. 

IV. Request for Comments 

Comments are invited on: (a) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the agency, including 

whether the information shall have 

practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden 

(including hours and cost) of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on respondents, including through the 

use of automated collection techniques 

or other forms of information 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 54 / Friday, March 20, 2015 / Notices 14943 

1See Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of 

Korea and the Republic of Turkey: Initiation of 

Countervailing Duty Investigations, 79 FR 67419 

(November 13, 2014) (Initiation Notice). See also 

Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of Korea and 

the Republic of Turkey: Initiation of Less-Than-FairValue Investigations, 79 FR 68213 (November 14, 

2014). 

2The petitioners in this investigation are 

American Cast Iron Pipe Company, Energex (a 

division of JMC Steel Group), Maverick Tube 

Corporation, Northwest Pipe Company, Stupp 

Corporation (a division of Stupp Bros., Inc.), TexTube Company, TMK IPSCO, and Welspun Tubular 

LLC USA. 3See Memorandum from Christian Marsh, Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, 

Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and 

Compliance, regarding ‘‘Decision Memorandum for 

the Affirmative Preliminary Determination in the 

Countervailing Duty Investigation of Welded Line 

Pipe from the Republic of Turkey,’’ dated 

concurrently with this notice (Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum). 

4See sections 771(5)(B) and (D) of the Act 

regarding financial contribution; section 771(5)(E) 

of the Act regarding benefit; and section 771(5A) of 

the Act regarding specificity. 

5On November 24, 2014, Enforcement and 

Compliance changed the name of Enforcement and 

Compliance’s AD and CVD Centralized Electronic 

Service System (IA ACCESS) to AD and CVD 

Centralized Electronic Service System (ACCESS). 

The Web site location was changed from http://

iaaccess.trade.gov to http://access.trade.gov. The 

Final Rule changing the references to the 

Regulations can be found at 79 FR 69046 

(November 20, 2014).’’ 

technology, e.g., permitting electronic 

submission of responses. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized or 

included in the request for OMB 

approval of this information collection; 

they will also become a matter of public 

record. 

Dated: March 13, 2015. 

Marcie Lovett, 

Records Management Division Director, 

USPTO, Office of the Chief Information 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2015–06461 Filed 3–19–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

International Trade Administration 

[C–489–823] 

Welded Line Pipe From the Republic of 

Turkey: Preliminary Affirmative 

Countervailing Duty Determination and 

Alignment of Final Determination With 

Final Antidumping Determination 

AGENCY: Enforcement and Compliance, 

International Trade Administration, 

Department of Commerce. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce 

(the Department) preliminarily 

determines that countervailable 

subsidies are being provided to 

producers and exporters of welded line 

pipe from the Republic of Turkey 

(Turkey). The period of investigation is 

January 1, 2013, through December 31, 

2013. Interested parties are invited to 

comment on this preliminary 

determination. 

DATES: Effective March 20, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth Eastwood or Dennis McClure, 

AD/CVD Operations, Enforcement and 

Compliance, International Trade 

Administration, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; 

telephone: (202) 482–3874 or (202) 482– 

5973, respectively. 

Alignment of Final Countervailing Duty 

(CVD) Determination With Final 

Antidumping Duty (AD) Determination 

On the same day the Department 

initiated this CVD investigation, the 

Department also initiated a CVD 

investigation of welded line pipe from 

the Republic of Korea (Korea) and AD 

investigations of welded line pipe from 

Korea and Turkey.1 The CVD and AD 

investigations cover the same 

merchandise. On February 27, 2015, in 

accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (Act), the 

petitioners 2 requested alignment of the 

final CVD determination with the final 

AD determination of welded line pipe 

from Turkey. Therefore, in accordance 

with section 705(a)(1) of the Act and 19 

CFR 351.210(b)(4), we are aligning the 

final CVD determination with the final 

AD determination. Consequently, the 

final CVD determination will be issued 

on the same date as the final AD 

determination, which is currently 

scheduled to be issued no later than July 

28, 2015, unless postponed. 

Scope of the Investigation 

The scope of the investigation covers 

welded line pipe, which is carbon and 

alloy steel pipe of a kind used for oil or 

gas pipelines, not more than 24 inches 

in nominal outside diameter. For a 

complete description of the scope of the 

investigation, see Appendix I. 

Scope Comments 

Certain interested parties commented 

on the scope of the investigation as it 

appeared in the Initiation Notice. For 

discussion of those comments, see the 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum.3

Methodology 

The Department is conducting this 

CVD investigation in accordance with 

section 701 of the Act. For each of the 

subsidy programs found 

countervailable, we preliminarily 

determine that there is a subsidy (i.e., a 

financial contribution by an ‘‘authority’’ 

that gives rise to a benefit to the 

recipient) and that the subsidy is 

specific.4 For a full description of the 

methodology underlying our 

preliminary conclusions, see the 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum. 

The Preliminary Decision 

Memorandum is a public document and 

is on file electronically via Enforcement 

and Compliance’s Antidumping and 

Countervailing Duty Centralized 

Electronic Service System (ACCESS).5

ACCESS is available to registered users 

at http://access.trade.gov, and is 

available to all parties in the Central 

Records Unit, room 7046 of the main 

Department of Commerce building. In 

addition, a complete version of the 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum can 

be accessed directly at http://

enforcement.trade.gov/frn/. The signed 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum and 

the electronic versions of the 

Preliminary Decision Memorandum are 

identical in content. 

Preliminary Determination and 

Suspension of Liquidation 

In accordance with section 

703(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, we calculated 

a CVD rate for each individuallyinvestigated producer/exporter of the 

subject merchandise. For companies not 

individually investigated, we have 

calculated an ‘‘all others’’ rate as 

described below. We preliminarily 

determine the countervailable subsidy 

rates to be: 

Company Subsidy rate 

(percent) 

Borusan Istikbal Ticaret, Borusan Mannesmann Boru Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S., Borusan Mannesmann Boru Yatirim Holding A.S., 

and Borusan Holding A.S ................................................................................................................................................................ 8.85 

Tosc ̧elik Profil ve Sac Endustrisi A.S., Tosyali Demir Celik Sanayi A.S., Tosyali Dis Ticaret A.S., Tosyali Elektrik Enerjisi Toptan

Satis Ith. Ihr. A.S., and Tosyali Holding A.S.6 ................................................................................................................................. 3.76 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES