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)

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, 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