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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance

Results:1-10 of 24

Export Control Reform comes to night vision and cameras
  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • USA
  • May 29 2015

On May 5, 2015, the State Department's Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) and the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security

Export Control Reform continues with Category XII: night vision and cameras
  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • USA
  • May 20 2015

On May 5, 2015, the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) and the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security

Congressional focus on export controls may lead to greater domestic sales scrutiny
  • Sidley Austin LLP
  • USA
  • December 18 2009

US companies should expect enhanced export enforcement activities focusing on domestic sales as the result of a recent undercover investigation by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

Stepped-up trade regulation enforcement against non-US persons: a growing trend or a flash in the pan?
  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • USA
  • September 24 2009

Non-US citizens living and doing business outside the United States and business entities located and organized in other countries often find it difficult to understand how their wholly non-US sales and other commercial transactions could possibly be subject to US export controls and economic sanctions programs.

NTSB air ambulance safety recommendations
  • Baker & Hostetler LLP
  • USA
  • September 17 2009

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is a uniquely independent federal agency responsible for investigating airplane accidents, determining the probable cause of accidents, and making recommendations to help protect against future accidents.

FLIR Systems, Inc. v. Parrish: a cautionary tale for trade secrets misappropriation plaintiffs
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • July 1 2009

The California Court of Appeal’s recent decision in FLIR Systems, Inc. v. Parrish, 2d Civil No. B209964, 2009 WL 1653103 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. June 15, 2009), affirming a $1.6 million attorney fee award to defendants upon a finding that the action was brought in bad faith, provides a useful and interesting discussion of various factors that may lead a court to conclude that a misappropriation case has been brought in bad faith.

Recent enforcement actions and updates
  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • USA
  • March 20 2009

Qioptiq S.a.r.l., a Luxembourg-based optics company, entered into a consent agreement with the DDTC to pay US$25 million in fines and remedial compliance measures to settle 163 alleged violations of the ITAR.

Federal Court in California imposes maximum sentence under plea deal in first ever sentencing under the Economic Espionage Act of 1996
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • June 20 2008

United States v. Meng, No. CR 04-20216 JF (U.S.D.C. N.D. Calif.). Judge Jeremy Fogel of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in San Jose today imposed a 24-month prison sentence on Xiaodong Sheldon Meng, who pleaded guilty to possessing night vision software for pilots belonging to Quantum3D, his former employer, and using that information in a sales demonstration to Chinese naval officials.

Managing health claims for foods in Canada
  • Gowling WLG
  • Canada
  • December 6 2007

Health Canada released a discussion paper on November 30, 2007 entitled "Managing Health Claims for Foods in Canada - Discussion Paper, 2007" for the purpose of examining possible changes to the current framework for managing health claims on foods.

New China Policy Rule: “catch-all” or only “catch-lots”?
  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • USA, China
  • September 5 2007

The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) of the US Department of Commerce recently published its much anticipated China Policy Rule (China Rule).