Sie sind auf Seite 1von 2


Notices Federal Register

Vol. 71, No. 115

Thursday, June 15, 2006

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER the collection of information unless it DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
contains documents other than rules or displays a currently valid OMB control
proposed rules that are applicable to the number. Agricultural Research Service
public. Notices of hearings and investigations,
committee meetings, agency decisions and Rural Utilities Service Notice of Intent To Grant Exclusive
rulings, delegations of authority, filing of License
petitions and applications and agency Title: Lien Accommodations and
statements of organization and functions are Subordinations 7 CFR Part 1717,
examples of documents appearing in this Subparts R and S. AGENCY: Agricultural Research Service,
section. USDA.
OMB Control Number: 0572–0100.
Summary of Collection: The Rural ACTION: Notice of intent.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Electrification Act (RE Act) of 1936, 7
U.S.C. 901 et seq., as amended, SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
Submission for OMB Review; authorizes and empowers the the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Comment Request Administrator of the Rural Utilities Agricultural Research Service, intends
Service (RUS) to make loans in the to grant to Becton Dickinson of Sparks,
June 9, 2006. Maryland, an exclusive license to U.S.
several States and Territories of the
The Department of Agriculture has United States for rural electrification Patent No. 5,891,709, ‘‘Campy-Cefex
submitted the following information and the furnishing electric energy to selective and differential medium for
collection requirement(s) to OMB for persons in rural areas who are not campylobacter’’, issued on April 6,
review and clearance under the 1999. Notice is hereby given that the
receiving central station service. The RE
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Act also authorizes and empowers the
Public Law 104–13. Comments
Administrator of RUS to provide Agricultural Research Service, intends
regarding (a) whether the collection of
financial assistance to borrowers for to grant to Becton Dickinson of Sparks,
information is necessary for the proper
purposes provided in the RE Act by Maryland, an exclusive license to U.S.
performance of the functions of the
accommodating or subordinating loans Patent No. 6,368,847, ‘‘Selective media
agency, including whether the
made by the National Rural Utilities for recovery and enumeration of
information will have practical utility;
Cooperative Finance Corporation, the campylobacters’’, issued on April 9,
(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
Federal Financing Bank, and other 2002.
of burden including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (c) lending agencies.
Need and Use of the Information: DATES: Comments must be received by
ways to enhance the quality, utility and
RUS will used the information to July 17, 2006.
clarity of the information to be
collected; (d) ways to minimize the determine an applicant’s eligibility for a ADDRESSES: Send comments to: USDA,
burden of the collection of information lien accommodation or lien ARS, Office of Technology Transfer,
on those who are to respond, including subordination under the RE Act; 5601 Sunnyside Avenue, Rm. 4–1174,
through the use of appropriate facilitates an applicant’s solicitation and Beltsville, Maryland 20705–5131.
automated, electronic, mechanical, or acquisition of non-RUS loans as to
other technological collection converse available Government funds; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: June
techniques or other forms of information monitor the compliance of borrowers Blalock of the Office of Technology
technology should be addressed to: Desk with debt covenants and regulatory Transfer at the Beltsville address given
Officer for Agriculture, Office of requirements in order to protect loan above; telephone: 301–504–5989.
Information and Regulatory Affairs, security; and subsequently to granting SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Office of Management and Budget the lien accommodation of lien Federal Government’s patent rights in
(OMB), subordination, administer each so as to the inventions are assigned to the
OIRA_Submission@OMB.EOP.GOV or minimize its cost to the Government. If
United States of America, as represented
fax (202) 395–5806 and to Departmental the information were not collected, RUS
by the Secretary of Agriculture. It is in
Clearance Office, USDA, OCIO, Mail would not be able to accomplish its
the public interest to so license the
Stop 7602, Washington, DC 20250– statutory goals.
7602. Comments regarding these inventions as Becton Dickinson of
Description of Respondents: Not-for- Sparks, Maryland has submitted a
information collections are best assured profit institutions; Business or other for-
of having their full effect if received complete and sufficient application for
profit. a license. The prospective exclusive
within 30 days of this notification.
Copies of the submission(s) may be Number of Respondents: 12. license will be royalty-bearing and will
obtained by calling (202) 720–8681. Frequency of Responses: Reporting: comply with the terms and conditions
An agency may not conduct or On occasion. of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7. The
sponsor a collection of information Total Burden Hours: 233. prospective exclusive license may be
unless the collection of information granted unless, within thirty (30) days
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES

displays a currently valid OMB control Charlene Parker, from the date of this published Notice,
number and the agency informs Departmental Information Collection the Agricultural Research Service
potential persons who are to respond to Clearance Officer. receives written evidence and argument
the collection of information that such [FR Doc. E6–9333 Filed 6–14–06; 8:45 am] which establishes that the grant of the
persons are not required to respond to BILLING CODE 3410–15–P license would not be consistent with the

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:47 Jun 14, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15JNN1.SGM 15JNN1
34590 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 115 / Thursday, June 15, 2006 / Notices

requirements of 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 Comments should identify the person a. Is a provision that would allow
CFR 404.7. or organization submitting the removal of state indirect purchaser
comments. If comments are submitted actions necessary or desirable, in light
Richard J. Brenner,
by an organization, the submission of the generally applicable removal
Assistant Administrator. should identify a contact person within provisions contained in the Class Action
[FR Doc. E6–9351 Filed 6–14–06; 8:45 am] the organization. Comments should Fairness Act?
BILLING CODE 3410–03–P include the following contact b. Is preemption of state indirect
information for the submitter: an purchaser actions necessary or desirable
address, telephone number, and email if state indirect purchaser actions may
ANTITRUST MODERNIZATION address (if available). Comments be removed to Federal court?
COMMISSION submitted to the Commission will be c. Should the Commission also
made available to the public in recommend to Congress that courts be
Request for Public Comment accordance with Federal laws. required to use structured proceedings
AGENCY: Antitrust Modernization Comments may be submitted either in to resolve purchaser claims? Those
Commission. hard copy or electronic form. Electronic proceedings would resolve liability in
submissions may be sent by electronic the one phase, determine total damages
ACTION: Request for public comment.
mail to Comments in another, and allocate damages among
SUMMARY: The Antitrust Modernization submitted in hard copy should be direct and indirect claimants in a
Commission requests comments from delivered to the address specified above, separate phase. Would structured
the public regarding specific questions and should enclose, if possible, a CD– proceedings work better if courts could
relating to the issues selected for ROM or a 31⁄2 inch computer diskette combine certain phases of the
Commission study. containing an electronic copy of the proceedings, especially liability and
comment. The Commission prefers to total damages, in appropriate cases in
DATES: Comments are due by July 10,
receive electronic documents (whether the exercise of their discretion?
2006. d. To what extent would the
by email or on CD–ROM/diskette) in
ADDRESSES: By electronic mail: portable document format (.pdf), but legislative overruling of Hanover Shoe By mail: Antitrust also will accept comments in Microsoft create new challenges in the process of
Modernization Commission, Attn: Word format. certifying appropriate classes of
Public Comments, 1120 G Street, NW., The AMC has issued this request for claimants? Can any such challenges be
Suite 810, Washington, DC 20005. comments pursuant to its authorizing resolved fully through the structured
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: statute and the Federal Advisory approach suggested in (c) above?
Andrew J. Heimert, Executive Director & Committee Act. Antitrust Modernization 2. The Commission is evaluating a
General Counsel, Antitrust Commission Act of 2002, Public Law proposal to alter the circumstances in
Modernization Commission. Telephone: 107–273, § 11053, 116 Stat. 1758, 1856; which treble damages are awarded to
(202) 233–0701; e-mail: Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 successful antitrust plaintiffs. The
Internet: U.S.C. App., 10(a)(3). proposal would provide as follows:
The court, in its discretion, may limit
Topic for Comment the award to single damages based on
Antitrust Modernization Commission
The Commission requests comment consideration of the following factors:
was established to ‘‘examine whether
on the following topic. a. Whether the violation was per se or
the need exists to modernize the
rule of reason;
antitrust laws and to identify and study Civil Remedies b. whether the violation involved
related issues.’’ Antitrust Modernization single-firm or multi-firm conduct;
Commission Act of 2002, Public Law 1. The Commission is evaluating a
c. whether the violation was related to
107–273, § 11053, 116 Stat. 1856. In proposal to reform indirect purchaser
an otherwise pro-competitive joint
conducting its review of the antitrust litigation. The potential reform would
laws, the Commission is required to consist of three principal components: d. the state of the development of the
‘‘solicit the views of all parties (1) Legislative overruling of Illinois law with respect to the challenged
concerned with the operation of the Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 720 (1977), conduct as an antitrust violation;
antitrust laws.’’ Id. By this request for so that indirect purchaser claims could e. whether the challenged conduct
comments, the Commission seeks to be brought under federal antitrust law, was overt or covert;
provide a full opportunity for interested and Hanover Shoe, Inc. v. United Shoe f. whether the challenged conduct
members of the public to provide input Machinery, 392 U.S. 481 (1968), so as to was criminal;
regarding certain issues selected for allow assertion of the pass-on defense; g. whether there has also been a
Commission study. From time to time, (2) Statutory provisions either (a) to related government action;
the Commission may issue additional allow removal of all state indirect h. whether it is a competitor that is
requests for comment on issues selected purchaser actions to federal court to the alleging the conduct was
for study. full extent permitted under Article III, anticompetitive; and,
Comments should be submitted in or (b) to preempt state indirect i. whether the violation was proven
written form. Comments should identify purchaser laws; and (3) Statutory by clear and convincing evidence.
the topic to which it relates. Comments provisions to allow the consolidation of Should the Commission recommend
need not address every question within all related direct and indirect purchaser such reform to Congress? Should any of
the topic. Comments exceeding 1500 actions in a single Federal district court the factors listed above be removed? Are
words should include a brief (less than for pre-trial and trial proceedings. there any other factors that should also
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES

250 word) summary. Commenters may Should the Commission recommend be included?
submit additional background materials such reform to Congress? Should the 3. Should the Commission
(such as articles, data, or other proposal be modified in any respects? In recommend to Congress that courts in
information) relating to the topic by responding, please also comment on the their discretion be permitted to increase
separate attachment. following: the damages multiplier above three? For

VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:47 Jun 14, 2006 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15JNN1.SGM 15JNN1