DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,290

RIGAKU INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF RIGAKU AMERICAS HOLDING COMPANY
SAXS SYSTEMS
AUBURN HILLS, MICHIGAN

Notice of Negative Determination
After Statutory Reconsideration

As required by the Trade Adjustment Assistance Reauthorization
Act of 2015 (TAARA 2015), which was enacted as Title IV of the
Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law No. 114-27,
section 405(a)(1)(A), the investigation into this petition was
reopened for a reconsideration investigation to apply the
requirements for worker group eligibility under chapter 2 of title
II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended by the TAARA 2015, to the
facts of this petition (statutory reconsideration).
The initial investigation, initiated May 7, 2014, resulted in
a negative determination, issued on June 5, 2014, that was based on
predominate cause of layoffs not relating to shift in production to
a foreign country or increased imports. The determination was
applicable to workers and former workers of Rigaku Innovative
Technologies, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Rigaku Americas
Holding Company, SAXS Systems, Auburn Hills, Michigan (herein
referred to as “Rigaku Innovative Technologies, Inc.”). The
workers’ firm is engaged in activities related to the production of
X-Ray Analytical Systems as well as SAXS Systems and both of their
components.
Based on information reviewed during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department of Labor determines that there was no
shift in production to a foreign country, no acquisition from a
foreign country, no company or customer imports, no decision of
import injury from the International Trade Commission, or no
secondary impact from a Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) certified
firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of articles like or directly
competitive with X-Ray Analytical Systems and SAXS Systems did
not increase from 2012 to 2013 or from January through April 2013
to January through April 2014.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the production
of X-Ray Analytical Systems and SAXS Systems or a like or
directly competitive article to a foreign country or acquire X-
Ray Analytical Systems and SAXS Systems or a like or directly
competitive article from a foreign country.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that Rigaku Innovative Technologies, Inc.
is not a Supplier or a Downstream Producer to a firm that
employed a group of workers who received a certification of
eligibility under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied either because Criterion
(1) has not been met since the workers’ firm has not been publicly
identified by name by the International Trade Commission as a
member of a domestic industry in an investigation resulting in an
affirmative finding of serious injury, market disruption, or
material injury, or threat thereof.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that the requirements of
Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272, have not been met and,
therefore, deny the petition for group eligibility of Rigaku
Innovative Technologies, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of
Rigaku Americas Holding Company, SAXS Systems, Auburn Hills,
Michigan, who were engaged in employment related to production of
X-Ray Analytical Systems as well as SAXS Systems and both of their
components to apply for adjustment assistance, in accordance with
Section 223 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 4th day of December, 2015


/s/Jacquelyn R. Mendelsohn
______________________________
JACQUELYN R. MENDELSOHN
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,290

RIGAKU INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF RIGAKU AMERICAS HOLDING COMPANY
SAXS SYSTEMS
AUBURN HILLS, MICHIGAN

Negative Determinations Regarding Eligibility
To Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance
And Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended ("Act"), 19 U.S.C. § 2273, the Department of Labor
herein presents the results of an investigation regarding
certification of eligibility to apply for worker adjustment
assistance.
Workers of a firm may be eligible for worker adjustment
assistance if they satisfy the criteria of subsection (a) and
(b) of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a) and (b). For
the Department of Labor to issue a certification for workers
under Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), the
following three criteria must be met:
(1) The first criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(1) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a)(1)) requires that a significant
number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm,
or an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become
totally or partially separated, or are threatened to become
totally or partially separated
(2) The second criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(2) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a)(2)) may be satisfied in one of two
ways:
(A) Increased Imports Path:
(i) sales or production, or both, at the workers' firm
must have decreased absolutely, AND
(ii) imports of articles like or directly competitive with
articles produced by such firm or subdivision have
increased; and
(iii) the increase described in clause (ii) contributed
importantly to such workers' separation or threat of
separation and to the decline in the sales or
production of such firm or subdivision.

(B) Shift in Production Path:
(i) there has been a shift in production by such workers'
firm or subdivision to a foreign country of articles
like or directly competitive with articles which are
produced by such firm or subdivision; and
(ii)(I) the country to which the workers' firm has
shifted production of the articles is a party to a
free trade agreement with the United States;
(II)the country to which the workers' firm has
shifted production of the articles is a beneficiary
country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African
Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin
Economic Recovery Act; or
(III)there has been or is likely to be an increase
in imports of articles that are like or directly
competitive with articles which are or were produced
by such firm or subdivision.

For the Department to issue a secondary worker
certification under Section 222(b) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. §
2272(b), to workers of a Supplier or a Downstream Producer, the
following criteria must be met:
(1) a significant number or proportion of the workers in
the workers' firm or an appropriate subdivision of the
firm have become totally or partially separated, or
are threatened to become totally or partially
separated;

(2) the workers' firm is a Supplier or Downstream Producer
to a firm that employed a group of workers who
received a certification of eligibility under Section
222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), and such
supply or production is related to the article that
was the basis for such certification; and

(3) either
(A) the workers' firm is a supplier and the component
parts it supplied to the firm described in paragraph
(2) accounted for at least 20 percent of the
production or sales of the workers' firm; or
(B) a loss of business by the workers' firm with the firm
described in paragraph (2) contributed importantly to
the workers' separation or threat of separation.

Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), defines the
terms "Supplier" and "Downstream Producer."
The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
filed on May 7, 2014 by an American Job Center on behalf of
workers of Rigaku Innovative Technologies, Inc., a wholly owned
subsidiary of Rigaku Americas Holding Company, SAXS Systems,
Auburn Hills, Michigan. The workers' firm is engaged in
activities related to the production of X-Ray Analytical Systems
and SAXS Systems.
The petitioner alleges that, "Production of small angle
scattering x-ray cameras (SAXS) was shifted to Rigaku in Japan
as well as other equipment."
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm and the petitioner.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the shift in production of X-Ray
Analytical Systems as well as SAXS Systems and both of their
components to a foreign country did not contribute importantly
to the worker separations at the subject firm.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(iii), the
investigation revealed that imports of articles like or
directly competitive with the X-Ray Analytical Systems and
SAXS Systems did not increase from 2012 to 2013 or from
January through April 2013 to January through April 2014.
The investigation revealed that Rigaku is not a Supplier or
a Downstream Producer to a firm that employed a group of workers
who received a certification of eligibility under Section 222(a)
of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a).
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
(ATAA), the worker group must be certified eligible to apply for
trade adjustment assistance (TAA). Since the workers are denied
eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot be certified
eligible for ATAA.


Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that all workers of Rigaku Innovative
Technologies, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Rigaku
Americas Holding Company, SAXS Systems, Auburn Hills, Michigan
are denied eligibility to apply for adjustment assistance under
Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, and are also
denied eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment
assistance under Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974, amended.
Signed in Washington, D.C. this 5th day of June, 2014

/s/Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICAHEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance