Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 24, 2022 / Notices 31581 

Commission has determined to institute 

an advisory opinion proceeding to 

ascertain whether Panduit’s New 

Designs infringe claims 1 and 3 of the 

’320 patent; claims 11, 12, 14–16, 19, 21, 

27, and 28 of the ’456 patent; claims 9, 

16, 23, and 26 of the ’153 patent; and 

claims 22 and 23 of the ’206 patent, and 

are covered by the remedial orders 

issued in this investigation. The 

Commission has further determined to 

refer the matter to the CALJ for 

assignment to an ALJ for appropriate 

proceedings and the issuance of an IAO 

at the earliest practicable time, 

preferably within 120 days of institution 

but no later than 7 months after 

institution. The ALJ shall set a target 

date at two months following the date 

of issuance of the IAO. The target date 

may be extended for good cause shown. 

The following entities are named as 

parties to the proceeding: (1) Panduit; 

(2) Corning; and (3) OUII. 

The Commission vote for this 

determination took place on May 18, 

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 part 

210. 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: May 18, 2022. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–11078 Filed 5–23–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 337–TA–1314] 

Certain Computer Network Security 

Equipment and Systems, Related 

Software, Components Thereof, and 

Products Containing Same; Institution 

of Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a 

complaint was filed with the U.S. 

International Trade Commission on 

April 19, 2022, under section 337 of the 

Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, on 

behalf of Centripetal Networks, Inc. of 

Reston, Virginia. A supplement to the 

complaint was filed on April 29, 2022. 

The complaint alleges violations of 

section 337 based upon the importation 

into the United States, the sale for 

importation, and the sale within the 

United States after importation of 

certain computer network security 

equipment and systems, related 

software, components thereof, and 

products containing same by reason of 

the infringement of certain claims of 

U.S. Patent No. 9,264,370 (‘‘the ’370 

patent’’); U.S. Patent No. 10,193,917 

(‘‘the ’917 patent’’); and U.S. Patent No. 

10,284,526 (‘‘the ’526 patent’’). The 

complaint further alleges that an 

industry in the United States exists as 

required by the applicable Federal 

Statute. The complainant requests that 

the Commission institute an 

investigation and, after the 

investigation, issue a limited exclusion 

order and a cease and desist order. 

ADDRESSES: The complaint, except for 

any confidential information contained 

therein, may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

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

accessing EDIS, please email 

EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. Hearing impaired 

individuals are advised that information 

on this matter can be obtained by 

contacting the Commission’s TDD 

terminal on (202) 205–1810. Persons 

with mobility impairments who will 

need special assistance in gaining access 

to the Commission should contact the 

Office of the Secretary at (202) 205– 

2000. General information concerning 

the Commission may also be obtained 

by accessing its internet server at 

https://www.usitc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Pathenia M. Proctor, The Office of 

Unfair Import Investigations, U.S. 

International Trade Commission, 

telephone (202) 205–2560. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Authority: The authority for 

institution of this investigation is 

contained in section 337 of the Tariff 

Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 

1337, and in section 210.10 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10 (2021). 

Scope of Investigation: Having 

considered the complaint, the U.S. 

International Trade Commission, on 

May 18, 2022, ordered that— 

(1) Pursuant to subsection (b) of 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended, an investigation be instituted 

to determine whether there is a 

violation of subsection (a)(1)(B) of 

section 337 in the importation into the 

United States, the sale for importation, 

or the sale within the United States after 

importation of certain products 

identified in paragraph (2) by reason of 

infringement of one or more of claims 

22–27, 42–48, and 63 of the ’370 patent; 

claims 1, 5, 11, 15, and 20 of the ’917 

patent; and claims 1–3, 6, 11–13, and 16 

of the ’526 patent, and whether an 

industry in the United States exists as 

required by subsection (a)(2) of section 

337; 

(2) Pursuant to section 210.10(b)(1) of 

the Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.10(b)(1), the 

plain language description of the 

accused products or category of accused 

products, which defines the scope of the 

investigation, is ‘‘network traffic 

monitoring and security enforcement 

computer equipment, as well as related 

network analysis software components 

thereof, and products containing the 

same’’; 

(3) For the purpose of the 

investigation so instituted, the following 

are hereby named as parties upon which 

this notice of investigation shall be 

served: 

(a) The complainant is: Centripetal 

Networks, Inc., 1875 Explorer Street, 

Suite 900, Reston, VA 20190. 

(b) The respondent is the following 

entity alleged to be in violation of 

section 337, and is the party upon 

which the complaint is to be served: 

Keysight Technologies, Inc., 1400 

Fountaingrove Parkway, Santa Rosa, 

CA 95403–1738. 

(c) The Office of Unfair Import 

Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW, Suite 

401, Washington, DC 20436; and 

(4) For the investigation so instituted, 

the Chief Administrative Law Judge, 

U.S. International Trade Commission, 

shall designate the presiding 

Administrative Law Judge. 

Responses to the complaint and the 

notice of investigation must be 

submitted by the named respondent in 

accordance with section 210.13 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, 19 CFR 210.13. Pursuant to 

19 CFR 201.16(e) and 210.13(a), as 

amended in 85 FR 15798 (March 19, 

2020), such responses will be 

considered by the Commission if 

received not later than 20 days after the 

date of service by the complainant of the 

complaint and the notice of 

investigation. Extensions of time for 

submitting responses to the complaint 

and the notice of investigation will not 

be granted unless good cause therefor is 

shown. 

Failure of the 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1
31582 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 24, 2022 / Notices 

and to enter an initial determination 

and a final determination containing 

such findings, and may result in the 

issuance of an exclusion order or a cease 

and desist order or both directed against 

the respondent. 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: May 18, 2022. 

Lisa Barton, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2022–11079 Filed 5–23–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Proposed 

Consent Decree Under The Clean Air 

Act 

On May 17, 2022, the Department of 

Justice lodged a proposed consent 

decree with the United States District 

Court for the Western District of 

Pennsylvania in the lawsuit entitled 

United States and Allegheny County 

Health Department v. United States 

Steel Corporation, Civil Action No. 

2:22–cv–00729–CRE. 

The United States and the Allegheny 

County Health Department jointly filed 

this lawsuit under the Clean Air Act 

against United States Steel Corporation, 

alleging violations at the Edgar 

Thomson steel mill in Allegheny 

County, Pennsylvania. The complaint 

seeks injunctive relief and civil 

penalties for exceedances of visible 

emissions opacity standards, as well as 

violations of requirements to minimize 

fugitive emissions, maintain and operate 

equipment to minimize emissions, and 

comply with the facility’s operations 

and maintenance plan. The consent 

decree requires the defendant to 

perform injunctive relief to address the 

violations and pay a $1,500,000 civil 

penalty. The civil penalty will be split 

evenly between the United States and 

the Allegheny County Health 

Department, which will use its portion 

of the civil penalty to fund a 

multimodal trail connection for 

communities near the facility. 

The publication of this notice opens 

a period for public comment on the 

consent decree. Comments should be 

addressed to the Assistant Attorney 

General, Environment and Natural 

Resources Division, and should refer to 

United States and Allegheny County 

Health Department v. United States 

Steel Corporation, D.J. Ref. No. 90–5–2– 

1–12083. 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 consent decree may be examined 

and downloaded at this Justice 

Department website: https://

www.justice.gov/enrd/consent-decrees. 

We will provide a paper copy of the 

consent decree upon written request 

and payment of reproduction costs. 

Please mail your request and payment 

to: Consent Decree Library, U.S. DOJ— 

ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 

20044–7611. 

Please enclose a check or money order 

for $38.50 (25 cents per page 

reproduction cost) payable to the United 

States Treasury. 

Jeffrey Sands, 

Assistant Section Chief, Environmental 

Enforcement Section, Environment and 

Natural Resources Division. 

[FR Doc. 2022–11114 Filed 5–23–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

[OMB Number: 1103–0117] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed eCollection; 

eComments Requested; Extension of a 

Currently Approved Collection; 

Departmental Generic Clearance for 

the Collection of Qualitative Feedback 

on Agency Service Delivery 

AGENCY: Department of Justice. 

ACTION: 60 Day notice. 

SUMMARY: As part of a Federal 

Government-wide effort to streamline 

the process to seek feedback from the 

public on service delivery, Department 

of Justice will be submitting a Generic 

Information Collection Request (Generic 

ICR): ‘‘Generic Clearance for the 

Collection of Qualitative Feedback on 

Agency Service Delivery’’ to OMB for 

approval under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA). 

DATES: The purpose of this notice is to 

allow 60 days for public comment until 

July 25, 2022. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have additional comments 

especially on the estimated public 

burden or associated response time, 

suggestions, or need a copy of the 

proposed information collection 

instrument with instructions or 

additional information, please contact 

Melody Braswell, Department Clearance 

Officer, melody.braswell2@usdoj.gov; or 

the DOJ Clearance Officer at 202–307– 

0890. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Written 

comments and suggestions from the 

public and affected agencies concerning 

the proposed collection of information 

are encouraged. Your comments should 

address one or more of the following 

four points: 

—Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information 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; 

—Evaluate 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. 

Overview of This Collection 

Title: Generic Clearance for the 

Collection of Qualitative Feedback on 

Agency Service Delivery. 

Abstract: The information collection 

activity will garner qualitative customer 

and stakeholder feedback in an efficient, 

timely manner, in accordance with the 

Administration’s commitment to 

improving service delivery. By 

qualitative feedback we mean 

information that provides useful 

insights on perceptions and opinions, 

but are not statistical surveys that yield 

quantitative results that can be 

generalized to the population of study. 

This feedback will provide insights into 

customer or stakeholder perceptions, 

experiences and expectations, provide 

an early warning of issues with service, 

or focus attention on areas where 

communication, training or changes in 

operations might improve delivery of 

products or services. These collections 

will allow for ongoing, collaborative and 

actionable communications between the 

Agency and its customers and 

stakeholders. It will also allow feedback 

to contribute directly to the 

improvement of program management. 

Feedback collected under this generic 

clearance will provide useful 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with NOTICES1