Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Notices 66849 

Any such application must be made no 

later than 21 days after publication of 

this notice in the Federal Register. 

Authorized applicants must represent 

interested parties, as defined in 19 

U.S.C. 1677(9), who are parties to this 

proceeding. Parties that are currently 

subject to the APO issued in 

Investigation No. 701–TA–431 by virtue 

of their participation in the litigation 

before the Court of International Trade 

in Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. United 

States, Ct. No. 03–652, need not file a 

new APO application in this 

proceeding. The Secretary will maintain 

a separate service list for those parties 

authorized to receive BPI under the 

APO. 

Limitations on the scope of this 

proceeding. This proceeding is being 

conducted in order for the Commission 

to make a determination that would 

render its action in DRAMs and DRAM 

Modules from Korea, Investigation No. 

701–TA–431, not inconsistent with the 

findings of the WTO dispute settlement 

panel. Thus, this proceeding only 

involves issues related to the WTO 

dispute settlement findings and does 

not involve issues that were not in 

dispute in the WTO proceeding or on 

which the WTO dispute settlement 

panel found the United States in 

conformity with its obligations under 

the WTO. As discussed above, the only 

issue on which the WTO dispute 

settlement panel found the 

Commission’s injury determination 

inconsistent with the ASCM pertained 

to the question of whether the 

Commission attributed to the subject 

imports any injury that may have been 

caused by declines in demand. Any 

material in the parties’ submissions that 

contains new factual information or that 

addresses any issue beyond the scope of 

this proceeding will be disregarded. 

Written Submissions. The 

Commission is not reopening the record 

in this proceeding for submission of 

new factual information. The 

Commission will, however, permit the 

parties to file comments and rebuttal 

comments pertaining to the issue that is 

within the scope of this proceeding. The 

deadline for filing comments is 

December 5, 2005. Comments shall be 

limited to no more than forty (40) 

double-spaced and single-sided pages of 

textual material. The deadline for filing 

rebuttal comments is December 19, 

2005. Rebuttal comments shall be 

limited to no more than twenty (20) 

double-spaced and single sided pages of 

textual material. 

Any material in the parties’

submissions that contains new factual 

information or that addresses any issue 

beyond the scope of this proceeding will 

be disregarded. 

All written submissions must conform 

with the provisions of section 201.8 of 

the Commission’s rules; any 

submissions that contain BPI must also 

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). 

In accordance with sections 201.16(c) 

and 207.3 of the Commission’s rules, 

each document filed by a party to the 

investigation must be served on all other 

parties to the investigation (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. 

The Commission has concluded that, 

because it is not reopening the record, 

conducting a hearing is inappropriate in 

this proceeding. 

Issued: October 31, 2005. 

By order of the Commission. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 05–21949 Filed 11–2–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Inv. No. 337–TA–528] 

In the Matter of Certain Foam Masking 

Tape; Notice of Issuance of General 

Exclusion Order and Termination of 

Investigation 

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Having found a violation of 

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 

U.S.C. 1337, notice is hereby given that 

the U.S. International Trade 

Commission has issued a general 

exclusion order and terminated the 

above-captioned investigation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Timothy P. Monaghan, Esq., Office of 

the General Counsel, U.S. International 

Trade Commission, 500 E Street, SW., 

Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202–

205–3095. Copies of all 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, SW., Washington, DC 20436, 

telephone 202–205–2000. General 

information concerning the Commission 

may be obtained by accessing its 

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 

the 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 based 

on a complaint filed by 3M Company, 

3M Innovative Properties Company, and 

Mr. Jean Silvestre (collectively, ‘‘3M’’), 

which was subsequently amended. 70 

FR 386 (Jan. 4, 2005). The complaint, as 

amended, alleged a violation of section 

337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 in the 

importation into the United States, the 

sale for importation and/or sale within 

the United States after importation, of 

certain foam masking tape by reason of 

infringement of certain claims of U.S. 

Patents Nos. 4,996,092 (‘‘the ‘092 

patent’’) and 5,260,097 (‘‘the ‘097 

patent’’). The notice of investigation 

named 13 respondents. 

On February 10, 2005, 3M filed a 

motion to amend the complaint and 

notice of investigation to add two 

respondents. On March 1, 2005, the 

administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) issued 

an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order 

No. 14) granting the motion. No party 

petitioned for review. On March 29, 

2005, the Commission issued a notice of 

its determination not to review the ID. 

Between February and June of 2005, 

the investigation was terminated as to 

14 of the 15 respondents on the basis of 

settlement agreements and consent 

orders, or based on consent orders 

alone. With respect to Jevtec, Ltd.—the 

sole respondent as to which the 

investigation was not terminated—3M 

moved on May 17, 2005, for an order 

directing Jevtec to show cause why it 

should not be found in default for 

failure to respond to the amended 

complaint and notice of investigation. 

3M also requested the issuance of an ID 

finding Jevtec in default if Jevtec failed 

to show such cause. 

On May 26, 2005, 3M moved for a 

summary determination of a violation of 

section 337. On June 6, 2005, the 

Commission investigative attorney 

(‘‘IA’’), filed a response in support of the 

motion for summary determination. 

On June 7, 2005, the ALJ issued Order 

No. 36, ordering Jevtec to show cause 

why it should not be held in default no 

66850 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 212 / Thursday, November 3, 2005 / Notices 

1The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 

CFR 207.2(f)). 

later than June 14, 2005. Jevtec did not 

file a response to the order, an answer 

to the complaint, or a notice of 

appearance within the time permitted. 

On June 15, 2005, the ALJ issued an 

ID (Order No. 39) finding Jevtec in 

default. No party petitioned for review 

of the ID. On July 11, 2005, the 

Commission determined not to review 

that initial determination. 

On June 21, 2005, the ALJ issued an 

ID (Order No. 41), granting 3M’s motion 

for a summary determination of a 

violation of section 337. The ID notes 

that only the ‘‘097 patent is at issue in 

the summary determination, because the 

investigation has been terminated with 

respect to all respondents charged with 

infringement of the ‘‘092 patent. No 

party petitioned for review of the ID. 

In Order No. 41, the ALJ 

recommended the issuance of a general 

exclusion order. He also recommended 

that the bond permitting temporary 

importation during the Presidential 

review period be set at 100 percent of 

the value of the infringing imported 

product. 

On July 15, 2005, the Commission 

determined not to review the ALJ’s 

summary determination that 3M has 

shown that there is a violation of section 

337. It also issued a Federal Register 

notice, inviting written submissions on 

the ALJ’s recommended determination 

on remedy and bonding as well as 

submissions on the public interest. 

On July 25, 2005, the Commission 

received comments from complainant 

3M and the IA. No reply submissions 

were received. 

Having examined the relevant 

portions of the record, including ALJ 

Order No. 41, and the written 

submissions on remedy, the public 

interest and bonding, the Commission 

has determined to issue a general 

exclusion order prohibiting unlicensed 

entry for consumption of foam masking 

tape that is covered by claims 1, 7, 8, 10, 

11, 13, 14 or 16 of the ‘097 patent. In 

so doing the Commission determined 

that the public interest factors 

enumerated in section 337(d) do not 

preclude the issuance of the 

aforementioned remedial order and the 

bond during the Presidential review 

period shall be 100 percent of the 

entered value of the article in question. 

The Commission’s order was delivered 

to the President and the United States 

Trade Representative on the day of its 

issuance. 

This action is taken under the 

authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act 

of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, and §§ 210.42 

and 210.50 of the Commission’s Rules of 

Practice and Procedure, 19 CFR 210.42 

and 210.50. 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: October 31, 2005. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 05–21950 Filed 11–2–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

INTERNATIONAL TRADE 

COMMISSION 

[Investigation No. 731–TA–718 (Second 

Review)] 

Glycine From China 

Determination 

On the basis of the record 1 developed 

in the subject five-year review, the 

United States International Trade 

Commission (Commission) determines, 

pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff 

Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)) (the 

Act), that revocation of the antidumping 

duty order on glycine from China would 

be likely to lead to continuation or 

recurrence of material injury to an 

industry in the United States within a 

reasonably foreseeable time. 

Background 

The Commission instituted this 

review on June 1, 2005 (70 FR 31534) 

and determined on September 7, 2005 

that it would conduct an expedited 

review (70 FR 55625, September 22, 

2005). 

The Commission transmitted its 

determination in this review to the 

Secretary of Commerce on October 31, 

2005. The views of the Commission are 

contained in USITC Publication 3810 

(October 2005), entitled Glycine from 

China: Investigation No. 731–TA–718 

(Second Review). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: October 31, 2005. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 05–21951 Filed 11–2–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms 

and Explosives 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Proposed Collection; 

Comments Requested 

ACTION: 30-day notice of information 

collection under review: Identification 

Markings Placed on Firearms. 

The Department of Justice (DOJ), 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms 

and Explosives (ATF) has submitted the 

following information collection request 

to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and approval in 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed 

information collection is published to 

obtain comments from the public and 

affected agencies. This proposed 

information collection was previously 

published in the Federal Register 

Volume 70, Number 146, page 44117 on 

August 1, 2005, allowing for a 60 day 

comment period. 

The purpose of this notice is to allow 

for an additional 30 days for public 

comment until December 5, 2005. This 

process is conducted in accordance with 

5 CFR 1320.10. 

Written comments and/or suggestions 

regarding the items contained in this 

notice, especially the estimated public 

burden and associated response time, 

should be directed to the Office of 

Management and Budget, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attention Department of Justice Desk 

Officer, Washington, DC 20503. 

Additionally, comments may be 

submitted to OMB via facsimile to (202) 

395–5806. 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 

agencies 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. 

Overview of This Information 

Collection 

(1) Type of Information Collection: 

Extension of a currently approved 

collection.