[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 9, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61390-61394]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24813]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-901]
Certain Lined Paper Products From the People's Republic of China:
Notice of Final Results and Partial Rescission of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: On June 1, 2012, the Department of Commerce (the
``Department'') published in the Federal Register its preliminary
results of the fifth administrative review of certain lined paper
products from the People's Republic of China (``PRC'').\1\ We invited
parties to comment on the Preliminary Results, however, no party
submitted a case brief to the Department. The current review covers two
exporters: Leo's Quality Products Co., Ltd./Denmax Plastic Stationery
Factory (``Leo/Denmax'') and Shanghai Lian Li Paper Products Co., Ltd.
(``Lian Li''). For Leo/Denmax, we continue to apply adverse facts
available (``AFA''); for Lian Li, we are rescinding the review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Certain Lined Paper Products from the People's Republic
of China: Notice of Preliminary Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Preliminary Rescission, In Part, 77 FR
32498 (June 1, 2012) (``Preliminary Results'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Effective Date: October 9, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cindy Robinson, AD/CVD Operations,
Office 3, Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482-3797.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
In the Preliminary Results, the Department preliminarily rescinded
this review with respect to Lian Li based on evidence on the record
indicating that Lian Li had no shipments of subject merchandise which
entered the United States during the period of review (``POR'') of
September 1, 2010, through August 31, 2011.\2\ As discussed in the
Preliminary Results, on December 30, 2011, Lian Li submitted a letter,
certifying that they did not export the subject merchandise to the
United States during the POR; the Department confirmed this information
with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (``CBP''). We invited
interested parties to submit comments on our Preliminary Results, but
we received no comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Department preliminarily applied AFA with respect
to Leo/Denmax because Leo/Denmax did not respond to the Department's
questionnaire. As stated above, on June 1, 2012, the Department
published its Preliminary Results. On June 5, 2012, the Department
received a letter dated May 29, 2012, from Leo/Denmax stating that they
made no sales of subject merchandise to the United States during the
POR and requesting rescission of the review with respect to Leo/Denmax.
However, because Leo/Denmax's letter claiming that it made no shipments
was
[[Page 61391]]
improperly and untimely submitted, the Department rejected and returned
Leo/Denmax's letter on June 11, 2012.\3\ Therefore, for purposes of
these final results, we continue to apply AFA with respect to Leo/
Denmax. See the ``Application of AFA with Respect to Leo/Denmax''
section below for further details.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See the Department's June 11, 2012, letter to Tilly Shiang,
General Manager, Leo's Quality Products Co., Ltd. from James
Terpstra, Program Manager, titled ``Certain Lined Paper Products
from the People's Republic of China--Return of Improperly and
Untimely Submission of Leos' May 29, 2012 No Shipment Letter,
(Rejection Letter).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period of Review
The POR is September 1, 2010, through August 31, 2011.
Scope of the Order
The scope of this order includes certain lined paper products,
typically school supplies (for purposes of this scope definition, the
actual use of or labeling these products as school supplies or non-
school supplies is not a defining characteristic) composed of or
including paper that incorporates straight horizontal and/or vertical
lines on ten or more paper sheets (there shall be no minimum page
requirement for looseleaf filler paper) including but not limited to
such products as single- and multi-subject notebooks, composition
books, wireless notebooks, looseleaf or glued filler paper, graph
paper, and laboratory notebooks, and with the smaller dimension of the
paper measuring 6 inches to 15 inches (inclusive) and the larger
dimension of the paper measuring 8-3/4 inches to 15 inches (inclusive).
Page dimensions are measured size (not advertised, stated, or ``tear-
out'' size), and are measured as they appear in the product (i.e.,
stitched and folded pages in a notebook are measured by the size of the
page as it appears in the notebook page, not the size of the unfolded
paper). However, for measurement purposes, pages with tapered or
rounded edges shall be measured at their longest and widest points.
Subject lined paper products may be loose, packaged or bound using any
binding method (other than case bound through the inclusion of binders
board, a spine strip, and cover wrap). Subject merchandise may or may
not contain any combination of a front cover, a rear cover, and/or
backing of any composition, regardless of the inclusion of images or
graphics on the cover, backing, or paper. Subject merchandise is within
the scope of this order whether or not the lined paper and/or cover are
hole punched, drilled, perforated, and/or reinforced. Subject
merchandise may contain accessory or informational items including but
not limited to pockets, tabs, dividers, closure devices, index cards,
stencils, protractors, writing implements, reference materials such as
mathematical tables, or printed items such as sticker sheets or
miniature calendars, if such items are physically incorporated,
included with, or attached to the product, cover and/or backing
thereto.
Specifically excluded from the scope of this order are:
Unlined copy machine paper;
Writing pads with a backing (including but not limited to
products commonly known as ``tablets,'' ``note pads,'' ``legal pads,''
and ``quadrille pads''), provided that they do not have a front cover
(whether permanent or removable). This exclusion does not apply to such
writing pads if they consist of hole-punched or drilled filler paper;
Three-ring or multiple-ring binders, or notebook
organizers incorporating such a ring binder provided that they do not
include subject paper;
Index cards;
Printed books and other books that are case bound through
the inclusion of binders board, a spine strip, and cover wrap;
Newspapers;
Pictures and photographs;
Desk and wall calendars and organizers (including but not
limited to such products generally known as ``office planners,'' ``time
books,'' and ``appointment books'');
Telephone logs;
Address books;
Columnar pads & tablets, with or without covers, primarily
suited for the recording of written numerical business data;
Lined business or office forms, including but not limited
to: Pre-printed business forms, lined invoice pads and paper, mailing
and address labels, manifests, and shipping log books;
Lined continuous computer paper;
Boxed or packaged writing stationary (including but not
limited to products commonly known as ``fine business paper,''
``parchment paper'', and ``letterhead''), whether or not containing a
lined header or decorative lines;
Stenographic pads (``steno pads''), Gregg ruled (``Gregg
ruling'' consists of a single- or double-margin vertical ruling line
down the center of the page. For a six-inch by nine-inch stenographic
pad, the ruling would be located approximately three inches from the
left of the book.), measuring 6 inches by 9 inches.
Also excluded from the scope of this order are the following
trademarked products:
FlyTM lined paper products: A notebook,
notebook organizer, loose or glued note paper, with papers that are
printed with infrared reflective inks and readable only by a
FlyTM pen-top computer. The product must bear the valid
trademark FlyTM (products found to be bearing an invalidly
licensed or used trademark are not excluded from the scope).
ZwipesTM: A notebook or notebook organizer made
with a blended polyolefin writing surface as the cover and pocket
surfaces of the notebook, suitable for writing using a specially-
developed permanent marker and erase system (known as a
ZwipesTM pen). This system allows the marker portion to mark
the writing surface with a permanent ink. The eraser portion of the
marker dispenses a solvent capable of solubilizing the permanent ink
allowing the ink to be removed. The product must bear the valid
trademark ZwipesTM (products found to be bearing an
invalidly licensed or used trademark are not excluded from the scope).
FiveStar[supreg]AdvanceTM: A notebook or
notebook organizer bound by a continuous spiral, or helical, wire and
with plastic front and rear covers made of a blended polyolefin plastic
material joined by 300 denier polyester, coated on the backside with
PVC (poly vinyl chloride) coating, and extending the entire length of
the spiral or helical wire. The polyolefin plastic covers are of
specific thickness; front cover is 0.019 inches (within normal
manufacturing tolerances) and rear cover is 0.028 inches (within normal
manufacturing tolerances). Integral with the stitching that attaches
the polyester spine covering, is captured both ends of a 1'' wide
elastic fabric band. This band is located 2-3/8'' from the top of the
front plastic cover and provides pen or pencil storage. Both ends of
the spiral wire are cut and then bent backwards to overlap with the
previous coil but specifically outside the coil diameter but inside the
polyester covering. During construction, the polyester covering is sewn
to the front and rear covers face to face (outside to outside) so that
when the book is closed, the stitching is concealed from the outside.
Both free ends (the ends not sewn to the cover and back) are stitched
with a turned edge construction. The flexible polyester material forms
a covering over the spiral wire to protect it and provide a comfortable
grip on the product. The product must bear the valid trademarks
FiveStar[supreg]AdvanceTM (products found to be bearing an
invalidly licensed or used
[[Page 61392]]
trademark are not excluded from the scope).
FiveStar FlexTM: A notebook, a notebook
organizer, or binder with plastic polyolefin front and rear covers
joined by 300 denier polyester spine cover extending the entire length
of the spine and bound by a 3-ring plastic fixture. The polyolefin
plastic covers are of a specific thickness; front cover is 0.019 inches
(within normal manufacturing tolerances) and rear cover is 0.028 inches
(within normal manufacturing tolerances). During construction, the
polyester covering is sewn to the front cover face to face (outside to
outside) so that when the book is closed, the stitching is concealed
from the outside. During construction, the polyester cover is sewn to
the back cover with the outside of the polyester spine cover to the
inside back cover. Both free ends (the ends not sewn to the cover and
back) are stitched with a turned edge construction. Each ring within
the fixture is comprised of a flexible strap portion that snaps into a
stationary post which forms a closed binding ring. The ring fixture is
riveted with six metal rivets and sewn to the back plastic cover and is
specifically positioned on the outside back cover. The product must
bear the valid trademark FiveStar FlexTM (products found to
be bearing an invalidly licensed or used trademark are not excluded
from the scope).
Merchandise subject to this order is typically imported under
headings 4810.22.5044, 4811.90.9050, 4820.10.2010, 4820.10.2020,
4820.10.2030, 4820.10.2040, 4820.10.2060, and 4820.10.4000 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (``HTSUS''). The HTSUS
headings are provided for convenience and customs purposes; however,
the written description of the scope of this order is dispositive.
Since the issuance of the order, the Department has clarified the
scope of the order in response to numerous scope inquiries. In
addition, on September 23, 2011, the Department revoked, in part, the
PRC AD order with respect to FiveStar[supreg] AdvanceTM
notebooks and notebook organizers without PVC coatings.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Certain Lined Paper Products From People's Republic of
China: Final Results of Antidumping Duty Changed Circumstances
Review and Revocation, in Part, 76 FR 60803 (September 30, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
We have received no comments on our Preliminary Results, with the
exception of Leo/Denmax's May 29, 2012, letter which the Department
rejected on June 11, 2012, as noted above.
Final Rescission of Review With Respect to Lian Li
Because there is no information on the record which indicates that
Lian Li made shipments of subject merchandise which entered the United
States during the POR, and because we did not receive any comments on
our Preliminary Results, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(d)(3) and
consistent with our practice, we are rescinding this review of the
antidumping duty order on certain lined paper products from the PRC for
the period of September 1, 2010, through August 31, 2011, with respect
to Lian Li. The cash deposit rate for Lian Li will continue to be the
rate established in the most recently completed segment of this
proceeding.
Application of Adverse Facts Available (AFA) With Respect to Leo/Denmax
In this case, the Department issued a questionnaire to Leo/Denmax
on November 8, 2011, by email. Receiving no acknowledgement of receipt
of the emailed questionnaire from Leo/Denmax, the Department sent a
hard copy of the questionnaire to Leo/Denmax through United Parcel
Service (``UPS'') by registered mail on November 17, 2011.\5\ After the
Department announced its Preliminary Results, Leo/Denmax submitted a
letter stating that Leo/Denmax did not have any exports, sales or
entries of subject merchandise to the United States during the POR, and
requested that the Department rescind the administrative review with
respect to Leo/Denmax. The deadline for submitting a letter certifying
``no shipments'' was December 31, 2011, but the Department did not
receive Leo/Denmax's no-shipment letter until June 5, 2012 (dated May
29, 2011), 158 days after the filing deadline for a no shipment
letter.\6\ Moreover, Leo/Denmax's letter was not filed electronically
on the Department's filing system (IA ACCESS), as required and stated
in the initial questionnaire issued to Leo/Denmax. Instead, Leo/Denmax
filed its letter manually in regular mail without submitting the proper
certifications. Therefore, on June 11, 2012, the Department rejected
Leo's/Denmax's no-shipment submission dated May 29, 2012, because the
letter was improperly and untimely submitted. In accordance with 19 CFR
351.302(d)(iii), the Department also withdrew all known copies of Leo/
Denmax's May 29, 2012, letter from the record and returned them to Leo/
Denmax. The Department informed Leo/Denmax that this information shall
not be considered by the Department in making its final results of
review.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See ``Proof of Delivery of Antidumping Questionnaire to
Leo's Quality Products Co., Ltd,'' memorandum to file from Joy
Zhang, analyst, through James Terpstra, Program Manager, Office 3,
AD/CVD Operations, dated January 4, 2012.
\6\ The Department's Rejection Letter inadvertently stated that
the deadline for filing a notice of no sale letter is October 31,
2011.
\7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 776(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (``the Act'')
provides that the Department shall apply ``facts otherwise available''
if (1) necessary information is not on the record, or (2) an interested
party or any other person (A) withholds information that has been
requested, (B) fails to provide information within the deadlines
established, or in the form and manner requested by the Department,
subject to subsections (c)(1) and (e) of section 782 of the Act, (C)
significantly impedes a proceeding, or (D) provides information that
cannot be verified as provided by section 782(i) of the Act.
Where the Department determines that a response to a request for
information does not comply with the request, section 782(d) of the Act
provides that the Department will so inform the party submitting the
response and will, to the extent practicable, provide that party the
opportunity to remedy or explain the deficiency. If the party fails to
remedy the deficiency within the applicable time limits and subject to
section 782(e) of the Act, the Department may disregard all or part of
the original and subsequent responses, as appropriate. Section 782(e)
of the Act provides that the Department ``shall not decline to consider
information that is submitted by an interested party and is necessary
to the determination but does not meet all applicable requirements
established by the administering authority'' if the information is
timely, can be verified, is not so incomplete that it cannot be used,
and if the interested party acted to the best of its ability in
providing the information. Where all of these conditions are met, the
statute requires the Department to use the information supplied if it
can do so without undue difficulties.
Section 776(b) of the Act further provides that the Department may
use an adverse inference in applying the facts otherwise available when
a party has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its
ability to comply with a request for information. Such an adverse
inference may include reliance on information derived from the
petition, the final determination, a previous
[[Page 61393]]
administrative review, or other information placed on the record.\8\
Furthermore, ``affirmative evidence of bad faith on the part of a
respondent is not required before the Department may make an adverse
inference.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See, e.g., Notice of Final Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review: Stainless Steel Bar from India, 70 FR 54023,
54025-26 (September 13, 2005); Statement of Administrative Action,
reprinted in H.R. Doc. No. 103-216, at 870 (1994) (``SAA'').
\9\ See Antidumping Duties; Countervailing Duties; Final Rule,
62 FR 27296, 27340 (May 19, 1997); see also Nippon Steel Corp. v.
United States, 337 F.3d 1373, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (``Nippon'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because Leo/Denmax did not provide the requested information timely
and properly, they significantly impeded the proceeding and we find
that application of facts available is appropriate under sections
776(a)(2)(A), (B), and (C) of the Act. We further find that application
of AFA is appropriate under section 776(b) because Leo/Denmax failed to
cooperate to the best of its ability in responding to the Department's
requests for information.
Separate Rates
In proceedings involving nonmarket economy (``NME'') countries,
there is a rebuttable presumption that all companies within that
country are subject to government control and thus should be assessed a
single antidumping duty rate. It is the Department's policy to assign
all exporters of subject merchandise in an NME country this single rate
unless an exporter demonstrates that it is sufficiently independent so
as to be entitled to a separate rate. Exporters can demonstrate this
independence through the absence of both de jure and de facto
governmental control over export activities.\10\ It is the Department's
practice to require a party to submit evidence that it operates
independently of the State-controlled entity in each segment of a
proceeding in which it requests separate rate status. The process
requires exporters to submit a separate-rate status application.\11\ As
discussed in the Preliminary Results, Leo/Denmax did not respond to the
Department's questionnaire regarding separate rate eligibility, or
submit a separate rate certification. Furthermore, Leo/Denmax has not
demonstrated that it operates free from government control. Therefore,
the Department continues to find that Leo/Denmax is part of the PRC-
wide entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Notice of Final Determination of Sales at Less Than
Fair Value: Sparklers from the People's Republic of China, 56 FR
20588 (May 6, 1991), as further developed in Notice of Final
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from
the People's Republic of China, 59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994).
\11\ See Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished or
Unfinished, from the People's Republic of China: Final Results of
2005-2006 Administrative Review and Partial Rescission of Review, 72
FR 56724 (October 4, 2007), Peer Bearing Co. Changshan v. United
States, 587 F.Supp. 2d 1319, 1324-25 (CIT 2008) (affirming the
Department's determination in that review).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The PRC-Wide Entity
Because we determined that Leo/Denmax is part of the PRC-wide
entity, the PRC-wide entity is under review. Pursuant to section 776(a)
of the Act, we further find that because the PRC entity (including Leo/
Denmax) failed to respond to the Department's questionnaires, withheld
or failed to provide information in a timely manner or in the form or
manner requested by the Department, submitted information that cannot
be verified, or otherwise impeded the proceeding, it is appropriate to
apply a dumping margin for the PRC-wide entity using the facts
otherwise available on the record. Moreover, by failing to respond to
the Department's requests for information, we find that the PRC-wide
entity has failed to cooperate by not acting to the best of its ability
to comply with the Department's requests for information in this
proceeding, within the meaning of section 776(b) of the Act. Therefore,
an adverse inference is warranted in selecting from the facts otherwise
available.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Nippon, 337 F.3d at 1382-83.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Selection of Adverse Facts Available Rate
In deciding which facts to use as AFA, section 776(b) of the Act
and 19 CFR 351.308(c)(1) provide that the Department may rely on
information derived from (1) the petition, (2) a final determination in
the investigation, (3) any previous review or determination, or (4) any
other information placed on the record. In selecting a rate for AFA,
the Department selects a rate that is sufficiently adverse ``as to
effectuate the purpose of the facts available rule to induce
respondents to provide the Department with complete and accurate
information in a timely manner.''\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See Circular Welded Austenitic Stainless Pressure Pipe from
the People's Republic of China: Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value, 74 FR 4913 (January 28, 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generally, the Department finds that selecting the highest rate
from any segment of the proceeding as AFA is appropriate.\14\ The Court
of International Trade (``CIT'') and the Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit (``CAFC'') have affirmed the Department's prior
decisions to select the highest margin from any prior segment of the
proceeding as the AFA rate on numerous occasions.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See, e.g., Certain Cased Pencils from the People's Republic
of China; Notice of Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review and Intent to Rescind in Part, 70 FR 76755,
76761 (December 28, 2005).
\15\ See Rhone Poulenc, Inc. v. United States, 899 F.2d 1185,
1190 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (``Rhone Poulenc''); NSK Ltd. v. United
States, 346 F. Supp. 2d 1312, 1335 (CIT 2004) (upholding the
application of an AFA rate which was the highest available dumping
margin from a different respondent in an investigation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As AFA, we have assigned to the PRC-wide entity a rate of 258.21
percent, from the investigation of certain lined paper products from
the PRC, which is the highest rate on the record of all segments of
this proceeding.\16\ As explained below, this rate has been
corroborated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Lined Paper Products from the People's
Republic of China; Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Lined
Paper Products from India, Indonesia and the People's Republic of
China; and Notice of Countervailing Duty Orders: Certain Lined Paper
Products from India and Indonesia, 71 FR 56949 (September 28, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corroboration of Secondary Information
Section 776(c) of the Act provides that, when the Department relies
on secondary information rather than on information obtained in the
course of an investigation or review, it shall, to the extent
practicable, corroborate that information from independent sources that
are reasonably at its disposal. Secondary information is defined as
information derived from the petition that gave rise to the
investigation or review, the final determination concerning the subject
merchandise, or any previous review under section 751 of the Act
concerning the subject merchandise.\17\ Corroborate means that the
Department will satisfy itself that the secondary information to be
used has probative value.\18\ To corroborate secondary information, the
Department will, to the extent practicable, examine the reliability and
relevance of the information to be used.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See SAA at 870.
\18\ Id.
\19\ See Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative
Reviews and Partial Termination of Administrative Reviews: Tapered
Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and Unfinished from
Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings Four Inches or Less in Outside
Diameter, and Components Thereof, from Japan, 61 FR 57391, 57392
(November 6, 1996) (unchanged in the final determination), Final
Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Reviews and Termination
in Part: Tapered Roller Bearings and Parts Thereof, Finished and
Unfinished from Japan, and Tapered Roller Bearings Four Inches or
Less in Outside Diameter, and Components Thereof, from Japan, 62 FR
11825 (March 13, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The AFA rate selected in this instance is from the original
investigation. This
[[Page 61394]]
rate was calculated based on information contained in the petition,
which was corroborated for the final determination.\20\ This rate was
also applied in the 2007-2008 period of review of lined paper products
from the PRC and the CIT found this PRC-wide rate to be
corroborated.\21\ No additional information has been presented in the
current review which calls into question the reliability of the
information.\22\ Therefore, the Department finds that the information
continues to be reliable and has probative value. In addition, the AFA
rate we are applying is the rate currently in effect for the PRC-wide
entity.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Notice of Amended Final Determination of Sales at Less
Than Fair Value: Certain Lined Paper Products from the People's
Republic of China; Notice of Antidumping Duty Orders: Certain Lined
Paper Products from India, Indonesia and the People's Republic of
China; and Notice of Countervailing Duty Orders: Certain Lined Paper
Products from India and Indonesia, 71 FR 56949 (September 28, 2006).
\21\ See Watanabe Group v. United States, Court No. 09-520, Slip
Op. 2010-139 (CIT Dec. 22, 2010), affirming Final Results in Certain
Lined Paper Products from the People's Republic of China: Notice of
Final Results of the Antidumping Duty Administrative Review, 74 FR
63387 (December 3, 2009).
\22\ See Certain Lined Paper Products from the People's Republic
of China: Notice of Final Results of the Antidumping Duty
Administrative Review, 76 FR 23288 (April 26, 2011).
\23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Results of Review
We determine that the following margin exists for the period
September 1, 2010, through August 31, 2011:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weighted-
average
Exporter margin
(percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRC-wide Entity (including Leo/Denmax).................. 258.21
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assessment Rates
Pursuant to section 751(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 19 CFR
351.212(b)(1), the Department will determine, and CBP shall assess,
antidumping duties on all appropriate entries covered by this review.
The Department intends to issue assessment instructions to CBP 15 days
after the publication date of the final results of this review. We will
instruct CBP to liquidate all appropriate entries at the PRC-wide rate
of 258.21 percent.
Cash Deposit Requirements
The following cash deposit requirements will be effective upon
publication of the notice of final results of the administrative review
for all shipments of certain lined paper products from the PRC entered,
or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after the date of
publication, as provided by section 751(a)(2)(C) of the Act: (1) For
previously reviewed or investigated companies not listed above that
have separate rates, the cash-deposit rate will continue to be the
company-specific rate published for the most recent period; (2) for all
other PRC exporters of subject merchandise, which have not been found
to be entitled to a separate rate, the cash-deposit rate will be PRC-
wide rate of 258.21 percent; and (3) for all non-PRC exporters of
subject merchandise, the cash-deposit rate will be the rate applicable
to the PRC exporter that supplied that non-PRC exporter. These deposit
requirements, when imposed, shall remain in effect until further
notice.
Notification to Importers
This notice serves as a final reminder to importers of their
responsibility under 19 CFR 351.402(f)(2) to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
Notification Regarding APOs
This notice also serves as a reminder to parties subject to
administrative protective orders (``APO'') of their responsibility
concerning the return or destruction of proprietary information
disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305, which continues
to govern business proprietary information in this segment of the
proceeding. Timely written notification of the return/destruction of
APO materials or conversion to judicial protective order is hereby
requested. Failure to comply with the regulations and terms of an APO
is a violation which is subject to sanction.
This notice is issued and published in accordance with sections
751(a)(1) and 777(i)(1) of the Act, as amended, and 19 CFR
351.213(d)(4).
Dated: October 1, 2012.
Paul Piquado,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 2012-24813 Filed 10-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P