Episode 372 -- DOJ Applies False Claims Act to Tariff and Trade Violations
Hot Topics in International Trade - Tariff Mitigation Strategies
Daily Compliance News: May 30, 2025, The Leissner Sentenced Edition
Regulatory Ramblings: Episode 70 – Lessons for Compliance from a Law Enforcement Career + Regional Geopolitical Risks in 2025 with Mark Nuttall and Steve Vickers
Daily Compliance News: May 21, 2025, The I Want You Back Edition
Hot Topics in International Trade Terrified by Tariffs Braumiller Law
2 Gurus Talk Compliance: Episode 52 – The Big Jet Plane Edition
10 For 10: Top Compliance Stories For the Week Ending May 10, 2025
Daily Compliance News: May 6, 2025 the Made in China Edition
Daily Compliance News: May 5, 2025, The Washing Edition
Daily Compliance News: April 30, 2025, The 4 AM Wake-Up Call Edition
10 For 10: Top Compliance Stories For the Week Ending April 26, 2025
Daily Compliance News: April 25, 2025, The Trouble in Travel Edition
What's the Buzz in the Battery World With Roger Miksad, BCI – Battery + Storage Podcast
State AG Pulse | “Don’t Mess With Our Health or Our Kids!”
Daily Compliance News: April 21, 2025, The Tribute to Pope Francis Edition
Daily Compliance News: April 17, 2025, The Musk Fights BEE's Edition
Tit For Tat US China Trade War
Daily Compliance News: April 14, 2025, The Cascade of Corruption Edition
Sunday Book Review: April 13, 2025, The Books on Trade and Tariffs Edition
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently rejected challenges to a district court’s decision to confirm a Hong Kong arbitration award, including arguments that confirming the award violated public policy and international...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently issued a decision in In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation, reversing a $148 million price-fixing judgment against two Chinese exporters of vitamin C, remanding the...more
On August 10, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (the “Second Circuit”) once again drew on principles of international comity to dismiss antitrust price-fixing claims against Chinese vitamin C...more
In a sweeping decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently affirmed a District Court Contempt Order issued against three Chinese banks for failing to comply with U.S. government subpoenas. In...more
In the products arena, it is not every day that foreign law becomes relevant to a domestic lawsuit. When it does, however, it can create confusion and uncertainty amongst the litigants and the court. Although Federal Rule of...more
On June 14, 2018, in Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co., the Supreme Court held that Courts are not obliged to accept statements from a foreign government agency on the meaning and effects of...more
The Supreme Court has ruled US federal courts should carefully consider a foreign government’s interpretation of its own domestic laws, but are not required to give it conclusive effect. Key Points - ..The Supreme...more
International dispute practitioners are well aware of the challenges that arise when the substance of foreign law is disputed in U.S. courts. Most practitioners are aware that the question is governed by Rule 44.1 of the...more
The Situation: In Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co., the defendants in an anticompetition matter—who were China-based manufacturers of vitamin C—claimed that Chinese law required them to...more
In a 9-0 opinion delivered by Justice Ruth Ginsburg, the United States Supreme Court last week ruled that the federal courts are not “bound to accord conclusive effect” to a foreign government’s statement of its own law under...more
Rejecting an earlier appellate case that allowed Chinese companies to escape liability in the United States for allegations of price fixing because their government said it was not illegal under Chinese law, the U.S. Supreme...more
Is a federal court determining foreign law required to treat as conclusive a submission from a foreign government interpreting its law? The U.S. Supreme Court confronted this question in a case involving price-fixing claims...more
Alert: The Supreme Court clarified the principles of international comity this week in a ruling pertaining to the long-running vitamin C antitrust class action litigation. International comity is the recognition a nation...more
On June 14, Justice Ginsberg, writing for a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court, reversed a 2016 opinion by the Second Circuit and held that a foreign government’s interpretation of its own law is not binding on U.S. courts....more
On June 14, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., No. 16-1220, holding that a federal court determining foreign law under Fed. R. Civ. P....more
The Supreme Court ruled today that, when a foreign government presents a formal submission to a federal court about the content of the government’s own laws, the court should accord “respectful consideration” to the...more
On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States will hear arguments on the issue of whether a court may exercise independent review of the meaning of a foreign country’s domestic law, or whether a court is “bound to...more
On January 12, 2018, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Animal Science Products v. Hebei Welcome Pharmaceutical Co. (In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation), No. 16-1220. The issue before the Supreme Court is...more
On Friday, January 12, 2018, the United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeal of two Vitamin C purchasers in what has become known as In re: Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation. Appellants are seeking to overturn a 2016...more
The U.S. Supreme Court on June 26, 2017, took the somewhat unusual step of inviting the Acting Solicitor General to express the views of the United States regarding Animal Science Products, Inc. v. Hebei Welcome...more
Last week, the Second Circuit affirmed that U.S. courts should, and indeed must, defer to a foreign government’s interpretation of its own laws. That should hardly be a controversial proposition, but up until now, lower...more
The Second Circuit recently set aside a $147 million verdict against two Chinese companies accused of conspiring to fix the price and supply of vitamin C sold to U.S. buyers. In re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation. The panel...more
On September 20, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued its decision in a closely watched dispute over the question of whether foreign companies may be held liable under U.S. antitrust law for price...more
On Tuesday, the Second Circuit in In Re Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation vacated a $147 million award against two Chinese companies for engaging in anti-competitive behavior. At issue was how a federal court should respond...more
Forced to choose between the competing concerns of international comity and United States antitrust law in In re: Vitamin C Antitrust Litigation, a unanimous panel of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decided this...more