International Trade Commission
Document Headings Document headings vary by document type but may contain the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document the number of the CFR title and the number of each part the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly related to the agency docket number / agency internal file number the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions See the Document Drafting Handbook for more details. International Trade Commission [Inv. No. 337-TA-582] The Commission has determined that there is a violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 ( 19 U.S.C. 1337 ) based on the unlawful importation and sale of certain hydraulic excavators that infringe United States Trademark Registration Nos. 2,140,606; 2,241,077; 2,140,605 and 2,448,848, which cover the “CAT” and “Caterpillar” marks. Having reviewed the record in this investigation, including the written submissions of the parties, the Commission has made its determination on the issues of remedy, the public interest, and bonding. The Commission has determined that a general exclusion from entry for consumption is necessary because there is a pattern of violation of section 337 and it is difficult to identify the source of the infringing products. Accordingly, the Commission has determined to issue a general exclusion order prohibiting the unlicensed importation of infringing gray market hydraulic excavators bearing the trademarks at issue. The Commission has further determined that the public interest factors enumerated in 19 U.S.C. 1337(d) do not preclude issuance of the general exclusion order, 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. Accordingly, the Commission hereby orders that: ( printed page 4052) (1) Hydraulic excavators manufactured by or under authority of Caterpillar Inc. for sale a…
Other Federal Register documents from the same docket.
Citation: 74 FR 4051