63202 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 198 / Thursday, October 14, 2010 / Notices 

Commission determined not to review 

an ID (Order No. 13) terminating the 

investigation as to respondent 

InkPlusToner based upon a settlement 

agreement. On June 7, 2010, the 

Commission determined not to review 

an ID (Order No. 14) terminating the 

investigation as to respondent SmartOne 

based upon a settlement agreement. 

On June 3, 2010, the Commission 

determined not to review an ID (Order 

No. 17) terminating the investigation as 

to the ’985 patent and the ’630 patent. 

On June 17, 2010, HP filed an 

unopposed motion pursuant to 

Commission Rule 210.21(a) to withdraw 

all allegations related to claims 7 and 10 

of the ’687 patent and claims 2 and 3 of 

the ’301 patent from the complaint, and 

to terminate the investigation with 

respect to those claims. 

On May 7, 2010, HP moved for 

summary determination on the issues of 

domestic industry, importation, and 

violation of section 337. Pursuant to 

Commission Rule 210.16(c)(2), 19 CFR 

216(c)(2), HP also stated that it was 

seeking a general exclusion order and a 

cease and desist order against Mextec. 

On June 2, 2010, the Commission 

investigative attorney submitted a 

response in support of a finding that a 

domestic industry exists and that the 

defaulting respondents, Mipo 

International, Mextec, Shanghai Angel, 

Shenzhen Print Media, Zhuhai National, 

Tatrix, and Ourway have violated 

section 337 by infringing claims 6 and 

9 of the ’687 patent and claims 1, 5, and 

6 of the ’301 patent. 

On August 30, 2010, the presiding 

administrative law judge issued the 

subject ID, Order No. 18, granting: (1) 

HP’s motion to terminate the 

investigation as to claims 7 and 10 of 

the ’687 patent and claims 2 and 3 of the 

’301 patent, and (2) HP’s motion for 

summary determination of violation of 

section 337 with respect to the 

defaulting respondents. He also 

recommended a general exclusion order, 

a cease and desist order directed to 

domestic respondent Mextec, and a 100 

percent bond to permit importation 

during the period of Presidential review. 

No petitions for review were filed. 

The Commission has determined not to 

review the subject ID. 

In connection with the final 

disposition of this investigation, the 

Commission may (1) Issue an order that 

could result in the exclusion of the 

subject articles from entry into the 

United States, and/or (2) issue one or 

more cease and desist orders that could 

result in the respondent(s) being 

required to cease and desist from 

engaging in unfair acts 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 either are adversely 

affecting it or are 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 U.S. Trade 

Representative, as delegated by the 

President, has 60 days to approve or 

disapprove the Commission’s action. 

See Presidential Memorandum of July 

21, 2005, 70 FR 43251 (July 26, 2005). 

During this period, the subject articles 

would be entitled to enter the United 

States under bond, in an amount 

determined by the Commission. The 

Commission is therefore interested in 

receiving submissions concerning the 

amount of the bond that should be 

imposed if a remedy is ordered. 

Written Submissions: The parties to 

the investigation, interested government 

agencies, and any other interested 

parties are encouraged to file written 

submissions on the issues of remedy, 

the public interest, and bonding. Such 

submissions should address the 

recommended determination by the ALJ 

on remedy and bonding. Complainants 

and the IA are also requested to submit 

proposed remedial orders for the 

Commission’s consideration. 

Complainants are also requested to state 

the dates that the patents expire and the 

HTSUS numbers under which the 

accused products are imported. The 

written submissions and proposed 

remedial orders must be filed no later 

than close of business on Thursday, 

October 28, 2010. Reply submissions 

must be filed no later than the close of 

business on Thursday, November 4, 

2010. No further submissions on these 

issues will be permitted unless 

otherwise ordered by the Commission. 

Persons filing written submissions 

must file the original document and 12 

true copies thereof on or before the 

deadlines stated above with the Office 

of the Secretary. Any person desiring to 

submit a document 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 210.6. Documents 

for which confidential treatment by the 

Commission is sought will be treated 

accordingly. All nonconfidential written 

submissions will be available for public 

inspection at the Office of the Secretary. 

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 

sections 210.42–46 and 210.50 of the 

Commission’s Rules of Practice and 

Procedure (19 CFR 210.42–46 and 

210.50). 

By order of the Commission. 

Issued: October 7, 2010. 

Marilyn R. Abbott, 

Secretary to the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–25812 Filed 10–13–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree 

Notice is hereby given that on 

September 23, 2010, an electronic 

version of a proposed Consent Decree 

was lodged in the United States District 

Court for District of Arizona in United 

States v. CalPortland Company, No. 

4:10–CV–00573–DCB. The Consent 

Decree settles the United States’ claims 

for civil penalties and injunctive relief 

against CalPortland Company (‘‘CPC’’) 

based on violations of the Clean Air Act 

(the ‘‘Act’’), 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., and 

the Air Implementation Plan for the 

State of Arizona approved by EPA 

pursuant to the Act, in connection with 

modifications to CPC’s cement 

manufacturing plant in Rillito, Arizona 

(the ‘‘Facility’’). 

Under the terms of the proposed 

Consent Decree, CPC will pay a civil 

penalty of $350,000 and will perform 

injunctive relief. The proposed decree 

sets forth two compliance options for 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 198 / Thursday, October 14, 2010 / Notices 63203 

CPC and requires CPC to inform EPA of 

its choice of compliance option within 

30 days from the effective date of the 

decree. 

Under Option 1, CPC will construct a 

new Kiln 6 as authorized by an Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality 

permit within a 42-month time period 

and permanently shut down kilns 1–4 

within six months of commencing 

operation of Kiln 6. 

Under Option 2, CPC will continue to 

operate Kilns 1 through 4 but will 

install Particulate Matter controls 

(enclosures, spraybars and upgrades to 

existing baghouses) and accept more 

stringent limits than those already in the 

permit on equipment previously 

modified. Option 2 requires stricter 

opacity standards for some limestone 

storage piles, mill feed hoppers, and 

mill rejects bins. Option 2 also imposes 

lower emission limits on various 

baghouses and dust collectors and 

requires the installation of a bag leak 

detection system. 

Option 2 also requires CPC to install 

software to optimize the operation of the 

existing kilns, which EPA expects will 

lead to reduced fuel use and reduced 

combustion emissions. 

The Department of Justice will receive 

for a period of thirty (30) days from the 

date of this publication comments 

relating to the proposed Consent Decree. 

Comments should be addressed to the 

Assistant Attorney General, 

Environment and Natural Resources 

Division, and either e-mailed to 

pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov or 

mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. 

Department of Justice, Washington, DC 

20044–7611, and should refer to United 

States v. CalPortland Company, No. 

4:10–CV–00573–DCB and DOJ No. 90– 

5–2–1–08306. 

The Consent Decree may be examined 

at the Office of the United States 

Attorney for the District of Arizona, 405 

W. Congress Street, Suite 4800, Tucson, 

AZ 85701–5040. During the public 

comment period, the Consent Decree 

may also be examined on the following 

Department of Justice Web site: http:// 

www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ 

Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the 

Consent Decree may also be obtained by 

mail from the Consent Decree Library, 

P.O. Box 7611, U.S. Department of 

Justice, Washington, DC 20044–7611, or 

by faxing or e-mailing a request to Tonia 

Fleetwood, tonia.fleetwood@usdoj.gov, 

Fax No. (202) 514–0097, phone 

confirmation number (202) 514–1547. In 

requesting a copy from the Consent 

Decree Library, please enclose a check 

in the amount of $11.25 (25 cents per 

page reproduction cost) payable to the 

U.S. Treasury. 

Maureen Katz, 

Assistant Section Chief, Environmental 

Enforcement Section, Environment and 

Natural Resources Division. 

[FR Doc. 2010–25876 Filed 10–13–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Manufacturer of Controlled 

Substances; Notice of Application 

Pursuant to § 1301.33(a) of Title 21 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 

this is notice that on January 28, 2010, 

PCAS–Nanosyn, LLC, 3331–B Industrial 

Drive, Santa Rosa, California 95403, 

made application to the Drug 

Enforcement Administration (DEA) as a 

bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of 

controlled substances listed in schedule 

II: 

Drug Schedule 

Amphetamine (1100) .................... II 

Methamphetamine (1105) ............ II 

Methylphenidate (1724) ................ II 

Phencyclidine (7471) .................... II 

Codeine (9050) ............................. II 

Diprenorphine (9058) ................... II 

Oxycodone (9143) ........................ II 

Hydromorphone (9150) ................ II 

Hydrocodone (9193) ..................... II 

Methadone (9250) ........................ II 

Morphine (9300) ........................... II 

Oxymorphone (9652) ................... II 

Fentanyl (9801) ............................ II 

The company is a contract 

manufacturer. At the request of the 

company’s customers, it manufactures 

derivatives of controlled substances in 

bulk form only. The primary service 

provided by the company to its 

customers is the development of the 

process of manufacturing the derivative. 

As part of its service to its customers, 

the company distributes the derivatives 

of the controlled substances it 

manufactures to those customers. The 

company’s customers use the newlycreated processes and the manufactured 

derivatives in furtherance of 

formulation processes and dosage form 

manufacturing; pre-clinical studies, 

including toxicological studies; clinical 

studies supporting investigational Drug 

Applications; and use in stability 

studies. 

Any other such applicant, and any 

person who is presently registered with 

DEA to manufacture such substances, 

may file comments or objections to the 

issuance of the proposed registration 

pursuant to 21 CFR § 1301.33(a). 

Any such written comments or 

objections should be addressed, in 

quintuplicate, to the Drug Enforcement 

Administration, Office of Diversion 

Control, Federal Register Representative 

(ODL), 8701 Morrissette Drive, 

Springfield, Virginia 22152; and must be 

filed no later than December 13, 2010. 

Dated: October 6, 2010. 

Joseph T. Rannazzisi, 

Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of 

Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–25849 Filed 10–13–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–09–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration 

[Docket No. OSHA–2010–0044] 

Advisory Committee on Construction 

Safety and Health (ACCSH); Notice of 

Reestablishment of Charter 

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), Labor. 

ACTION: Notice of reestablishment of the 

ACCSH Charter. 

SUMMARY: The Secretary of Labor has 

reestablished the Charter of the 

Advisory Committee on Construction 

Safety and Health (ACCSH) for two 

years. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Francis Dougherty, Office of 

Construction Services, Directorate of 

Construction, Occupational Safety and 

Health Administration, Room N–3468, 

U.S. Department of Labor, 200 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20210; telephone (202) 693–2020 

(TTY (877) 889–5627). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

accordance with the Federal Advisory 

Committee Act (FACA), as amended 

(5 U.S.C. App. 2), and its implementing 

regulations (41 CFR 102–3 et seq.), the 

Secretary of Labor (Secretary) is 

reestablishing the ACCSH Charter for 

two years. The Charter will be dated, 

signed, and filed on October 29, 2010 

and will expire two years from the date 

filed. 

ACCSH is a continuing advisory 

committee established under Section 

107 of the Contract Work Hours and 

Safety Standards Act (Construction 

Safety Act (CSA))(40 U.S.C. 3704(d)(4)), 

to advise the Secretary and the Assistant 

Secretary of Labor for Occupational 

Safety and Health in the formulation of 

construction safety and health standards 

as well as on policy matters arising 

under the CSA and the Occupational 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES