30-Day Notice

25766

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 85 / Thursday, May 2, 2013 / Notices

Dated: April 26, 2013.
Roseann Gonzales,
Director, Policy and Administration, Denver
Office.
[FR Doc. 2013–10357 Filed 5–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–MN–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
[A10–1412–0001–009–01–0–4, 8453000]

Send written comments to
the Desk Officer for the Department of
the Interior at the Office of Management
and Budget, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, via facsimile to (202)
395–5806, or email to
[email protected]. A copy
of your comments should be directed to
the Bureau of Reclamation, Attention:
84–53000, P.O. Box 25007, Denver, CO
80225–0007. Please reference OMB
Control Number 1006–0006 in your
comments.

ADDRESSES:

OMB Control Number 1006–0006;
Agency Information Collection
Activities Under OMB Review; Renewal
of a Currently Approved Information
Collection

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bureau of Reclamation,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of renewal and request
for comments.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

AGENCY:

Stephanie McPhee, Bureau of
Reclamation, at (303) 445–2897. You
may also view the Information
Collection Request at www.reginfo.gov.
I. Abstract

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Reclamation
has forwarded the following Information
Collection Request to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval: Certification
Summary Form and Reporting Summary
Form for Acreage Limitation, 43 CFR
part 426 and 43 CFR part 428 (OMB
Control Number 1006–0006).
DATES: OMB has up to 60 days to
approve or disapprove this information
collection request but may respond after
30 days; therefore, public comments
must be received on or before June 3,
2013.

This information collection is
required under the Reclamation Reform
Act of 1982 (RRA), Acreage Limitation
Rules and Regulations, 43 CFR part 426,
and Information Requirements for
Certain Farm Operations In Excess of
960 Acres and the Eligibility of Certain
Formerly Excess Land, 43 CFR part 428.
The forms in this information collection
are to be used by district offices to
summarize individual landholder
(direct or indirect landowner or lessee)
and farm operator certification and
reporting forms. This information
allows us to establish water user
compliance with Federal reclamation
law.
Burden
estimate
per form
(in hours)

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Form No.

II. Changes to the RRA Forms and
Their Instructions
The changes made to the currently
approved RRA forms and the
corresponding instructions are of an
editorial nature, and are designed to
assist the respondents by increasing
their understanding of the forms,
clarifying the instructions for
completing the forms, and clarifying the
information that is required to be on the
forms. The proposed revisions to the
RRA forms will be effective in the 2014
water year.
III. Data
OMB Control Number: 1006–0006.
Title: Certification Summary Form
and Reporting Summary Form for
Acreage Limitation, 43 CFR part 426
and 43 CFR part 428.
Form Number: Form 7–21SUMM–C
and Form 7–21SUMM–R.
Frequency: Annually.
Respondents: Contracting entities that
are subject to the acreage limitation
provisions of Federal reclamation law.
Estimated Annual Total Number of
Respondents: 182.
Estimated Number of Responses per
Respondent: 1.25.
Estimated Total Number of Annual
Responses: 228.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on
Respondents: 9,120 hours.
Estimated Completion Time per
Respondent: See table below.
Estimated non-hour cost burden:
$159,660.
Number of
respondents

Annual
number of
responses

Annual
burden on
respondents
(in hours)

7–21SUMM–C and associated tabulation sheets ...........................................
7–21SUMM–R and associated tabulation sheets ...........................................

40
40

172
10

215
13

8,600
520

Totals ........................................................................................................

........................

182

228

9,120

IV. Request for Comments
We invite your comments on:
(a) Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of our functions, including
whether the information will have
practical use;
(b) the accuracy of our burden
estimate for the proposed collection of
information;
(c) ways to enhance the quality,
usefulness, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
(d) ways to minimize the burden of
the information collection on
respondents, including the use of
automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:50 May 01, 2013

Jkt 229001

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. Reclamation will
display a valid OMB control number on
the RRA forms.
A Federal Register notice with a 60day comment period soliciting
comments on this collection of
information was published in the
Federal Register (77 FR 57587,
September 18, 2012). No comments
were received.
OMB has up to 60 days to approve or
disapprove this information collection,
but may respond after 30 days;
therefore, public comment should be

PO 00000

Frm 00076

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

submitted to OMB within 30 days in
order to assure maximum consideration.
V. Public Disclosure
Before including your address, phone
number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.

E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM

02MYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 85 / Thursday, May 2, 2013 / Notices
Dated: April 26, 2013.
Roseann Gonzales,
Director, Policy and Administration, Denver
Office.
[FR Doc. 2013–10358 Filed 5–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–MN–P

INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
[Investigation No. 337–TA–792]

Certain Static Random Access
Memories and Products Containing
Same; Commission Determination To
Review in Part a Final Initial
Determination Finding No Violation of
Section 337
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: Notice.

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

AGENCY:

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
the U.S. International Trade
Commission has determined to review
in part the remand initial determination
(‘‘RID’’) issued by the presiding
administrative law judge (‘‘ALJ’’) on
February 25, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Panyin A. Hughes, Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202)
205–3042. 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 http://www.usitc.gov.
The public record for this investigation
may be viewed on the Commission’s
electronic docket (EDIS) at http://
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 this investigation
on July 28, 2011, based on a complaint
filed by Cypress Semiconductor
Corporation of San Jose, California
(‘‘Cypress’’). 76 FR 45295 (July 28,
2011). The complaint alleged violations
of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930
(19 U.S.C. 1337) in the importation into
the United States, the sale for
importation, and the sale within the
United States after importation of
certain static random access memories

VerDate Mar<15>2010

16:50 May 01, 2013

Jkt 229001

and products containing the same by
reason of infringement of various claims
of United States Patent Nos. 6,534,805;
6,651,134; 6,262,937 and 7,142,477. The
notice of investigation named the
following entities as respondents: GSI
Technology, Inc. of Sunnyvale,
California (‘‘GSI’’); Alcatel-Lucent of
Paris, France (‘‘Alcatel-Lucent’’);
Alcatel-Lucent USA, Inc. of Murray Hill,
New Jersey (‘‘Alcatel-Lucent USA’’);
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson of
Stockholm, Sweden (‘‘Ericsson LM’’);
Ericsson, Inc. of Plano, Texas
(‘‘Ericsson’’); Motorola Solutions, Inc. of
Schaumburg, Illinois (‘‘Motorola’’);
Motorola Mobility, Inc. of Libertyville,
Illinois (‘‘MMI’’); Arrow Electronics,
Inc. of Melville, New York (‘‘Arrow’’);
Nu Horizons Electronics Corp. of
Melville, New York (‘‘Nu Horizons’’);
Cisco Systems, Inc. of San Jose,
California (‘‘Cisco’’); Hewlett Packard
Company/Tipping Point of Palo Alto,
California (‘‘HP’’); Avnet, Inc. of
Phoenix, Arizona (‘‘Avnet’’); Nokia
Siemens Networks US, LLC of Irving,
Texas (‘‘Nokia US’’); Nokia Siemens
Networks B.V. of Zoetermeer,
Netherlands (‘‘Nokia’’); and Tellabs of
Naperville, Illinois (‘‘Tellabs’’). The
Office of Unfair Import Investigations is
not a party to this investigation.
The following respondents were
terminated from the investigation based
on settlement agreements, consent
orders, or withdrawal of allegations
from the complaint: Alcatel-Lucent,
Alcatel-Lucent USA, Ericsson, Arrow,
Nu Horizons, Nokia US, and Nokia. The
following respondents were terminated
from the investigation based upon grant
of summary determination of no
violation of section 337: MMI, HP,
Motorola, Tellabs, and Ericsson LM. The
following respondents remain in the
investigation: GSI, Cisco, and Avnet
(collectively, ‘‘Respondents’’).
On October 25, 2012, the ALJ issued
his final ID (‘‘ID’’), finding no violation
of section 337 by the remaining
respondents. Specifically, the ALJ found
that the Commission has subject matter
jurisdiction, in rem jurisdiction over the
accused products, and in personam
jurisdiction over the Respondents. ID at
8. The ALJ also found that the
importation requirement of section 337
(19 U.S.C. 1337(a)(1)(B)) has been
satisfied. Id. The ALJ, however, found
that the accused products do not
infringe the asserted patent claims. See
ID at 16, 24, 39, and 55. The ALJ also
found that Cypress failed to establish
the existence of a domestic industry that
practices the asserted patents under 19
U.S.C. 1337(a)(2) for failure to establish
the technical prong of the domestic
industry requirement. See ID at 20, 31,

PO 00000

Frm 00077

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 9990

25767

45, and 58. The ALJ did not consider the
validity or enforceability of the asserted
patents despite Respondents’ assertion
in both their pre-hearing and posthearing briefs that the asserted patents
are invalid and unenforceable. See ID at
20, 31, 45–46, and 59.
On November 7, 2012, Cypress filed a
petition for review of the ID. That same
day, Respondents filed a contingent
petition for review. On November 15,
2012, the parties filed responses to the
petition and contingent petition for
review.
On December 21, 2012, the
Commission determined to review the
ID in its entirety (without requesting
further briefing) and remanded the
investigation to the ALJ to make
findings on invalidity and
unenforceability, issues he did not rule
on. On February 25, 2012, the ALJ
issued his RID, finding that the asserted
patents are enforceable and not invalid.
On March 11, 2013, Respondents filed
a petition for review of the RID,
challenging the ALJ’s findings that the
asserted patents are enforceable and not
invalid. On March 19, 2013, Cypress
filed a response to the petition for
review.
Having examined the record of this
investigation, including the ALJ’s final
ID and RID, the petitions for review, and
the responses thereto, the Commission
has determined to review the RID in
part, i.e., with respect to validity. The
final ID remains under Commission
review.
The Commission declines
Respondents’ request to take judicial
review of the on-going reexamination
proceedings at the United States Patent
and Trademark Office regarding the ’805
patent and admit filings in that case into
evidence in this investigation.
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).
Issued: April 26, 2013.
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013–10354 Filed 5–1–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P

E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM

02MYN1