81 FR 94416 - Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Products; Commission Determination To Review an Initial Determination Granting Respondents' Motion To Terminate Complainant's Antitrust Claim; Request for Written Submissions and Setting of Date for Possible Oral Argument

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 247 (December 23, 2016)

Page Range		94416-94417
FR Document		2016-30934

Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to review an initial determination (``ID'') (Order No. 38) of the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'') granting Respondents' motion to terminate Complainant's antitrust claim and sets the date of March 14, 2017, for possible oral argument.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 247 (Friday, December 23, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 247 (Friday, December 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 94416-94417]
From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-30934]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 337-TA-1002]

Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Products; Commission Determination
To Review an Initial Determination Granting Respondents' Motion To
Terminate Complainant's Antitrust Claim; Request for Written
Submissions and Setting of Date for Possible Oral Argument

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to review an initial determination (``ID'')
(Order No. 38) of the presiding administrative law judge (``ALJ'')
granting Respondents' motion to terminate Complainant's antitrust claim
and sets the date of March 14, 2017, for possible oral argument.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Houda Morad, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-4716. 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 Internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed
on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://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: The Commission instituted Investigation No.
337-TA-1002 on June 2, 2016, based on a complaint filed by Complainant
United States Steel Corporation of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (``U.S.
Steel''), alleging a violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of
1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. 1337. See 81 FR 35381 (June 2, 2016). The
complaint alleges violations of Section 337 based upon the importation
into the United States, or in the sale of certain carbon and alloy
steel products by reason of: (1) A conspiracy to fix prices and control
output and export volumes, the threat or effect of which is to restrain
or monopolize trade and commerce in the United States; (2)
misappropriation and use of trade secrets, the threat or effect of
which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in the United
States; and (3) false designation of origin or manufacturer, the threat
or effect of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry in
the United States. Id. The notice of investigation identified forty
(40) respondents that are Chinese steel manufacturers or distributors,
as well as some of their Hong Kong and United States affiliates. Id. In
addition, the Office of Unfair Import Investigations is a party in this
investigation. Id.
On July 6, 2016, the presiding ALJ issued, sua sponte, an initial
determination (Order No. 19) suspending the investigation pursuant to
Section 337(b)(3). On August 5, 2016, the Commission reversed and
vacated the suspension. See Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel Products,
USITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1002, Comm'n Notice (Aug. 5, 2016).
On August 26, 2016, Respondents filed a motion to terminate U.S.
Steel's antitrust claim under 19 CFR 210.21. On September 6, 2016, U.S.
Steel filed a response in opposition to Respondents' motion to
terminate. On September 9, 2016, the Commission Investigative Attorney
(``IA'') filed a response in opposition to Respondents' motion to
terminate. On November 14, 2016, the ALJ issued the subject ID,
granting Respondents' motion to terminate Complainant's antitrust claim
under 19 CFR 210.21 and, in the alternative, under 19 CFR 210.18. On
November 23, 2016, Complainant and the IA filed petitions for review of
the ID. Complainant also requested oral argument before the Commission.
On December 1, 2016, Respondents filed a response to the petitions for
review. Also on December 1, 2016, Complainant filed a response to the
IA's petition for review.
The Commission has determined to review the ID. In connection with
its review, the Commission requests written responses regarding the
following questions:
1. Please explain the policies that underlie the injury requirement
under Section 337(a)(1)(A)(iii), including an analysis of any relevant
statutory language, legislative history, Commission determinations,
case law, or other authority. In discussing this question, please also
explain how the injury requirement under Section 337(a)(1)(A)(iii) is
different from, or relates to, the injury requirement that applies
under Section 337(a)(1)(A)(i).
2. Please explain what Complainant must prove to satisfy the injury
requirement under Section 337(a)(1)(A)(iii), where the alleged unfair
act in violation of Section 337 is based on a claim alleging a
conspiracy to fix prices and control output and export volumes
(``antitrust claim''). Please include an analysis of any relevant
statutory language, legislative history, Commission determinations,
case law, or other authority.
3. Please explain how ``antitrust injury'' standing, as required
for private litigants in federal district courts asserting antitrust
claims, see, e.g., Atl. Richfield Co. v. USA Petroleum Co., 495 U.S.
328, 335 (1990), compares to, or differs from, the injury requirement
under Section 337(a)(1)(A). Please include an analysis of any relevant
statutory language, legislative history, Commission determinations,
case law, or other authority. In discussing this question, please
explain the chronology of the adoption of the ``antitrust injury''
standing requirement in relation to the injury requirement under
Section 337(a)(1)(A).
4. Please explain whether ``antitrust injury'' standing is, or
should be,

[[Page 94417]]

required for establishing a Section 337 violation based on a claim
alleging a conspiracy to fix prices and control output and export
volumes as a matter of law and/or policy. Please include an analysis of
any relevant statutory language, legislative history, Commission
determinations, case law, or other authority.
5. Please explain whether good cause exists under Commission Rule
210.14 to amend the complaint, presuming the Complainant is required to
plead ``antitrust injury'' in its complaint.
6. To the extent not specifically requested above, please further
explain any other legal reasoning and/or argument (with citation to
legal authority) advanced before the ALJ with respect to Order No. 38,
and/or raised in a corresponding petition for review of the ID, and not
otherwise waived, why Complainant's antitrust claim should or should
not be terminated at the present stage of the investigation.
Written Submissions: The parties to the investigation, including
the Office of Unfair Import Investigations, and interested government
agencies are requested to file written submissions on the issues
identified in this notice. Written submissions must be filed no later
than close of business on January 17, 2017 and may not exceed 50 pages
in length, exclusive of any exhibits. Responsive submissions must be
filed no later than the close of business on February 1, 2017 and may
not exceed 25 pages in length, exclusive of any exhibits. No further
submissions on any of these issues will be permitted unless otherwise
ordered by the Commission.
Oral Argument: Upon review of written submissions, the Commission
will determine whether to conduct oral argument. Notice of the
Commission's determination will be announced no later than February 24,
2017. Any oral argument, if granted, will be held on March 14, 2017.
The oral argument would be expected to last two hours. Further details
about the specifics of the oral argument will be forthcoming if one is
granted.
The written submissions and any oral argument must be limited to
explanation and analysis of the existing factual record in this
investigation in view of governing legal authority as applied to the
issues identified in this notice. The written submissions and the oral
argument shall not include the submission of any factual evidence, such
as testimony or documents, not already in the factual record of this
investigation, absent the grant of specific permission to submit new
evidence based upon good cause shown upon consideration of a specific
request.
Persons filing written submissions must file the original document
electronically on or before the deadlines stated above and submit eight
(8) true paper copies to the Office of the Secretary by noon the next
day pursuant to section 210.4(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (19 CFR 210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to the
investigation number (``Inv. No. 337-TA-1002'') in a prominent place on
the cover page and/or the first page. (See Handbook for Electronic
Filing Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf). Persons with questions
regarding filing should contact the Secretary (202-205-2000).
Any person desiring to submit a document to the Commission in
confidence must request confidential treatment. All such requests
should be directed to the Secretary to the Commission and must include
a full statement of the reasons why the Commission should grant such
treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents for which confidential treatment
by the Commission is properly sought will be treated accordingly. All
information, including confidential business information and documents
for which confidential treatment is properly sought, submitted to the
Commission for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and
used: (i) By the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract
personnel (a) for developing or maintaining the records of this or a
related proceeding, or (b) in internal investigations, audits, reviews,
and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of
the Commission including under 5 U.S.C. Appendix 3; or (ii) by U.S.
government employees and contract personnel \1\, solely for
cybersecurity purposes. All nonconfidential written submissions will be
available for public inspection at the Office of the Secretary and on
EDIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ All contract personnel will sign appropriate nondisclosure
agreements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 part 210 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR
part 210).

By order of the Commission.

Issued: December 19, 2016.
Lisa R. Barton,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2016-30934 Filed 12-22-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P

94416 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 247 / Friday, December 23, 2016 / Notices

1. Agendas for future meetings: None Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) September 6, 2016, U.S. Steel filed a
2. Minutes 708–4716. Copies of non-confidential response in opposition to Respondents’
3. Ratification List documents filed in connection with this motion to terminate. On September 9,
4. Vote in Inv. Nos. 701–TA–566 and investigation are or will be available for 2016, the Commission Investigative
731–TA–1342 (Preliminary) inspection during official business Attorney (‘‘IA’’) filed a response in
(Softwood Lumber Products from hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.) in the opposition to Respondents’ motion to
Canada). The Commission is Office of the Secretary, U.S. terminate. On November 14, 2016, the
currently scheduled to complete International Trade Commission, 500 E ALJ issued the subject ID, granting
and file its determinations on Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, Respondents’ motion to terminate
January 9, 2017; views of the telephone (202) 205–2000. General Complainant’s antitrust claim under 19
Commission are currently information concerning the Commission CFR 210.21 and, in the alternative,
scheduled to be completed and may also be obtained by accessing its under 19 CFR 210.18. On November 23,
filed on January 17, 2017. Internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. 2016, Complainant and the IA filed
5. Vote in Inv. Nos. 701–TA–560 and The public record for this investigation petitions for review of the ID.
731–TA–1319, 1326, and 1328 may be viewed on the Commission’s Complainant also requested oral
(Final) (Carbon and Alloy Steel Cut- electronic docket (EDIS) at https:// argument before the Commission. On
to-Length Plate from Brazil, South edis.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired December 1, 2016, Respondents filed a
Africa, and Turkey). The persons are advised that information on response to the petitions for review.
Commission is currently scheduled this matter can be obtained by Also on December 1, 2016, Complainant
to complete and file its contacting the Commission’s TDD filed a response to the IA’s petition for
determinations and views of the terminal on (202) 205–1810. review.
Commission by January 18, 2017. The Commission has determined to
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
6. Outstanding action jackets: None review the ID. In connection with its
Commission instituted Investigation No.
In accordance with Commission review, the Commission requests
337–TA–1002 on June 2, 2016, based on
policy, subject matter listed above, not written responses regarding the
a complaint filed by Complainant
disposed of at the scheduled meeting, following questions:
United States Steel Corporation of 1. Please explain the policies that
may be carried over to the agenda of the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (‘‘U.S. Steel’’),
following meeting. underlie the injury requirement under
alleging a violation of Section 337 of the Section 337(a)(1)(A)(iii), including an
By order of the Commission. Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 analysis of any relevant statutory
Issued: December 20, 2016. U.S.C. 1337. See 81 FR 35381 (June 2, language, legislative history,
William R. Bishop, 2016). The complaint alleges violations Commission determinations, case law,
Supervisory Hearings and Information of Section 337 based upon the or other authority. In discussing this
Officer. importation into the United States, or in question, please also explain how the
[FR Doc. 2016–31126 Filed 12–21–16; 11:15 am] the sale of certain carbon and alloy steel injury requirement under Section
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
products by reason of: (1) A conspiracy 337(a)(1)(A)(iii) is different from, or
to fix prices and control output and relates to, the injury requirement that
export volumes, the threat or effect of applies under Section 337(a)(1)(A)(i).
INTERNATIONAL TRADE which is to restrain or monopolize trade 2. Please explain what Complainant
COMMISSION and commerce in the United States; (2) must prove to satisfy the injury
misappropriation and use of trade requirement under Section
[Investigation No. 337–TA–1002] secrets, the threat or effect of which is 337(a)(1)(A)(iii), where the alleged
to destroy or substantially injure an unfair act in violation of Section 337 is
Certain Carbon and Alloy Steel
industry in the United States; and (3) based on a claim alleging a conspiracy
Products; Commission Determination
false designation of origin or to fix prices and control output and
To Review an Initial Determination
manufacturer, the threat or effect of export volumes (‘‘antitrust claim’’).
Granting Respondents’ Motion To
which is to destroy or substantially Please include an analysis of any
Terminate Complainant’s Antitrust
injure an industry in the United States. relevant statutory language, legislative
Claim; Request for Written
Id. The notice of investigation identified history, Commission determinations,
Submissions and Setting of Date for
forty (40) respondents that are Chinese case law, or other authority.
Possible Oral Argument
steel manufacturers or distributors, as 3. Please explain how ‘‘antitrust
AGENCY: U.S. International Trade well as some of their Hong Kong and injury’’ standing, as required for private
Commission. United States affiliates. Id. In addition, litigants in federal district courts
ACTION: Notice. the Office of Unfair Import asserting antitrust claims, see, e.g., Atl.
Investigations is a party in this Richfield Co. v. USA Petroleum Co., 495
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that investigation. Id. U.S. 328, 335 (1990), compares to, or
the U.S. International Trade On July 6, 2016, the presiding ALJ differs from, the injury requirement
Commission has determined to review issued, sua sponte, an initial under Section 337(a)(1)(A). Please
an initial determination (‘‘ID’’) (Order determination (Order No. 19) include an analysis of any relevant
No. 38) of the presiding administrative suspending the investigation pursuant statutory language, legislative history,
law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) granting to Section 337(b)(3). On August 5, 2016, Commission determinations, case law,
Respondents’ motion to terminate the Commission reversed and vacated or other authority. In discussing this
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES

Complainant’s antitrust claim and sets the suspension. See Certain Carbon and question, please explain the chronology
the date of March 14, 2017, for possible Alloy Steel Products, USITC Inv. No. of the adoption of the ‘‘antitrust injury’’
oral argument. 337–TA–1002, Comm’n Notice (Aug. 5, standing requirement in relation to the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 2016). injury requirement under Section
Houda Morad, Office of the General On August 26, 2016, Respondents 337(a)(1)(A).
Counsel, U.S. International Trade filed a motion to terminate U.S. Steel’s 4. Please explain whether ‘‘antitrust
Commission, 500 E Street SW., antitrust claim under 19 CFR 210.21. On injury’’ standing is, or should be,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:33 Dec 22, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\23DEN1.SGM 23DEN1

Document Created: 2016-12-23 12:29:35
Document Modified: 2016-12-23 12:29:35

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Notices
Action		Notice.
Contact		Houda Morad, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW., Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 708-4716. 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 Internet server at https:// www.usitc.gov. The public record for this investigation may be viewed on the Commission's electronic docket (EDIS) at https://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.
FR Citation		81 FR 94416