Import investigations: Cotton shop towels from— earth magnets and magnetic materials and articles containing same,

 
CONTENT

[Federal Register: December 15, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 240)]

[Notices]

[Page 70052-70053]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr15de99-92]

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Inv. No. 337-TA-413]

Certain Rare-Earth Magnets and Magnetic Materials and Articles Containing Same; Notice of Issuance of General Exclusion Order and Cease and Desist Orders; Termination of the Investigation

AGENCY: International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that, having found violations of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. 1337, the Commission issued a general exclusion order and cease and desist orders directed to three domestic respondents, and terminated the investigation.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia Johnson, Esq., Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, telephone 202- 205-3098. Hearing-impaired individuals are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the

[[Page 70053]]

Commission's TDD terminal on 202-205-1810. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its Internet server (http://www.usitc.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 4, 1998, the Commission instituted an investigation based on a complaint filedby Magnequench International, Inc. (Magnequench) and Sumitomo Special Metals Co., Ltd. (SSMC). 63 FR 47319. The complaint alleged violations 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 rare-earth magnets or magnetic materials, or articles containing the same, that infringe claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, or 11 of U.S. Letters Patent 4,851,058, (the `058 patent); claims 1-6, 10, 14-16, or 18-20 of U.S. Letters Patent 4,802,931 (the `931 patent); claims 13-18 of U.S. Letters Patent 4,496,395 (the `395 patent); claims 1-9, 12-20, 23-27, or 29-34 of U.S. Letters Patent 4,770,723 (the `723 patent); claims 1-6, 8-10, 13-19, 21-24, 27-35, or 37-39 of U.S. Letters Patent 4,792,368 (the `368 patent); or claims 1-3, 5, 15, 18, 19, 21, or 22 of U.S. Patent Letters 5,645,651 (the `651 patent).

On September 22, 1999, the Commission determined not to review an initial determination (ID) granting complainants motion to withdraw from the investigation claims 1, 12, 23, 29, 30, and 32 of the `723 patent and claims 1, 13, 14, 22, 27, 32, 33, 34, and 39 of the `368 patent. Hence the claims in issue of the `723 patent and `368 patent are claims 2-9, 13-20, 24-27, 31, 33, and 34 of the `723 patent and claims 2-6, 8-10, 15-19, 21, 23, 24, 28-31, 35, 37, and 38 of the `368 patent.

The following respondents were named in the notice of investigation: Houghes International, Inc. (Houghes) of New York; International Magna Products, Inc. (IMI) of Indiana; Multi-Trend International Corp. a/k/a MTI-Modern Technology Inc. (Multi-Trend) of California; American Union Group, Inc. (AUG) of Maryland; High End Metals Corp. (High End) of Taiwan; Harvard Industrial America Inc. (Harvard) of California; H.T.I.E., Inc. (H.T.I.E.) of Pennsylvania; and CYNNY Magnets (CYNNY) of New Jersey.

On January 11, 1999, the Commission determined not to review an ID granting complainants' motion to amend the complaint and notice of investigation to add A.R.E., Inc. (A.R.E.) of Pennsylvania; NEOCO, L.C. (NEOCO) of Michigan; Beijing Jing Ma Permanent Magnets Materials Factory (Jing Ma) of China; and Xin Huan Technology Development Co., Ltd. (Xin Huan) of China as respondents.

On February 1, 1999, the Commission determined not to review an ID terminating the investigation as to respondent IMI on the basis of a consent order. On February 9, 1999, the Commission determined not to review IDs terminating the investigation as to respondents AUG, CYNNY, H.T.I.E., and Houghes on the basis of consent orders.

On May 25, 1999, the Commission determined not to review an ID granting complainants' motion for partial summary determination on the importation issue. On May 28, 1999, the Commission determined not to review an ID granting complainants' motion for summary determination on the domestic industry issue.

On August 6, 1999, the Commission determined not to review an ID finding respondents A.R.E., Jing Ma, and Xin Huan in default. On September 27, 1999, the Commission determined not to review an ID finding respondent Multi-Trend in default.

The prehearing conference and evidentiary hearing were conducted on June 9 to 18, 1999. Complainants, respondent NEOCO, and the Commission investigative attorneys (IAs) participated at the hearing. Following the filing of post-hearing submissions, closing arguments were heard on July 27, 1999.

On September 7, 1999, the ALJ issued his final ID finding a violation of section 337. His determination is based on his findings that the patents in issue are valid and enforceable, and that the accused imported magnets infringed all of the asserted claims, with the exception of claims 13-20, 25-27 and 33 of the `723 patent and claims 15-19, 21, 23, 24, 28, 30, 31, and 35 of the `368 patent. On October 25, 1999, the Commission determined not to review the ID, thereby finding a violation of section 337.

The remaining issues for the Commission to decide were (1) the appropriate remedy for the aforesaid violations, (2) whether the statutory public interest factors precluded such relief, and (3) the amount of the bond during the Presidential review period under 337(j). In making those determinations, the Commission took into account the presiding ALJ's recommended determination (RD) on permanent relief and bonding under 19 CFR 210.42(a)(2), as well as any written submissions from parties, the public, and other Federal agencies. The Commission solicited but did not receive submissions from other agencies or members of the public. The Commission received written submissions from complainants and the IAs that addressed the form of remedy, if any, that should be ordered, the effect of a remedy on the public interest, and the amount of bond that should be imposed during the 60-day Presidential review period. Complainants also fileda motion to file a sur-reply to the IAs' reply submission. That motion is hereby denied.

After considering the RD and the parties' submissions, the Commission determined that a general exclusion order is the appropriate remedy for the violations found in the subject investigation. The Commission also determined to issue three cease and desist orders directed to domestic respondents Multi-Trend, Harvard, and A.R.E.

The Commission also determined that the public interest factors enumerated in subsections (d) and (f) of section 337 do not preclude the issuance of the aforementioned general exclusion order and cease and desist orders, and that the bond during the Presidential review period shall be in the amount of 100 percent of the entered value of the articles in question.

This action is taken under the authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, (19 U.S.C. Sec. 1337), the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551 et seq., and sections 210.45-210.51 of the Commission's rules of practice and procedure, 19 CFR 210.45-210.51.

Nonconfidential versions of Commission's Order and its Opinion on Remedy, the Public Interest, and Bonding, and all other nonconfidential documents filedin the investigation are or will be available for public inspection during official business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the Commission's Office of the Secretary, Dockets Branch, 500 E Street, SW, Room 112, Washington, DC 20436, telephone 202-205-1802.

Issued: December 9, 1999.

By order of the Commission. Donna R. Koehnke, Secretary.

[FR Doc. 99-32497Filed12-14-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P