Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2005 / Notices 61157 

1A record of the Commissioners’ votes, the 

Commission’s statement on adequacy, and any 

individual Commissioner’s statements will be 

available from the Office of the Secretary and at the 

Commission’s Web site. 

2The Commission has found the responses 

submitted by ACCO Brands USA, LLC, and 

Officemate International Corp. to be individually 

adequate. Comments from other interested parties 

will not be accepted (see 19 CFR 207.62(d)(2)). 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 731–TA–663 (Second 

Review)] 

Paper Clips from China 

AGENCY: International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Scheduling of an expedited fiveyear review concerning the antidumping 

duty order on paper clips from China. 

SUMMARY: The Commission hereby gives 

notice of the scheduling of an expedited 

review pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of 

the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 

1675(c)(3)) (the Act) to determine 

whether revocation of the antidumping 

duty order on paper clips from China 

would be likely to lead to continuation 

or recurrence of material injury within 

a reasonably foreseeable time. For 

further information concerning the 

conduct of this review and rules of 

general application, consult the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure, part 201, subparts A through 

E (19 CFR part 201), and part 207, 

subparts A, D, E, and F (19 CFR part 

207). 

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 4, 2005. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

McClure (202–205–3191), Office of 

Investigations, U.S. International Trade 

Commission, 500 E Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20436. Hearingimpaired persons can obtain 

information on this matter 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 (http:// 

www.usitc.gov). The public record for 

this review may be viewed on the 

Commission’s electronic docket (EDIS) 

at http://edis.usitc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background. On October 4, 2005, the 

Commission determined that the 

domestic interested party group 

response to its notice of institution (70 

FR 38202, July 1, 2005) of the subject 

five-year review was adequate and that 

the respondent interested party group 

response was inadequate. The 

Commission did not find any other 

circumstances that would warrant 

conducting a full review.1 Accordingly, 

the Commission determined that it 

would conduct an expedited review 

pursuant to section 751(c)(3) of the Act. 

Staff report. A staff report containing 

information concerning the subject 

matter of the review will be placed in 

the nonpublic record on December 9, 

2005, and made available to persons on 

the Administrative Protective Order 

service list for this review. A public 

version will be issued thereafter, 

pursuant to section 207.62(d)(4) of the 

Commission’s rules. 

Written submissions. As provided in 

section 207.62(d) of the Commission’s 

rules, interested parties that are parties 

to the review and that have provided 

individually adequate responses to the 

notice of institution,2 and any party 

other than an interested party to the 

review may file written comments with 

the Secretary on what determination the 

Commission should reach in the review. 

Comments are due on or before 

December 14, 2005 and may not contain 

new factual information. Any person 

that is neither a party to the five-year 

review nor an interested party may 

submit a brief written statement (which 

shall not contain any new factual 

information) pertinent to the review by 

December 14, 2005. However, should 

the Department of Commerce extend the 

time limit for its completion of the final 

results of its review, the deadline for 

comments (which may not contain new 

factual information) on Commerce’s 

final results is three business days after 

the issuance of Commerce’s results. If 

comments contain business proprietary 

information (BPI), they must conform 

with the requirements of sections 201.6, 

207.3, and 207.7 of the Commission’s 

rules. The Commission’s rules do not 

authorize filing of submissions with the 

Secretary by facsimile or electronic 

means, except to the extent permitted by 

section 201.8 of the Commission’s rules, 

as amended, 67 FR 68036 (November 8, 

2002). Even where electronic filing of a 

document is permitted, certain 

documents must also be filed in paper 

form, as specified in II (C) of the 

Commission’s Handbook on Electronic 

Filing Procedures, 67 FR 68168, 68173 

(November 8, 2002). 

In accordance with sections 201.16(c) 

and 207.3 of the rules, each document 

filed by a party to the review must be 

served on all other parties to the review 

(as identified by either the public or BPI 

service list), and a certificate of service 

must be timely filed. The Secretary will 

not accept a document for filing without 

a certificate of service. 

Determination. The Commission has 

determined to exercise its authority to 

extend the review period by up to 90 

days pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 

1675(c)(5)(B). 

Authority: This review is being conducted 

under authority of title VII of the Tariff Act 

of 1930; this notice is published pursuant to 

section 207.62 of the Commission’s rules. 

Issued: October 14, 2005. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 05–20977 Filed 10–19–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Inv. No. 337–TA–509] 

In the Matter of Certain Personal 

Computers, Server Computers, and 

Components Thereof; Notice of 

Commission Decision To Review an 

Initial Determination Finding a 

Violation of Section 337 of the Tariff 

Act of 1930; Request for Written 

Submissions on the Issues Under 

Review, and on Remedy, the Public 

Interest, and Bonding 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has determined to review 

in its entirety the presiding 

administrative law judge’s (‘‘ALJ’’) 

initial determination (‘‘ID’’) in the 

above-captioned investigation finding a 

violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act 

of 1930. Notice is also hereby given that 

the Commission is requesting briefing 

on the issues under review, and on the 

issues of remedy, the public interest, 

and bonding. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Rodney Maze, Esq., Office of the 

General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 

205–3065. 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 

61158 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2005 / Notices 

Internet server (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 

patent-based section 337 investigation 

was instituted by the Commission on 

June 7, 2004, based on a complaint filed 

by Hewlett-Packard Development 

Company, L.P. of Houston, Texas and 

Hewlett-Packard Company of Palo Alto, 

California (collectively ‘‘HP’’). 69 FR 

31844 (June 7, 2004). The complainants 

alleged violations of section 337 in the 

importation and sale of certain personal 

computers, server computers, and 

components thereof, by reason of 

infringement of seven U.S. patents. The 

complainants named Gateway, Inc. of 

Poway, California (Gateway) as the only 

respondent. Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 

5,737,604, claims 1, 3, 4, 6–8, 18, 20, 21, 

23–25, 35, 37, 38, and 40–42 of U.S. 

Patent No. 6,138,184 (‘‘the ‘184 patent’’), 

claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 5,892,976 

(‘‘the ‘976 patent’’), and claim 1 of U.S. 

Patent No. 6,085,318 (‘‘the ‘318 patent’’) 

remain at issue in this investigation. 

On May 24, 2005, the ALJ issued an 

ID (Order No. 45) extending the target 

date of the investigation by three 

months or until December 8, 2005. No 

party petitioned for review of the ID. 

The Commission has determined not to 

review this ID. 

On August 8, 2005, the ALJ issued his 

final ID on violation and his 

recommended determination on remedy 

and bonding. The final ID incorporates 

by reference Order No. 15 setting forth 

the applicable construction of the claim 

terms at issue in this investigation. The 

ALJ found a violation of section 337 by 

reason of infringement of claims 7, 24, 

and 41 of the ‘184 patent and claim 9 

of the ‘976 patent. The ALJ did not find 

a violation of section 337 with respect 

to the other two patents. Petitions for 

review were filed by HP, Gateway, and 

the Commission investigative attorney 

(IA) on August 18, 2005. 

On August 23, 2005, the Commission 

issued a notice indicating that it had 

determined to extend the deadline for 

determining whether to review the final 

ID by 14 days, i.e., from September 22, 

2005, until October 6, 2005. On August 

25, 2005, all parties filed responses to 

the petitions. On October 6, 2005, the 

Commission issued a notice indicating 

that it had determined to extend the 

deadline for determining whether to 

review the final ID by 8 days, i.e., from 

October 6, 2005, until October 14, 2005. 

Having examined the record in this 

investigation, including the ALJ’s final 

ID, the petitions for review, and the 

responses thereto, the Commission has 

determined to review the ID in its 

entirety. In connection with its review, 

the Commission requests briefing 

limited to the following questions: 

(1) With respect to the ALJ’s 

infringement finding regarding the ‘184 

and ‘976 patents, the extent to which 

installation of parallel port driver 

software is required to enable DMAcontrolled transfers to the parallel port, 

and the implications for infringement 

analysis and for the technical prong of 

the domestic industry requirement; 

(2) With respect to the ALJ’s 

infringement finding regarding claim 1 

of the ‘318 patent, whether use of an El 

Torito CD–ROM is required for the 

accused devices to meet the limitations 

of claim 1 of the ‘318 patent, and the 

implications for infringement analysis 

and for the technical prong of the 

domestic industry requirement; 

(3) Whether there is a factual or legal 

distinction, for purposes of infringement 

analysis, between the installation of 

software in relation to the parallel 

output port limitation of the ‘184 and 

‘976 patents and the use of an El Torito 

CD–ROM in relation to the boot memory 

limitation of claim 1 of the ‘318 patent; 

and 

(4) Whether the holdings of Jazz 

Photo Corp v. International Trade 

Commission, 264 F.3d 1094, 1105 (Fed. 

Cir. 2001), and Fuji Photo Film Co. Ltd. 

v. Jazz Photo Corp., 394 F.3d 1368, 1376 

(Fed. Cir 2005), concerning the first sale 

doctrine and patent exhaustion, control 

where the patents at issue are the 

subject of worldwide licenses, unlike 

the situation in the Jazz and Fuji cases. 

In connection with the final 

disposition of this investigation, the 

Commission may issue (1) an order that 

could result in the exclusion of the 

subject articles from entry into the 

United States, and/or (2) a cease and 

desist order that could result in the 

respondent being required to cease and 

desist from engaging in unfair action in 

the importation and sale of such 

articles. Accordingly, the Commission is 

interested in receiving written 

submissions that address the form of 

remedy, if any, that should be ordered. 

If a party seeks exclusion of an article 

from entry into the United States for 

purposes other than entry for 

consumption, the party should so 

indicate and provide information 

establishing that activities involving 

other types of entry are either adversely 

affecting it or likely to do so. For 

background, see In the Matter of Certain 

Devices for Connecting Computers via 

Telephone Lines, Inv. No. 337–TA–360, 

USITC Pub. No. 2843 (December 1994) 

(Commission Opinion). 

If the Commission contemplates some 

form of remedy, it must consider the 

effects of that remedy upon the public 

interest. The factors the Commission 

will consider include the effect that an 

exclusion order and/or cease and desist 

orders would have on (1) the public 

health and welfare, (2) competitive 

conditions in the U.S. economy, (3) U.S. 

production of articles that are like or 

directly competitive with those that are 

subject to investigation, and (4) U.S. 

consumers. The Commission is 

therefore interested in receiving written 

submissions that address the 

aforementioned public interest factors 

in the context of this investigation. 

If the Commission orders some form 

of remedy, the President has 60 days to 

approve or disapprove the 

Commission’s action. During this 

period, the subject articles would be 

entitled to enter the United States under 

a bond, in an amount determined by the 

Commission and prescribed by the 

Secretary of the Treasury. The 

Commission is therefore interested in 

receiving submissions concerning the 

amount of the bond that should be 

imposed. 

Written Submissions: Submissions 

should be concise and thoroughly 

referenced to the record in this 

investigation. The parties to the 

investigation, interested government 

agencies, and any other interested 

persons are encouraged to file written 

submissions on the issues under review 

and the issues of remedy, the public 

interest, and bonding. Such submissions 

should address the ALJ’s recommended 

determination on remedy and bonding. 

Complainant and the Commission 

investigative attorney are also requested 

to submit proposed remedial orders for 

the Commission’s consideration. 

Complainant is further requested to 

state the expiration date of the ‘184 and 

‘976 patents and the HTSUS numbers 

under which the infringing products are 

imported. The main written 

submissions and proposed remedial 

orders must be filed no later than close 

of business on October 24, 2005. 

Response submissions must be filed no 

later than close of business on October 

31, 2005. No further submissions will be 

permitted unless otherwise ordered by 

the Commission. 

Persons filing written submissions 

must file the original document and 12 

true copies thereof with the Office of the 

Secretary on or before the deadlines 

stated above. Any person desiring to 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 202 / Thursday, October 20, 2005 / Notices 61159 

submit a document (or portions thereof) 

to the Commission in confidence must 

request confidential treatment unless 

the information has already been 

granted such treatment during the 

proceedings. All such requests should 

be directed to the Secretary of the 

Commission and must include a full 

statement of the reasons why the 

Commission should grant such 

treatment. See 19 CFR 210.5. Documents 

for which confidential treatment is 

granted by the Commission will be 

treated accordingly. All nonconfidential written submissions will be 

available for public inspection at the 

Office of the Secretary. 

This action is taken under the 

authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act 

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

and §§ 210.42, 210.43, and 210.50 of the 

Commission’s Interim Rules of Practice 

and Procedure (19 CFR 210.42, 210.43, 

and 210.50). 

Issued: October 14, 2005. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 05–20976 Filed 10–19–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

[AAG/A Order No. 013–2005] 

Privacy Act of 1974, Systems of 

Records 

AGENCY: Environment and Natural 

Resources Division, DOJ. 

ACTION: Notice of modifications to 

systems of records. 

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the 

Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), the 

Environment and National Resources 

Division (ENRD), Department of Justice, 

proposes to make minor modifications 

to two systems of records. The first 

system, entitled ‘‘Appraisers, Approved 

Attorneys, Abstractors and Title 

Companies Files Database System 

(Justice/ENRD–001),’’ was last 

published in the Federal Register on 

February 23, 2000 (65 FR 8989). The 

second system entitled ‘‘Environment 

and Natural Resources Division Case 

and Related Files System (Justice/ 

ENRD–003),’’ was last published in the 

Federal Register on February 23, 2000 

(65 FR 8990). The modifications involve 

a change to the name of a Section within 

ENRD; and a change in the name of an 

Office serving as a System Manager. 

These minor changes do not require 

notification to the Office of Management 

and Budget or Congress. The changes 

will be effective on October 20, 2005. 

Questions regarding the modifications 

may be directed to Mary Cahill, 

Management Analyst, Management and 

Planning Staff, Justice Management 

Division, National Place Building, Room 

1400, Department of Justice, 

Washington, DC 20530. 

The modifications to the system 

descriptions are set forth below. 

Dated: October 12, 2005. 

Paul R. Corts, 

Assistant Attorney General for 

Administration. 

JUSTICE/ENRD–001 

SYSTEM NAME: 

Appraisers, Approved Attorneys, 

Abstractors and Title Companies Files 

Database System. 

* * * * * 

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: 

Address inquiries to the FOIA/Privacy 

Act Coordinator; Environment and 

Natural Resources Division; Law and 

Policy Section; PO Box 4390; Ben 

Franklin Station; Washington, DC 

20044–4390. 

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: 

Submit in writing all requests for 

access, and clearly mark the envelope 

and letter, ‘‘Privacy Act Access 

Request.’’ Include in the request your 

full name, date, and place of birth, case 

caption, or other information which 

may assist in locating the records you 

seek. Also include your notarized 

signature and a return address. Direct all 

access requests to the FOIA/Privacy Act 

Coordinator; Environment and Natural 

Resources Division; Law and Policy 

Section; PO Box 4390, Ben Franklin 

Station; Washington, DC 20044–4390. 

* * * * * 

JUSTICE/ENRD–003 

SYSTEM NAME: 

Environment and Natural Resources 

Division Case and Related Files System. 

* * * * * 

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: 

The System Manager is the Assistant 

Director, Office of Information 

Management, in coordination with the 

Office of Planning and Management’s 

Records Management Unit. 

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: 

Address inquiries to the FOIA/Privacy 

Act Coordinator; Environment and 

Natural Resources Division; Law and 

Policy Section; PO Box 4390; Ben 

Franklin Station; Washington, DC 

20044–4390. 

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: 

* * * [Paragraph remains the same, 

except to change last sentence of 

paragraph to read as follows.] 

Direct all access requests to the FOIA/ 

Privacy Act Coordinator; Environment 

and Natural Resources Division; Law 

and Policy Section; PO Box 4390, Ben 

Franklin Station, Washington DC 

20044–4390. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 05–20997 Filed 10–19–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

[AAG/A Order No. 011–2005] 

Privacy Act of 1974; Notice of the 

Removal of System of Records 

Pursuant to the provisions of the 

Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), the 

Department of Justice is removing a 

published Privacy Act system of records 

entitled ‘‘Department of Justice (DOJ) 

Call Detail Records, Justice/JMD–012,’’

last published in the Federal Register 

on September 27, 1996, at 61 FR 50870. 

This system of records notice is no 

longer necessary because DOJ 

authorized Bell Atlantic to terminate the 

Message Detail Recording on April 16, 

1999. At the present time, a Verizonowned computer processes telephone 

circuit usage for the Washington Area 

Switch Program (WASP II). That 

function (including long-distance 

calling) has been totally taken in-house 

by Verizon. The only way DOJ can have 

access to this information would be by 

a valid subpoena issued against Verizon. 

The DOJ records have been destroyed in 

accordance with the Retention and 

Disposal schedule provided in the 

Federal Register notice of September 

27, 1996. 

Therefore, the system of records 

entitled ‘‘Department of Justice Call 

Detail Records, Justice/JMD–012’’ is 

removed from the Department’s 

compilation of Privacy Act systems of 

records effective on the date of 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register. 

Dated: October 6, 2005. 

Paul R. Corts, 

Assistant Attorney General for 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 05–20998 Filed 10–19–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–FB–P