15454 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2022 / Notices 

TEXAS 

Presidio County 

Central Marfa Historic District, Roughly 

bounded by Washington, Dallas, Dean, 

Russell, Austin and Abbott Sts., Marfa, 

SG100007597 

VIRGINIA 

Fairfax County 

Mount Vernon Enterprise Lodge #3488-Pride 

of Fairfax County Lodge #298, 7809 

Fordson Rd., Alexandria vicinity, 

SG100007613 

Manassas Independent City 

Annaburg, 9201 Maple St., Manassas, 

SG100007614 

WEST VIRGINIA 

Hampshire County 

West Virginia Schools for the Deaf and the 

Blind Dairy Barn, 199 Depot St., Romney, 

SG100007605 

Monongalia County 

Richwood Avenue Wall, (New Deal Stone 

Resources in Morgantown, Monongalia 

County, WV, 1932–1943 MPS), Richwood 

Ave. along Whitmore Park, Morgantown, 

MP100007608 

Deckers Creek Wall, (New Deal Stone 

Resources in Morgantown, Monongalia 

County, WV, 1932–1943 MPS), Deckers 

Creek, Morgantown, MP100007609 

Eighth Street Stone Retaining Walls, (New 

Deal Stone Resources in Morgantown, 

Monongalia County, WV, 1932–1943 MPS), 

305 and 321 8th St., Morgantown, 

MP100007610 

Ohio County 

Wheeling Warehouse Historic District 

(Boundary Increase), Roughly bounded by 

Main, 20th, and east side of Market Sts., 

and Wheeling Cr., Wheeling, BC100007606 

Preston County 

Terra Alta First United Methodist Church, 

301 West State Ave., Terra Alta, 

SG100007611 

Tucker County 

Buxton and Landstreet Company Store, 571 

Douglas Rd., Thomas, SG100007612 

Additional documentation has been 

received for the following resource: 

WISCONSIN 

Kewaunee County 

Marquette Historic District (Additional 

Documentation), Roughly bounded by Lake 

Michigan and Center, Juneau and Lincoln 

Sts., Kewaunee, AD93001167 

Nomination submitted by Federal 

Preservation Officer: 

The State Historic Preservation Officer 

reviewed the following nomination and 

responded to the Federal Preservation Officer 

within 45 days of receipt of the nomination 

and supports listing the property in the 

National Register of Historic Places. 

MAINE 

Hancock County 

Mount Desert Island Hiking Trail System, 

(Acadia National Park MPS), Acadia NP, 

P.O. Box 177, Bar Harbor, Bar Harbor 

vicinity, MP100007602 

Mount Desert Island Hiking Trail System, 

(Acadia National Park MPS), Acadia NP, 

P.O. Box 177, Bar Harbor, Tremont 

vicinity, MP100007602 

Mount Desert Island Hiking Trail System, 

(Acadia National Park MPS), Acadia NP, 

P.O. Box 177, Bar Harbor, Mount Desert, 

vicinity, MP100007602 

Mount Desert Island Hiking Trail System, 

(Acadia National Park MPS), Acadia NP, 

P.O. Box 177, Bar Harbor, Southwest 

Harbor vicinity, MP100007602 

Authority: Section 60.13 of 36 CFR 

part 60. 

Dated: March 8, 2022. 

Sherry A. Frear, 

Chief, National Register of Historic Places/ 

National Historic Landmarks Program. 

[FR Doc. 2022–05697 Filed 3–17–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–52–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–1217] 

Certain Blowers and Components 

Thereof; Notice of a Commission 

Determination Finding No Violation of 

the Consent Order; Terminating the 

Enforcement Proceeding; and 

Remanding Order No. 36 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined to bifurcate 

its review of Order No. 36 from its 

review of the EID in the enforcement 

proceeding. The Commission has 

determined to affirm the enforcement 

initial determination (‘‘EID’’) issued on 

December 14, 2021, finding no violation 

of the consent order issued in the abovereferenced section 337 enforcement 

investigation with the modifications set 

forth in the accompanying Commission 

opinion. The enforcement proceeding is 

terminated. The Commission has 

determined to remand Order No. 36 to 

the Administrative Law Judge (‘‘ALJ’’) 

for issuance of a revised order regarding 

sanctions as set forth in the Commission 

remand order. The Commission will 

consider Order No. 36 in the separate 

sanctions proceeding. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW, 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–3042. Copies of non-confidential 

documents filed in connection with this 

investigation may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help 

accessing EDIS, please email 

EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. General 

information concerning the Commission 

may also be obtained by accessing its 

internet server at https://www.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: On 

September 8, 2020, the Commission 

instituted the original, underlying 

investigation based on a complaint filed 

by Regal Beloit America, Inc. of Beloit, 

Wisconsin (‘‘Regal’’ or ‘‘Complainant’’). 

85 FR 55491–92 (Sept. 8, 2020). The 

complaint alleged violations of section 

337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337, in the 

importation into the United States, the 

sale for importation, or the sale within 

the United States after importation of 

certain blowers and components thereof 

by reason of infringement of one or 

more of claims 1, 2, 7–10, and 15 of U.S. 

Patent No. 8,079,834 (‘‘the ’834 patent’’). 

Id. at 55492. The Commission’s notice 

of investigation named as respondents 

East West Manufacturing, LLC of 

Atlanta, Georgia, and East West 

Industries of Binh Duong, Vietnam 

(collectively, ‘‘East West’’ or 

‘‘Respondents’’). Id. at 55492. The Office 

of Unfair Import Investigations (‘‘OUII’’) 

did not participate as a party in the 

original investigation. Id. 

On November 12, 2020, the 

Commission terminated the original 

investigation with respect to 

Respondents based upon a consent 

order stipulation and entry of a consent 

order. 85 FR 73511 (Nov. 18, 2020). The 

Consent Order directs East West to ‘‘not 

sell for importation, import or sell after 

importation the Subject Articles . . . 

except under consent or license from 

Complainant.’’ Consent Order at ¶ 5. 

The Consent Order defines ‘‘Subject 

Articles’’ as ‘‘certain blowers and 

components thereof that infringe claims 

1, 2, 7–10, and 15 of the ’834 Patent.’’ 

Id. at ¶ 3. 

On January 15, 2021, Regal filed an 

enforcement complaint at the 

Commission alleging that East West’s 

redesigned blower infringes claims 1, 2, 

7–10, and 15 of the ’834 patent in 

violation of the Consent Order. On 

February 19, 2021, the Commission 

instituted a formal enforcement 

proceeding, pursuant to Commission 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 53 / Friday, March 18, 2022 / Notices 15455 

Rule 210.75(a), to determine whether a 

violation of the consent order issued in 

the original investigation has occurred 

and to determine what, if any, 

enforcement measures are appropriate. 

86 FR 10335 (Feb. 19, 2021). The 

respondents named in the enforcement 

proceeding are the same as the 

respondents named in the original 

investigation, i.e., East West 

Manufacturing, LLC of Atlanta, Georgia, 

and East West Industries of Binh Duong, 

Vietnam. Id. OUII was named as a party 

in the enforcement proceeding. Id. 

On March 1, 2021, East West filed a 

motion for monetary and other 

sanctions alleging that Regal and its 

attorneys tampered with and 

misrepresented the accused redesigned 

blower in the enforcement complaint. 

Regal and OUII filed responses thereto 

on March 11, 2021, and March 18, 2021, 

respectively. Regal opposed the motion 

and asked for monetary sanctions in its 

response. The presiding Administrative 

Law Judge (‘‘ALJ’’) further permitted the 

private parties to file replies and surreplies to the sanctions briefing. EID at 

16. 

On June 29, 2021, the ALJ issued a 

Markman Order (Order No. 22), styled 

‘‘Markman Claim Constructions With 

Abbreviated Rationales’’ (Markman 

Order I). On July 13, 2021, the ALJ 

issued Order No. 23, clarifying Order 

No. 22. 

The ALJ held an evidentiary hearing 

from July 20–23, 2021 and received 

post-hearing briefs thereafter. On 

September 22, 2021, the ALJ held a 

supplemental hearing on the sanctions 

motion. EID at 18. 

On October 29, 2021, the ALJ issued 

Order No. 32 (Markman Order II), 

providing extensive explanations as to 

the adopted constructions in Order No. 

22. 

On December 14, 2021, the ALJ issued 

the subject EID finding no violation of 

the Consent Order. The EID found that 

the parties do not contest personal 

jurisdiction, and that the Commission 

has in rem jurisdiction over the accused 

products. EID at 19–20. The EID noted 

that the private parties filed a ‘‘Joint 

Stipulation on Importation and Sales,’’ 

describing ‘‘the number of units of the 

Accused or Redesigned Blower that East 

West imported and sold.’’ Id. at 20. The 

EID found that Regal failed to show that 

East West’s redesigned blower infringes 

asserted claims 1, 2, 7–10, and 15 of the 

’834 patent, and thus failed to show a 

violation of the consent order. See id. at 

9–10. The EID stated that ‘‘in the event 

the Commission were to find to the 

contrary, an imposed civil penalty 

should be de minimus and not the 

maximum civil penalty that Regal has 

proposed.’’ Id. at 10. Specifically, the 

EID recommended that ‘‘East West 

disgorge its profits plus an additional 

one-half of its profits from any sales that 

violated the Consent Order.’’ Id. at 10– 

11. 

On December 14, 2021, the ALJ also 

issued Order No. 36 denying East West’s 

motion for monetary sanctions. The ALJ 

issued a public warning to Regal, citing 

the Commission’s sanctions authority 

under Commission Rule 210.4(c) and 

(d), 19 CFR 210.4(c), (d), and ordered 

Regal to correct potentially misleading 

portions of the enforcement complaint. 

On January 4, 2022, Regal filed a 

petition for review of the EID, and 

Respondents filed a contingent petition 

for review of the EID and a petition for 

review of Order No. 36. On January 10, 

2022, the parties replied to the petitions 

for review. 

On February 11, 2022, the 

Commission determined to review the 

EID and Order No. 36. 87 FR 9085–86 

(Feb. 17, 2022). 

Pursuant to 19 CFR 210.25, the 

Commission has determined to bifurcate 

its review of Order No. 36 from its 

review of the EID. Upon review of the 

parties’ submissions, the EID, and the 

evidence of record, the Commission has 

determined to affirm the EID’s finding 

that Regal failed to show that East West 

violated the Consent Order with the 

modifications set forth in the 

accompanying Commission opinion. 

The enforcement proceeding is 

terminated. The Commission has 

determined to remand Order No. 36 to 

the ALJ for a revised order regarding 

sanctions as set forth in the Commission 

remand order. The Commission will 

consider Order No. 36 in the separate 

sanctions proceeding. 

The Commission’s vote on this 

determination took place on March 14, 

2022. 

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 part 

210 of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 210). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: March 14, 2022. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–05713 Filed 3–17–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Proposed 

Consent Decree Under the Clean Air 

Act 

On March 15, 2022, the Department of 

Justice lodged a proposed Consent 

Decree with the United States District 

Court for the Western District of 

Louisiana in the lawsuit entitled United 

States of America v. Power Performance 

Enterprises Inc. and Kory Blaine Willis, 

Civil Action No. 22–cv–00693. 

In this action, the United States, on 

behalf of the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, filed a Complaint 

alleging that between August 15, 2013 

and June 4, 2018, Defendants PPEI and 

its owner, Mr. Willis, manufactured, 

sold, or offered to sell aftermarket 

automotive products that have a 

principal effect of bypassing, defeating, 

or rendering inoperative the emission 

controls on diesel cars and trucks in 

violation of Section 203(a)(3)(B) of the 

CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7522(a)(3)(B). The 

Complaint further alleges that, absent an 

injunction, Defendants may resume the 

manufacture or sales of such products. 

The proposed Complaint seeks 

appropriate civil penalties and 

injunctive relief to prohibit Defendants 

from continuing to manufacture and sell 

these unlawful products. 

Under the proposed settlement, the 

Defendants agree to pay a civil penalty 

(based on a finding of limited ability to 

pay) of $1,550,000 in three installment 

payments over 2 years. In addition, the 

settlement imposes various restrictions 

designed to ensure that Defendants 

operate in compliance with the law. 

The publication of this notice opens 

a period for public comment on the 

proposed Consent Decree. Comments 

should be addressed to the Assistant 

Attorney General, Environment and 

Natural Resources Division, and should 

refer to United States of America v. 

Power Performance Enterprises Inc. and 

Kory Blaine Willis, D.J. Ref. No. 90–5– 

2–1–11865. All comments must be 

submitted no later than thirty (30) days 

after the publication date of this notice. 

Comments may be submitted either by 

email or by mail: 

To submit 

comments: Send them to: 

By email ....... pubcomment-ees.enrd@

usdoj.gov. 

By mail ......... Assistant Attorney General, 

U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. 

Box 7611, Washington, DC 

20044–7611. 

During the public comment period, 

the proposed Consent Decree may be 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1