Notices. Request for comments

4,188 words·~19 min read·/register/2005/12/20/05-24254·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 3510-DT-M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-570-846 Brake Rotors from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review and New Shipper Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 20, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin C. Begnal or Tom Killiam, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-1442 or

(202)482-5222, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On May 27, 2005, the Department of Commerce (“Department”) initiated an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on brake rotors from the People's Republic of China. The review was initiated for 27 individually named firms. The period of review

(POR)is April 1, 2004, through March 31, 2005. *See Notice of Initiation of Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Administrative Reviews and Request for Revocation in Part* , 66 FR 30694 (May 27, 2005). Of the 27 named firms for which the Department initiated an administrative review, 18 firms had shipments of subject merchandise during the POR that are subject to review. Two of the 18 firms are also participating in the proceeding as new shippers. After consulting with the two new shippers, they agreed to have the Department rescind their administrative reviews in accordance with 19 CFR 351.214(j). *See Memorandum to the File from Carrie Blozy Regarding the 8th Administrative Review of Brake Rotors from the People's Republic of China* , dated July 28, 2005. As a result, this administrative review will cover 16 firms. However, due to the large number of firms subject to this administrative review, and the Department's experience regarding the resulting administrative burden to review each company for which a request has been made, the Department exercised its authority to limit the number of respondents selected for individual review by sampling, and conducted the sampling on November 16, 2005. *See* Section 777A(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”); *see also* November 16, 2005, *Memorandum to the File from Erin Begnal, Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Brake Rotors from the People's Republic of China* (November 16, 2005, Sampling Memorandum). The following respondents were selected for individual review pursuant to the sampling procedure: Qingdao Meita Automotive Industry Co., Ltd., Yantai Winhere Auto-Part Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Xiangfen Hengtai Brake Systems Co., Ltd., Hongfa Machinery (Dalian) Group Co., Ltd., and Longkou Haimeng Machinery Co., Ltd. *See* November 16, 2005, Sampling Memorandum. The preliminary results of this administrative review are currently due by December 31, 2005. Extension of Time Limit for Preliminary Results Pursuant to section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act, the Department shall issue preliminary results in an administrative review of an antidumping duty order within 245 days after the last day of the anniversary month of the date of publication of the order for which a review is requested and the final results within 120 days after the date on which the preliminary results are published. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within the specified time periods, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend these deadlines to a maximum of 365 days and 180 days, respectively. The Department has determined that completion of the preliminary results within the originally anticipated time limit, December 31, 2005, is impracticable. For the first time in this proceeding, the Department employed a sampling methodology to select respondents. In order to obtain necessary information and to afford parties opportunities to comment on the Department's respondent selection methodology, the Department did not conduct its respondent selection sampling procedure until November 16, 2005. *See* section 777A(b) of the Act (where the Department determines to limit the selection of respondents by sampling, the Department “shall, to the greatest extent possible, consult with the exporters and producers regarding the method to be used to select exporters, producers or types of products”). The Department requires additional time to analyze the parties' responses to the questionnaires issued on November 16, 2005, as well as to issue any necessary supplemental questionnaires and to conduct verifications. Consequently, it is not practicable to complete the review within the time specified under the Act. Therefore, the Department is extending the time limit for completion of these preliminary results by 120 days to April 30, 2006, in accordance with Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act. Additionally, on April 29, 2005, Shanxi Zhongding Auto Parts Co., Ltd. agreed to waive the time limits of its new shipper review, on April 29, 2005, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.214(j)(3), and agreed to have its review conducted concurrently with the eighth administrative review of this order for the period April 1, 2004, through March 31, 2005. Therefore, the preliminary results of this new shipper review will also be extended by 120 days to April 30, 2006. The deadline for the final results of these reviews continues to be 120 days after the publication of the preliminary results. We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: December 13, 2005. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E5-7561 Filed 12-19-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-570-846 Brake Rotors from the People's Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of the Twelfth New Shipper Review AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 20, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kit Rudd or Nicole Bankhead, AD/CVD Operations, Office 9, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone

(202)482-1385 and

(202)482-9068, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On September 28, 2005, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published in the **Federal Register** the preliminary results of the new shipper review of the antidumping duty order on brake rotors from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”). *See Brake Rotors From the People's Republic of China: Preliminary Results of the Twelfth New Shipper Review* , 70 FR 56634 (“ *Preliminary Results* ”). The final results are currently due on December 19, 2005. Extension of Time Limit for Final Results Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), and section 351.214(i)(1) of the Department's regulations, the Department shall issue final results in a new shipper review of an antidumping duty order 90 days after the date on which the preliminary results are issued. Section 351.214(i)(2) of the Department's regulations state, however, that if the Department determines that a new shipper review is extraordinarily complicated, the Department may extend the 90-day period to 150 days. The Department finds that the complicated nature of this review necessitates an extension of time beyond the 90-day period to complete the final results. On October 17, 2005, the Department granted the Coalition for the Preservation of American Brake Drum and Rotor Aftermarket Manufacturers (“Petitioner”) an extension of time to file publicly available information to value certain factors of production in the final results of the review. In addition, on October 25, 2005, the Department granted respondents Laizhou Wally Automobile Co., Ltd. (“Wally”) and Dixion Brake System (Longkou) Ltd. an extension of time to file their case briefs and rebuttal briefs. As a result of these extensions, the Department requires additional time to analyze the complex issues contained in the parties' comments and briefs, including the Petitioner's argument regarding the *bona fide* nature of Wally's sales. Therefore, for the reasons cited above, we are extending the time limit for the completion of the final results of this review by 30 days, until no later than January 18, 2006. This notice is published in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act and section 351.214(i)(2) of the Department's regulations. Dated: December 13, 2005. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E5-7563 Filed 12-19-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration A-570-827 Notice of Continuation of Antidumping Duty Order on Certain Cased Pencils from the People's Republic of China AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 20, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maureen Flannery at

(202)482-3020 or Paul Stolz at

(202)482-4474, AD/CVD Operations, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC, 20230. SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Commerce (Department), pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), has determined that revocation of the antidumping duty order on certain cased pencils (pencils) from the People's Republic of China

(PRC)would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping. On December 6, 2005, the International Trade Commission (ITC), pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, determined that revocation of the antidumping duty order on pencils from the PRC would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. Therefore, pursuant to 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4), the Department is publishing notice of the continuation of the antidumping duty order on pencils from the PRC. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On July 1, 2005, the Department initiated, and the ITC instituted, a sunset review of the antidumping duty order on pencils from the PRC, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act. *See Initiation of Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews* , 70 FR 38101 (July 1, 2005) and *Cased Pencils from China* , 70 FR 38192 (July 1, 2005). As a result of its review, the Department found that revocation of the antidumping duty order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and notified the ITC of the magnitude of the margins likely to prevail were the order revoked. *See Certain Cased Pencils from the People's Republic of China (PRC); Notice of Final Results of Expedited Sunset Review of Antidumping Duty Order* , 70 FR 67427 (November 7, 2005). On November 15, 2005, the ITC determined, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Act, that revocation of the antidumping duty order on pencils would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time. *See Cased Pencils from China* , 70 FR 72652 (December 6, 2005). Scope of the Order Imports covered by this order are shipments of certain cased pencils of any shape or dimension (except as noted below) which are writing and/or drawing instruments that feature cores of graphite or other materials, encased in wood and/or man-made materials, whether or not decorated and whether or not tipped ( *e.g.* , with erasers, etc.) in any fashion, and either sharpened or unsharpened. The pencils subject to the order are classified under subheading 9609.10.00 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Specifically excluded from the scope of the order are mechanical pencils, cosmetic pencils, pens, non-cased crayons (wax), pastels, charcoals, chalks, and pencils produced under U.S. patent number 6,217,242, from paper infused with scents by the means covered in the above-referenced patent, thereby having odors distinct from those that may emanate from pencils lacking the scent infusion. Also excluded from the scope of the order are pencils with all of the following physical characteristics: 1) length: 13.5 or more inches; 2) sheath diameter: not less than one-and-one quarter inches at any point (before sharpening); and 3) core length: not more than 15 percent of the length of the pencil. Although the HTSUS subheading is provided for convenience and customs purposes, our written description of the scope of the order is dispositive. Determination As a result of the determinations by the Department and the ITC that revocation of this antidumping duty order would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury to an industry in the United States, pursuant to section 751(d)(2) of the Act, the Department hereby orders the continuation of the antidumping duty order on pencils from the PRC. U.S. Customs and Border Protection will continue to collect antidumping duty deposits at the rates in effect at the time of entry for all imports of subject merchandise. The effective date of continuation of this order is the date of publication in the **Federal Register** of this Notice of Continuation. Pursuant to sections 751(c)(2) and 751(c)(6) of the Act, the Department intends to initiate the next five-year review of this order not later than November 2010. We are issuing and publishing the results and notice in accordance with sections 751(c) and 777(i)(1) of the Act. Dated: December 13, 2005. Stephen J. Claeys, Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E5-7560 Filed 12-19-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE. International Trade Administration A-122-822 Notice of Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review: Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Canada AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. EFFECTIVE DATE: December 20, 2005. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gene Calvert or Sean Carey, AD/CVD Operations, Office 6, Import Administration, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230; telephone:

(202)482-3586 or

(202)482-3964, respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On September 9, 2005, the Department of Commerce (“the Department”) published the preliminary results of the administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain corrosion-resistant carbon steel flat products from Canada for the period of August 1, 2003, through July 31, 2004 *(see Certain Corrosion-Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Canada: Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review* , 70 FR 53621 (September 9, 2005)) *(Preliminary Results)* . The current deadline for the final results of this review is January 7, 2006. Extension of Time Limit for Final Results of Review Section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“the Act”), requires the Department to issue the final results in an administrative review within 120 days of the date on which the preliminary results were published. However, if it is not practicable to complete the review within this time period, section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act allows the Department to extend the time limit for the final results to 180 days from the date of publication of the preliminary results. Because of the Department's recent verification after the issuance of its preliminary determination, additional time is required to release and analyze its findings, and to afford interested parties the opportunity to comment on the verification findings of the three Canadian producers of subject merchandise: Dofasco Inc., Sorevco Inc., and Stelco Inc. Therefore, the Department finds that it is not practicable to complete the review by the original deadline of January 7, 2006. Consequently, in accordance with section 751(a)(3)(A) of the Act and section 351.213(h)(2) of the Department's regulations, the Department is extending the time limit for the completion of the final results of the review until no later than March 8, 2006, which is 180 days from the publication of the preliminary results. This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections 751(a)(3)(A) and 777(i) of the Act. Dated: December 13, 2005. Stephen J. Claeys, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration. [FR Doc. E5-7562 Filed 12-19-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office [Docket No.: 2005-P-072] RIN 0651-AB98 Request for Comments on Interim Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications for Patent Subject Matter Eligibility AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce. ACTION: Request for comments. SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has, in response to recent case law, revised its guidelines to be used by USPTO personnel in their review of patent applications to determine whether the claims in a patent application are directed to patent eligible subject matter. The USPTO is requesting comments from the public regarding these interim examination guidelines. Comment Deadline Date: To be ensured of consideration, written comments must be received on or before June 30, 2006. No public hearing will be held. ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent by electronic mail message over the Internet addressed to *AB98.Comments@uspto.gov.* Comments may also be submitted by mail addressed to: Mail Stop Comments—Patents, Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450, or by facsimile to

(571)273-0125, marked to the attention of Linda Therkorn. Although comments may be submitted by mail or facsimile, the Office prefers to receive comments via the Internet. If comments are submitted by mail, the Office prefers that the comments be submitted on a DOS formatted 3 1/2 inch disk accompanied by a paper copy. Comments may also be sent by electronic mail message over the Internet via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. See the Federal eRulemaking Portal Web site ( *http://www.regulations.gov* ) for additional instructions on providing comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. The comments will be available for public inspection at the Office of the Commissioner for Patents, located in Madison East, Tenth Floor, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia, and will be available via the Office Internet Web site (address: *http://www.uspto.gov* ). Because comments will be made available for public inspection, information that is not desired to be made public, such as an address or phone number, should not be included in the comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Therkorn, Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, by telephone at 571-272-8800, or Ray Chen, Office of the Solicitor, by telephone at 571-272-9035, by mail addressed to: Mail Stop Comments, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450, or by facsimile transmission to 571-273-0125, marked to the attention of Linda Therkorn or Ray Chen. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The USPTO has published a notice setting forth interim guidelines for the examination of patent applications for patent subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101. *See Interim Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications for Patent Subject Matter Eligibility,* 1300 *Off. Gaz. Pat. Office* 142 (Nov. 22, 2005) (Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines). The Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines are based on the USPTO's current understanding of the law and are believed to be fully consistent with binding precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) and the Federal Circuit's predecessor courts. The Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines do not constitute substantive rule making and hence do not have the force and effect of law. The Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines have been designed to assist USPTO personnel in analyzing claimed subject matter for compliance with substantive law. Rejections will be based upon the substantive law and it is these rejections which are appealable. Consequently, any failure by USPTO personnel to follow the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines is neither appealable nor petitionable. The Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines merely revise USPTO examination practice for consistency with the USPTO's current understanding of the case law regarding patent subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101. Therefore, the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines are interpretive or relate only to agency practice and procedure, and prior notice and an opportunity for public comment are not required under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A) (or any other law). Nevertheless, the USPTO is providing this opportunity for public comment because the USPTO desires the benefit of public comment on the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines. *The USPTO is particularly interested in comments addressing the following questions:*

(1)While the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines explain that physical transformation of an article or physical object to a different state or thing to another establishes that a claimed invention is eligible for patent protection, Annex III to the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines explains that identifying that a claim transforms data from one value to another is not by itself sufficient for establishing that the claim is eligible for patent protection. Therefore, claims that perform data transformation must still be examined for whether there is a practical application of an abstract idea that produces a useful, concrete, and tangible result. Is the distinction between physical transformation and data transformation appropriate in the context of the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines? If not, please explain why and provide support for an alternative analysis.

(2)Is the USPTO interpretation of *State Street Bank & Trust Co.* v. *Signature Financial Group Inc.,* 149 F. 3d 1368, 47 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1998), as holding that if there is no physical transformation, a claimed invention must necessarily, either expressly or inherently, produce a useful, concrete, and tangible result (rather than just be “capable of” producing such a result) either too broad or too narrow? If so, please suggest an alternative interpretation and reasons therefor.

(3)As the courts have yet to define the terms “useful,” “concrete,” and “tangible” in the context of the practical application requirement, are the explanations provided in the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines sufficient? If not, please suggest alternative explanations.

(4)What role should preemption have in the determination of whether a claimed invention is directed to a practical application of a 35 U.S.C. 101 judicial exception?

(5)Annex IV to the Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines explains why the USPTO considers claims to signals *per se* , whether functional descriptive material or non-functional descriptive material, to be nonstatutory subject matter. Does the USPTO analysis represent a reasonable extrapolation of relevant case law? If not, please explain why and provide support for an alternative analysis. If claims directed to a signal *per se* are determined to be statutory subject matter, what is the potential impact on internet service providers, satellites, wireless fidelity (WiFi ® ), and other carriers of signals? The USPTO also notes that the U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari in *Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings* v. *Metabolite Laboratories, Inc.,* S.Ct. No. 04-607 ( *LabCorp* ). *See* 546 U.S. __ (Nov. 2, 2005). The USPTO expects that a decision in *LabCorp* will be rendered sometime before the end of June 2006. Since the Court's decision in *LabCorp* may impact the broader question of patent subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, the USPTO is extending the period for public comment on the USPTO's Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines until June 30, 2006. The USPTO will publish a notice further extending the period for public comment on the USPTO's Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Interim Guidelines if necessary to permit the comments to take into account the Court's decision in *LabCorp* . Dated: December 14, 2005. Jon W. Dudas, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. [FR Doc. E5-7552 Filed 12-19-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-16-P COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION Agency Information Collection Activities Under OMB Review AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), this notice announces that the Information Collection Request

(ICR)abstracted below has been forwarded to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and comment. The ICR describes the nature of the information collection and its expected costs and burden; it includes the actual data collection instruments [if any]. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before January 19, 2006. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR A COPY CONTACT: David Van Wagner, Division of Market Oversight, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581,

(202)418-5481; FAX:

(202)418-5527; e-mail: *dvanwagner@cftc.gov* and refer to OMB Control No. 3038-0048. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Title:* Off-Exchange Agricultural Trade Options (OMB Control No. 3038-0048). This is a request for extension of a currently approved information collection. *Abstract:* Off-Exchange Agricultural Trade Options, OMB Control No. 3038-0048—Extension. In April 1998, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission or CFTC) removed the prohibition on off-exchange trade options on the enumerated agricultural commodities subject to a number of regulatory conditions. 63 FR 18821 (April 16, 1998). Thereafter, the Commission streamlined the regulatory or paperwork burdens in order to increase the utility of agricultural trade options while maintaining basic customer protections. 64 FR 68011 (Dec. 6, 1999). An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the CFTC's regulations were published on December 30, 1981. See 46 FR 63035 (Dec. 30, 1981). The **Federal Register** notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on this collection of information was published on October 12, 2005 (70 FR 59319). *Burden statement:* The respondent burden for this collection is estimated to average 5.59 hours per response. *Respondents/Affected Entities:* 360. *Estimated number of responses:* 411. *Estimated total annual burden on respondents:* 2,391 hours. *Frequency of collection:* On occasion. Send comments regarding the burden estimated or any other aspect of the information collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the addresses listed below. Please refer to OMB Control No. 3038-0048 in any correspondence. David Van Wagner, Division of Market Oversight, U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, 1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 20581; and Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Attention: Desk Officer for CFTC, 725 17th Street, Washington, DC 20503. Dated: December 15, 2005. Jean A. Webb, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 05-24254 Filed 12-19-05; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 5

Traces to 5 documents

CFR

U.S. Code

1 reference not yet in our index