`UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`
`
`
` Inv. No. 337-TA-1279
`
`In the Matter of
`
`CERTAIN FLOCKED SWABS, PRODUCTS
`CONTAINIG FLOCKED SWABS, AND
`METHODS OF USING SAME
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INITIAL DETERMINATION FINDING RESPONDENT HUNAN
`RUNMEI GENE TECHNOLOGY CO. LTD. IN DEFAULT
`
`ORDER NO. 27:
`
`(November 15, 2021)
`
`On October 12, 2021, Respondent Hunan Runmei Gene Technology Co. Ltd. (“Runmei”)
`
`filed a “Notice of Election to Default” (EDIS Doc. ID 753942). In its notice, Runmei states that
`
`it, “having considered the ongoing burden and expense of participation in this investigation,
`
`hereby elects to raise no further defense in this investigation and default.” Notice at 1.
`
` In its notice, Runmei cites Commission Rule 210.17, which allows a respondent to “file
`
`a notice of intent to default with the presiding administrative law judge at any time before the
`
`filing of the final initial determination.” 19 CFR § 210.17 (h). This provision, however, is
`
`inapplicable as it is for a respondent who “has filed a response to the complaint or notice of
`
`investigation.” Id.; see also 78 FR 23474-487 at 23475 (Apr. 19, 2013) (“If the named
`
`respondent has responded to the complaint or notice of investigation, then the default resulting
`
`from a notice of intent to default is under § 210.17.”). Although Runmei’s deadline to respond to
`
`the complaint and notice of investigation was extended from September 28, 2021 to October 15,
`
`2021, as of the date of this initial determination, Runmei has not responded to the complaint and
`
`notice investigation. See Order No. 5 (Sept. 5, 2021), EDIS Doc. No. 751704.
`
`
`
`Because Runmei has not responded to the complaint and notice of investigation,
`
`Commission Rule 210.16(b)(3), is the applicable provision. 19 C.F.R. § 210.16(b)(3). Under
`
`this provision, “[i]f a proposed respondent has not filed a response to the complaint and notice of
`
`investigation pursuant to § 210.13 or § 210.59(c) of this chapter, the proposed respondent may
`
`file a notice of intent to default under this section.” Id.; see also 78 FR 23474-487 at 23475
`
`(Apr. 19, 2013) (“If the named respondent has not yet responded to the complaint and notice of
`
`investigation, then the default resulting from a notice of intent to default is under § 210.16.”). If
`
`a respondent files such a notice, the presiding administrative law judge “shall issue an initial
`
`determination finding the proposed respondent in default.” Id. Moreover, the administrative law
`
`judge does not need to issue a show-cause order before doing so but can issue the initial
`
`determination “upon the filing of a notice of intent to default.” 19 C.F.R. § 210.16(b)(3); see
`
`also 78 FR 23474-487 at 23475 (Apr. 19, 2013) (“The Commission has further clarified that a
`
`respondent’s filing of a notice of intent to default eliminates the need for an order to show cause
`
`why the respondent should not be found in default.”).
`
`Accordingly, in view of Runmei’s Notice of Election to Default, it is the initial
`
`determination of the undersigned that Respondent Hunan Runmei Gene Technology Co. Ltd. is
`
`in default. As a defaulting party, under Commission Rule 210.16(b)(4), Runmei has waived its
`
`right to appear, be served with documents, and to contest the allegations at issue in this
`
`investigation. 19 C.F.R. § 210.16(b)(4).
`
` Pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 210.42(h), this Initial Determination shall become the
`
`determination of the Commission unless a party files a petition for review of the Initial
`
`Determination pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 210.43(a), or the Commission, pursuant to 19 C.F.R. §
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`
`210.44, orders on its own motion a review of the Initial Determination or certain issues contained
`
`herein.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`
`
`
`
`___________________________________
`Monica Bhattacharyya
`Administrative Law Judge
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
