We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-6 of 6

Major change in application of US countervailing duty law to China

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • China, USA
  • -
  • December 21 2011

Yesterday, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued a major international trade law determination in GPX International Tire Corp. v. United States holding that the US Countervailing Duty Law does not apply to China, Vietnam and other nonmarket economy countries

Part II: The SEC and Chinese issuers: transparency and accountability

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • China, USA
  • -
  • August 1 2012

This is the second segment of a five part series examining issues arising in SEC Enforcement Actions relating to issuers from the PRC whose shares are traded in the U.S

Another SEC action against a Chinese issuer

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • China, USA
  • -
  • September 4 2012

Chinese companies that went public through a reverse merger continue to be the subject of Commission enforcement actions

The SEC and Chinese issuers: transparency and accountability

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • China, USA
  • -
  • August 1 2012

This is the first segment of a five part series examining issues arising in SEC Enforcement Actions relating to issuers from the PRC whose shares are traded in the U.S

Part V: the SEC and Chinese issuers: transparency and accountability

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • China, USA
  • -
  • August 6 2012

This is the fifth and concluding segment of a series examining issues arising in SEC Enforcement Actions relating to issuers from the PRC whose shares are traded in the U.S

Will Morrison end the debate over PRC based audit work papers?

  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • -
  • China, USA
  • -
  • January 15 2013

In Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 136 S.Ct. 2869 (2010) the Supreme Court held that Exchange Act Section 10(b) only reaches to the water's