Certain Electric Power Tools, Battery Cartridges, and ... - USITC

6arguments, as required by the governing Commission rule.Alleged error inthe legal standards applied in the violation ID, as discussed in Makita'smotion, is a matter Makita could have raised U/ -- and in fact didraise JJ/ -- in its petition for review of the ID.Under Commissionprecedent, a motion for reconsideration that purports to address a newissue, but essentially is nothing more than a reassertion of arguments theCommission previously rejected, is properly denied. U/The Commission also does not find that there is good reason in thisinstance for exercising its discretion to waive the requirement that amotion for reconsideration be based on a new question raised by thecontested determination. U/ As the parties opposing Makita's motion havepointed out, p&E is not controlling precedent for the Commission'spurposes, since it was not decided by the U.S, Court of Appeals for theFederal Circuit (which is the court of review for Commission determinationsunder section 337 U/).Moreover, unlike the federal court decisions thathave prompted the Commission to determine whether to reconsider or modifyits determinations in previous investigations, pBE does not involve theU/ &!E 19 C.F.R. § 210.54(a)(1).ComDare the Motion for Reconsideration (Motion No. 284-139) at 2-12 and15-18 &,h Makita's Petition for Review at 9-41 and 66-88.21 &!E, u, Inv. No. 337-TA-252, Certain Heaw - Dutv Mobile Scrao Shears,Commission Order at 2, paragraph 1 (June 12, 1989).1l/ Under Commission rule 201.4(b), the Commission may waive or suspend aCommission rule when, in its judgment, there is good and sufficient reasonfor doing so and the rule is not a matter of procedure required by law,& 19 C.F.R. § 201.4(b) (1989).I&/ &!E 19 U.S.C.§ 1337(c).