The U.S. trade management system and its development
There have been no major changes in the U.S. trade management system in recent years. The United States relies on the Tariff Act of 1930, the Trade Act of 1974, the Omnibus Trade and Competition Act of 1988, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, and the Export Administration Act of 1979, The "Export Promotion Act of 1988" and the "Trading with Enemy Countries Act" govern the import and export trade of goods. In addition, the United States has signed free trade agreements with Canada, Mexico, Israel and other countries to provide reciprocal trade arrangements. The U.S. Congress is responsible for formulating important laws and policies regarding foreign trade. The executive departments headed by the president, including the Office of the Trade Representative, the Department of Commerce, the Treasury, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of Agriculture, are responsible for the implementation of trade laws and policies, tariff collection, goods import and export management, and foreign trade negotiations.
1. Tariff system
(1) Tariff management system
The "Tariff Act of 1930" and the "Comprehensive Trade and Competition Act of 1988" are the norms The principal laws governing the establishment and collection of tariffs in the United States. The U.S. Congress formulated the Harmonized Tariff Schedule in accordance with the Omnibus Trade and Competition Act of 1988, which came into effect on January 1, 1989. The U.S. International Trade Commission modifies or maintains the Harmonized Tariff Schedule at the request of the U.S. Congress, and Customs and Border Protection under the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is responsible for interpreting and enforcing the Harmonized Tariff Schedule and other customs laws.
The United States imposes most-favored-nation tariff treatment on all WTO members except Cuba. In addition, the United States provides preferential tariff treatment through bilateral or regional free trade arrangements.
The United States imposes ad valorem taxes on most imported products based on FOB prices, but applies specific taxes to certain imported products, mainly agricultural products. In addition, some products are subject to compound tariffs. Some products, including sugar, are also subject to tariff rate quotas. From January 1, 2009, the United States began to implement the "2009 U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule" and modified the "2008 U.S. Coordinated Tariff Schedule", but the modifications are mainly required by the United States to fulfill the free trade agreements signed with other countries. phased reduction of tariff obligations.
In addition, the U.S. Congress has the power to temporarily suspend or reduce tariffs on some products. Most of the products temporarily exempted from tariffs are chemicals, raw materials and other industrial raw materials. The decision to reduce tariffs will be included in the decision. In some laws, this is usually reflected in Chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule. The "Pension Protection Act of 2006" implements temporary tariff reductions and exemptions for 300 products including non-woven gloves, nitrocellulose, methyl sorbate, fluamide, etc.; Temporary tariff reductions and exemptions will be implemented for 500 products, including ethyl ester, sorafenib, prohexadione calcium salt, and 16-inch variable speed wire saw. The above two exemptions are valid until December 31, 2009.
(2) Tariff levels and adjustments
According to WTO statistics, the simple average most-favored nation applicable tariff rate of the United States in 2007 was 3.5%, which was the same as in 2006 and has reached the simple average of the United States. ultimately bound tariff levels. In 2008, excluding non-ad valorem tax rates, the simple average MFN applicable tax rate in the United States was 4.4%. In 2007, the simple average MFN applicable tariff rate for agricultural products was 5.5%, and for non-agricultural products was 3.2%. Compared with the levels of 5.3% and 3.3% in 2006, the former has increased, while the latter has decreased slightly.
2. Main import management systems
(1) Basic management system
The United States mainly relies on tariffs to manage and regulate imported products and their quantities, but the United States Tariff quotas are also used for relatively sensitive imported products such as agricultural products. In addition, for reasons such as environmental protection, national security, and balance of payments, Congress passed the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (Animal Protection), Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (National Security), and the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1974 (Animal Protection). Many domestic legislations, including Article 122 of the Trade Law (Balance of International Payments), authorize the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Agriculture and other administrative departments to impose restrictions on imports through quota management, import prohibitions, and import surcharges.
(2) Changes in 2008
① "12" requirements for carriers and importers
In November 2008, the U.S. Customs and Border The agency issued a notice that in order to assess and identify high-risk cargo and prevent terrorist weapons and cargo from entering the United States, effective January 26, 2009, importers and carriers must electronically provide additional information about cargo before cargo ships enter the United States. . According to the 24-hour warehouse receipt rule announced by the United States in 2002, carriers and importers must provide certain documents to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection 24 hours before the goods are shipped. On this basis, the new regulations put forward new declaration requirements for carriers and importers.
For carriers, "2" documents must be submitted on top of the original "10" pieces of information, which is the so-called "10" + "2". One of the two documents is a ship loading status statement, which includes information about the ship and each container to explain the actual location of the goods loaded on the ship. This document must be cleared by customs and border protection within 48 hours after the ship departs. The other is the container status information, which determines the movement and status changes of the container (such as full or empty status). When the nine situations listed in the regulations occur, the carrier must check the container status. Submit such information to Customs and Border Protection within 24 hours of the change information entering its device tracking system.
For importers, it is "2" + "10", that is, on the basis of the original 2 pieces of information provided, an "Importer Safety Declaration" must be submitted. This declaration contains the following 10 pieces of information: Seller, Buyer, importer registration number/foreign trade zone application identification code, consignee number, manufacturer (provider), consignee, country of origin, commodity customs HS code, container packing place, freight company (loader). Except for the container packing site and freight company (loader), which can be reported to Customs and Border Protection as soon as possible (no later than 24 hours before arrival), other information must be reported to the Bureau 24 hours before shipment.
However, this regulation gives a one-year transition period, that is, it will not be fully implemented until January 26, 2010.
② The final rules for the pre-notification system for imported foods are determined
In order to implement the "Biological Terrorism Act of 2002", the U.S. Food and Drug Administration promulgated the "Pre-Notification System for Imported Foods" in 2003 Transitional regulations stipulate that starting from December 12, 2003, food importers must submit advance notification to the Bureau for food imported or prepared to be imported into the United States. In November 2008, the US Food and Drug Administration announced the final rules of the system, which revised the original regulations and interim final rules. The final rules will take effect on May 6, 2009. Under the final rule, importers are required to submit electronic notifications to the United States 15 days (through the Food and Drug Administration's Advanced Notification System interface) or 30 days (through the Customs and Border Protection Automated Commerce System's automated broker interface) before the food's scheduled arrival. The Food and Drug Administration conducts advance notification. The advance notification must be made within a time limit of not less than 8 hours (if the food is imported by water transport), and not less than 4 hours (if the food is imported by air or by land or rail) before the food arrives at the U.S. port. Obtain confirmation information from the bureau within a time limit of no less than 2 hours (if the food is imported by land and road transport), otherwise the goods will be refused import and detained. The final rules also modify some definitions and the content of advance notices in the original regulations.
③ Some arrangements for quota-restricted textiles
In 2008, the U.S. Textile Agreement Executive Committee instructed the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to regulate products that exceed the 2008 annual quotas of the China-U.S. Textile Quota Agreement. Textiles are subject to phased entry. In December 2008, the committee issued specific arrangements for phased entry. Any export goods delivered in 2008 that exceed the annual quota for that year will not be allowed to enter the country before February 1, 2009. From February 1 to February 28, 2009, goods that account for 5% of the basic quota limit in 2008 will be Entry is granted. In each subsequent month, from the first day of the month to the last day of the month, only goods equivalent to 5% of the basic quota limit in 2008 are allowed to enter, until all shipments exceeding the quota limit are allowed to enter.
The monthly 5% phased entry limit is 4,252,922 dozen products in category 332/432/632T (plus baby socks) (including 4,043,310 dozen products in category 332/432/632B), and 4,043,310 dozen products in category 347/348 The number of products is 1,272,148 dozen, and the number of products in category 352/652 is 1,225,759 dozen.
In addition, the committee also decided to cancel the original electronic visa information system requirements for textiles exported from China on January 1, 2009 and later, but for goods exported before that date, Even when entering the United States in 2009, the electronic visa information system and quota requirements still apply.
④ The "Lacey Act" new requirements for the import of plant products
The "Lacey Act" is the oldest wildlife protection law in the United States. It aims to combat wild animals and plants, Illegal trade in fish and plants. The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 amended the Act to expand its scope of protection and add import declaration requirements for plants and plant products.
According to the new regulations, starting from May 22, 2008, if any plant is acquired, possessed, transported or sold in violation of any U.S. state or foreign law related to protected plants; import, export, transport, sell, receive in interstate or foreign commerce in violation of any restrictions on the export or re-export of plants imposed by the laws of any state or foreign country in the United States, upon payment of required royalties, taxes or logging fees It is illegal to obtain or purchase these plants. The "plant" referred to in the revised Lacey Act refers to "all wild plants in the plant kingdom, including roots, seeds, components and products thereof, including trees growing naturally or planted in woodlands", but three categories Except plants: conventionally cultivated plants other than trees, conventional food crops (including roots, seeds, components and their products); scientific samples of plant propagation materials (including roots, seeds, germplasm, components and products thereof); plants prepared for further cultivation, for planting or for replanting. If the plant belongs to Category 2 and Category 3 above, but it is listed in the Annex to the Convention on Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), or is an endangered or threatened species listed in the Endangered Species Act of 1973, Or if it is a native species and is endangered according to the laws on species protection in any state, such plants are still subject to the newly revised Lacey Act.
Starting from December 15, 2008, all importers are required to submit a declaration form when importing plants covered by the Lacey Act, stating the scientific names (including plant species and genus) of all plants included in the imported goods. name), the value of the imported goods and the quantity of the relevant plants (including units of measurement), and the name of the place of origin of the plants. However, plants or plant products used specifically as packaging materials to support, protect or carry other items do not need to be declared unless the packaging materials themselves are imported goods.
The United States will implement the above import declaration requirements in stages, as follows:
Phase 1: From December 15, 2008 to March 2009, it is the voluntary declaration stage ;
The second phase: From April 1, 2009 or the date when the US Customs electronic declaration system is launched, the HS codes are Chapter 44 (wood and wood products) and Chapter 6 (live trees, Plants, bulbs, flowers and decorative leaves, etc.) products will begin to implement declaration requirements;
The third phase: Starting from about July 1, 2009, the HS code is Chapter 47 (wood pulp), Chapter 48 (Paper and its products), Chapter 92 (Musical Instruments), Chapter 94 (Furniture), and the above-mentioned second-stage product implementation declaration regulations.
After September 30, 2009, the United States Department of Agriculture will implement import declarations in phases for plants and plant products covered by the Lacey Act, including those with HS codes of Chapter 12 (containing oil seeds, Miscellaneous kernels, grains, seeds, fruits, plants, etc.), Chapter 13 (Shellac, gums, resins, plant juices, plant extracts, etc.), Chapter 14 (Plant materials for braiding, other plant products), Chapter 45 Chapter (Cork and cork products), Chapter 46 (Baskets and wicker products), Chapter 66 (Umbrellas, walking sticks, riding whips), Chapter 82 (Tools), Chapter 93 (Firearms), Chapter 95 (Toys) , games, sporting goods), Chapter 96 (brooms, pens, buttons), Chapter 97 (artwork), etc.
Importers who violate the Lacey Act, including failing to file import declarations, will be subject to civil and criminal penalties and their imported products will be confiscated.
Although the declaration and penalty entities involved in the bill are all importers, importers will definitely make requests to Chinese producers and exporters for information, payment after customs clearance, etc. The pressure on Chinese producers and exporters will be severe. Risks will increase. Relevant companies should communicate well with U.S. customers, understand and familiarize themselves with the content and implementation of relevant U.S. laws, adjust procurement strategies, fulfill the "due diligence obligations" required by the Lacey Act, and prudently purchase and use some imported timber.
⑤ New regulatory measures for imported catfish
The "Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008" transferred the regulatory functions of catfish imports from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to the Department of Agriculture, authorizing the U.S. The Ministry of Agriculture defines the classification of catfish and manages the import of catfish in accordance with the current import inspection and supervision requirements for meat and poultry. This means that the import supervision of catfish extends from the US Customs to the domestic production and processing links, requiring China's domestic production and processing links to conduct equivalence assessments with reference to US standards. The relevant regulations of the US Department of Agriculture are currently soliciting internal opinions and are expected to be promulgated in the first half of 2009 and implemented before the end of 2009.
⑥ U.S. Customs proposes to abolish the first sale practice in customs valuation
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued a notice in January 2008, proposing to abolish the first sale in current customs valuation. practice. Under current law, "transaction price" is the primary method of determining the price of imported products, which is defined as the price actually paid or payable for sales of products exported to the United States. In transactions involving a series of sales, CBP will generally base the transaction price on the price paid by the buyer in the first or earlier sale (generally between the manufacturer and an intermediary), as long as the importer can Prove that the sale is an arm's length transaction and clearly indicate that the goods are sold for export to the United States. According to the resolution of the WTO Customs Valuation Technical Committee in 2007, the U.S. Customs recommended changing its original practice. In transactions involving a series of sales activities, the price of the last sale before the goods are imported into the United States is used to determine the transaction value, rather than the first or earlier price. Transaction price. Under the proposal, the transaction value would generally be determined by the price paid by the U.S. buyer.
Abolition of the valuation method of the "first sale rule" may increase costs for Chinese exporters. Chinese export companies should pay close attention to the progress of this regulatory proposal and, if possible, consider submitting written comments to the United States to maximize Reduce the negative impact of changes to this valuation method on international trade.
3. Main export management systems
(1) Basic management systems
In order to safeguard national security and promote the implementation of U.S. foreign policy, we restrict biological, chemical and biological weapons and missiles In order to promote the proliferation of technology and ensure adequate domestic supply of some shortage materials, the United States has implemented export controls on some products based on the Export Administration Act of 1979, the Export Control Regulations, and the Arms Export Control Act. The Bureau of Industry and Security of the U.S. Department of Commerce is responsible for the export control of dual-use materials, technologies and services. The export of products, services and related technical data for military purposes is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of State, while the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Department of the Treasury is responsible for determining economic sanctions. Embargoed countries and embargoed transactions involved in the plan.
(2) Progress in 2008
① China and the United States signed the "Exchange of Letters on Verified End-User On-site Access Issues"
January 2009 On the 13th, the Ministry of Commerce of China and the United States signed the "Exchange of Letters between China and the United States on Verified End-User On-site Visits."
This system allows U.S. exporters to export specific dual-use items directly to foreign end-users who have obtained Verified End User (VEU) authorization without applying for an export license. This exchange of letters mainly indicates that the Bureau of Industry and Security of the U.S. Department of Commerce will fully implement the Verified End User (VEU) system for relevant Chinese companies.
② Modification of relevant provisions in accordance with the Wassenaar Agreement
On October 14, 2008, the Bureau of Industry and Security of the U.S. Department of Commerce issued a final announcement, announcing that in accordance with the Wassenaar Agreement at the end of 2007 The revised opinions reached at the plenary meeting of the "Agreement" and the provisions related to solar cells reached at the plenary meeting at the end of 2006 modify the export management regulations. The announcement adds export license requirements for the following exports: exports and re-exports under section 742.4(a) of the Export Control Regulations, and specific software and technologies related to specific solar cells, solar panels and solar devices under the ECCN3D001 and 3E001 catalogs. The purpose of this export control is to ensure that the above-mentioned products do not pose a military threat to other countries. In addition, in order to implement the modifications related to dual-use goods and technologies in the Wassenaar Agreement, the Bureau of Industry and Security of the U.S. Department of Commerce revised ECCN Catalog 1 (raw materials, chemicals, microorganisms and drugs), ECCN Catalog 2 (raw material production processes), ECCN Catalog 3 (Electrical Products), ECCN Catalog 5 Category 1 (Radio Communications), ECCN Catalog 6 (Sensors), ECCN Catalog 7 (Navigation and Avionics Equipment), ECCN Catalog 9 (Propulsion Systems, Aircraft and Related Equipment) related definitions. In order to comply with the relevant provisions of the Wassenaar Agreement, the announcement also revised the ECCN catalog in the 27 commercial control lists, and added catalogs 1A006 (Equipment specially designed to deal with improvised explosive devices and their components) and 1A007 (Power generation equipment and installations).
③ Modification of the Commerce Control List
The Bureau of Industry and Security of the U.S. Department of Commerce has been conducting regular reviews of the Commerce Control List (CCL) since 2007. In April and October 2008, the Bureau of Industry and Security of the U.S. Department of Commerce issued two final announcements on periodic review. The announcement issued on April 23 (effective on April 18) mainly made technical corrections and classifications to parts 748 and 774 of the commercial control list.
The announcement issued on October 6 (effective on October 14) substantially revised the business control list, including:
First, clarification of existing controls, Such as the revision of the list of "related controls" and "clauses";
Second, deletion of redundant or outdated controls; such as ECCN 4A994 (supercomputer systems with operation rates exceeding 0.5 petaflops) controls Items (d), (e), (g), (h), (k) (1) are deleted from the article, and item (b) (digital computer) clarifies that digital computers include signal processing and image processing For equipment with enhanced functions, the regulatory threshold is increased from a maximum operating speed exceeding 0.0001WT (Weighted teraflops) (computer speed unit: weighted teraflops) to a maximum operating speed exceeding 0.0128WT; ECCN 5A991 (communication equipment) deleted 3 outdated technical parameters have been added;
Third, establish more centralized and reasonable controls;
Fourth, add new controls to be consistent with the international system or to make it clearer , including the addition of new items and new control reasons. Among them, the newly added controlled items include "stored procedures", "data conversion" and "data packet switching and routing". The new reason for adding controls under ECCN 1A002 (composite frames or pressure plates) is that the relevant controls will not only apply to the items under this item, but also to the technology related to the items.
The communiqué also made two amendments to the Export Control Regulations: (1) In Appendix 7 of Part 742 (Description of Main Weapon Systems), it was clarified that aircraft models do not belong to this part "Unmanned aerial vehicles" as referred to in (Missiles and Missile Launchers). (2) When Part 744 involves "restrictions on the end-use of certain military properties in China", it is mainly clarified that the items to which the "general restrictions" are applicable include those listed in Appendix 2 of Part 744 Items subject to the Export Control Regulations.
The purpose of this clarification is mainly because the original definition of items in Part 742 is relatively broad. The scope of items involved includes both items specified in the Export Control Regulations and items that are not within the above scope.
4. Trade remedy system
(1) Basic management system
The US trade remedy system can be divided into two aspects: affecting imports and affecting exports. The relief measures applicable to imported products are mainly anti-dumping, countervailing and safeguard measures (special safeguard measures against China), as well as Section 337 measures taken against unfair trade practices (mainly infringement of US intellectual property rights). The trade remedies applicable to exported products are mainly the 301 series of measures.
The current main anti-dumping and countervailing law in the United States is the "Tariff Act of 1930", and the specific administrative regulations are distributed in Title 19 of the "Codification of Federal Regulations" in the United States. The Import Trade Administration of the International Trade Department of the U.S. Department of Commerce is responsible for the investigation of dumping and subsidies and the calculation of dumping subsidy margins, and the U.S. International Trade Commission is responsible for the investigation of industrial damage. The President may impose safeguard measures on certain imported products pursuant to the authority authorized by Sections 201 to 204 of the Trade Act of 1974. For imported products suspected of infringing on U.S. intellectual property rights, the United States mainly protects the rights and interests of U.S. intellectual property holders through Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The U.S. International Trade Commission is the enforcement agency of Section 337. The agency can issue exclusion orders directing Customs to prohibit the import of goods that infringe on U.S. intellectual property rights.
Section 301 of the "Trade Act of 1974" is to safeguard the rights and interests of U.S. companies under existing trade agreements, expand overseas market access for U.S. products and services, and oppose foreign infringements of intellectual property rights and other behaviors that affect the export of U.S. products. The main laws relied upon. The law provides specific procedures for the U.S. Trade Representative to investigate foreign violations and negotiate with foreign governments to seek solutions. The specific implementation of the 301 series of provisions is carried out by the Office of the United States Trade Representative.
(2) Progress in 2008
① The Ministry of Commerce revised the regulations on the nature of processing or contractors in anti-dumping investigations
On March 28, 2008, the United States The Department of Commerce announced temporary regulations and announced the immediate repeal of the original U.S. Department of Commerce Anti-dumping Regulations 19CFR351.401(h) that imposes restrictions on processors or contractors when determining export prices, structural export prices, fair values ??and normal values ??in anti-dumping investigations. practice.
According to the original regulations, if the processor or contractor of the product under investigation does not obtain ownership of the product under investigation and does not control the related sales of the product under investigation, it should not be recognized as the owner of the product under investigation. Manufacturer or producer.
The U.S. Department of Commerce stated that the original intention of the original regulations was to ensure that when the production of the product under investigation is subcontracted to another company, the Department of Commerce can focus on determining the dumping margin of the product under investigation. Parties investigating product prices. However, the U.S. Court of International Trade held that this provision allowed U.S. companies that should have been recognized as purchasers of the products under investigation to obtain "foreign producer status," thereby affecting the U.S. Department of Commerce's determination of export prices and structures in the calculation of dumping margins. Export price, fair value and normal value cannot meet the stated objectives of the regulations. This finding by the Court of International Trade will limit the Department of Commerce’s discretion and require the Department to identify the wrong entity as the seller of the product under investigation. This is inconsistent with the Ministry of Commerce's duty to provide relief to domestic industries, so the Ministry of Commerce decided to discontinue this provision and adopt a case-by-case approach in future cases. This temporary provision came into effect on March 28, 2008.
This rule modification means that processing trade enterprises are more likely to be identified as manufacturers or producers of the products under investigation, and the pressure to respond will also increase.
② The Department of Commerce announces corporate wage standards in anti-dumping investigations into non-market economy countries
In anti-dumping investigation procedures involving non-market economies, the U.S. Department of Commerce has long calculated for them A hypothetical non-market economy wage alternative is used. These assumed non-market economy wages are calculated annually. The U.S. Business Section two-step calculation of annual wage levels in non-market economies. First, the least squares regression is used to analyze the relationship between hourly wage rate (data comes from the International Labor Organization's "Labor Statistics Yearbook") and per capita national income (data comes from the World Bank).
Secondly, the per capita national income of non-market economies recognized by the Ministry of Commerce is substituted into the regression results to obtain the assumed hourly wage rate of non-market economies.
On April 11, 2008, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced the assumed wages for non-market economies in 2007, among which the wage in China was US$1.06/hour. This time, the U.S. Department of Commerce estimated based on the hourly wage rates (data from the International Labor Organization's Labor Statistics Yearbook) and per capita national income (data from the World Bank) of 61 market economy countries, including China, Belarus, Armenia, Hourly wage rates in 10 non-market economies including Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. Among the published wage standards, China’s wage standards rank second after Belarus.
③ The Department of Commerce solicits comments on the issue of targeted dumping in the anti-dumping investigation
On May 9, 2008, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued an announcement in the Federal Register regarding the issue of targeted dumping in the anti-dumping investigation. The methods for identifying and analyzing dumping are soliciting public comments.
The U.S. Department of Commerce issued an announcement on October 25, 2007 to solicit a round of comments. In anti-dumping investigations, the U.S. Department of Commerce usually calculates the dumping margin using a weighted average versus weighted average or transaction versus transaction method. At the same time, U.S. law stipulates that if the export price pattern is significantly different due to different buyers, regions, and time periods, The presence of target dumping can be determined, allowing a weighted average pair of transactions to be used. In the last announcement, the U.S. Department of Commerce sought public comments on how to determine targeted dumping. In this announcement, the U.S. Department of Commerce announced its preliminary methods for identifying and analyzing targeted dumping, and once again solicited public comments on this method.
④ The U.S. Department of Commerce solicits comments on the issue of below-cost testing in anti-dumping investigations
On May 9, 2008, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued an announcement in the Federal Register regarding anti-dumping The below-cost testing question in the survey seeks public comment. The U.S. Department of Commerce explained that when calculating normal value, it considers sales in the normal course of trade, and whether a certain sale belongs to the normal course of trade requires a below-cost test. However, the law does not require the use of a single time period or multiple time periods as the period for calculating costs. In the vast majority of cases, the Department uses the investigation period or review period as the single time period for calculating costs. In a limited number of cases, the Department of Commerce has used shorter time periods. This time, the U.S. Department of Commerce seeks comments on whether and under what circumstances a shorter period should be adopted.
⑤ The U.S. International Trade Commission modifies the Section 337 investigation procedure
On July 7, 2008, the U.S. International Trade Commission announced new regulations on the Section 337 investigation procedure, and in August 2008 It officially comes into effect on the 6th. The new rules will have an impact on pending and future cases before the International Trade Commission.
This new rule is used to regulate the investigation of the International Trade Commission. Many modifications are procedural, and the more important modifications mainly involve the following four aspects:
First, regarding Written materials should be submitted when applying for investigation. The International Trade Commission has modified the content of Section 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations 210.12(a)(9)(viii). The applicant shall attach a patent claim diagram associated with its independent patent litigation claim to the complaint. Previously, plaintiffs were required to provide only sample claims for each patent. In addition, the patentee may still assert dependent claims without providing a claim diagram.
Second, regarding the requirement to submit a licensing contract. The newly revised section 210.12(a) of Title 19 of the Code of Federal Regulations first adds new sections (9)(iv), (10)(i), and (10)(ii) to reduce the number of licenses that prosecutors must submit. The number of contract copies has been reduced from the previous requirement of three copies of each patent licensing contract to the requirement of only one copy. At the same time, the International Trade Commission also revised the content of (c)(1), (d), (f), and (g) to stipulate that only if the plaintiff needs to do so through its own licensing behavior or through the behavior of its licensee in its home country Submission of the above licensing contract documents is necessary when seeking to satisfy the jurisdictional requirements of domestic industry.
Third, regarding the investigation period.
The newly revised Code of Federal Regulations 19 Sections 210.42, 210.43, and 210.51 extend the investigation period that the administrative law judge can set from 15 months to 16 months. At the same time, unless otherwise provided by the International Trade Commission, the administrative judge must submit a preliminary decision on whether Section 337 has been violated to the International Trade Commission four months (rather than just three months) before the expiration of the investigation period set above.
Fourth, regarding the page limit requirements for the request for reconsideration. For the "preliminary decision" made by the administrative judge, any party may submit a review to the International Trade Commission. Previously, since there was no page limit for the reconsideration letter, the reconsideration letter could usually be several hundred pages long. The newly revised Code of Federal Regulations 19 210.43(b)(1) stipulates that when a petition for reconsideration exceeds 50 pages, its summary shall not exceed 10 pages, and the petition for reconsideration shall be limited to 100 pages. (Except for abstracts and other physical displays). Because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit also imposed a 30-page limit, the 100-page limit applies to any type of dispute that a party may appeal to federal court.