Information collected under the Export Control Reform Act is “presumptively withheld” from Freedom of Information Act requests, the U.S. said July 14 in a case involving the disclosure of documents related to an addition to the Entity List (Husch Blackwell v. Department of Commerce, D.D.C. # 1:24-02733).
CBP unlawfully excluded importer Maxeon Americas' solar module entries on the basis that the goods were made, in whole or in part, in Xinjiang or by a company on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List, Maxeon argued in a July 15 complaint at the Court of International Trade. The importer said the agency ignored "substantial and persuasive" evidence showing the company's Max6 model solar modules weren't made in Xinjiang or by a listed company, adding that the agency appears to be using an "unreasonably difficult standard" in reviewing whether goods are made in Xinjiang (Maxeon Americas v. United States, CIT # 25-00074).
The U.S. opposed exporter Camel Group's motion to unredact part of the record in the company's case against its placement on the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List, arguing on July 10 that disclosure of information deemed confidential "would substantially harm the Government's" law enforcement efforts in applying the UFLPA. The government told the Court of International Trade it has a "strong interest in protecting the law enforcement sensitive information," while Camel has "no compelling argument as to why disclosure to the public, or to Camel, as opposed to confidential disclosure, is necessary" (Camel Group Co. v. United States, CIT # 25-00022).
The Forced Labor Enforcement Task Force failed to undertake a transparent process in considering exporter Ninestar's application for delisting from the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act Entity List, Ninestar told the Court of International Trade on June 26. Ninestar said FLETF's process was neither "fair, transparent," nor "productive," and led the task force to ignore its obligations and the company's rights under the Administrative Procedure Act (Ninestar Corp. v. United States, CIT # 23-00182).
The U.S. and law firm Husch Blackwell again swapped briefs June 13 in the firm’s Freedom of Information Act dispute. Husch Blackwell said the government, which provided a list of more than 100 disclosed and undisclosed documents related to the firm’s FOIA request regarding an Entity List listing when it filed for summary judgment (see 2505300055), still wasn’t making clear which documents were actually responsive to the request (Husch Blackwell v. Department of Commerce, D.D.C. # 1:24-02733).
A law firm said May 23 that the U.S. was failing to provide documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act partly because it was relying on a “novelly broad” interpretation of the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 (Husch Blackwell v. Department of Commerce, D.D.C. # 1:24-02733).
Alan Estevez, undersecretary of the Bureau of Industry and Security during the Biden administration, has joined Covington & Burling as a senior adviser in the practice groups working on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. and international trade controls. Estevez served as undersecretary for more than three years, during which he oversaw the introduction and implementation of a range of new export control rules to restrict sales of advanced semiconductors and chip-related technology to China; new export restrictions against Russia; the continued expansion of the Entity List; and more.
The U.S. this week said it won’t be prosecuting a NASA contractor for export control violations because the organization quickly self-reported the breaches and demonstrated “exceptional and proactive” cooperation with DOJ’s National Security Division. The announcement came after one of the contractor’s employees pleaded guilty to illegally exporting flight control software to a Chinese company on the Entity List and embezzling at least $161,000 in software license sales from those exports.
The U.S. this month arrested and charged a Pakistani-Canadian national with conspiracy to violate U.S. export controls after DOJ said he illegally shipped millions of dollars worth of controlled items to entities in Pakistan, including ones on the Entity List, all while hiding the true end-users from U.S. exporters.
Chinese drone maker DJI urged the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to compel the Pentagon to provide its counsel with classified information in the company's suit against its designation as a Chinese military company. DJI argued that the information is "undoubtedly" relevant since DOD used it as the basis for DJI's designation, and that disclosure is needed because the court can't evaluate the designation without access to the "very information on which that designation is based" (SZ DJI Technology Co. v. U.S. Department of Defense, D.D.C. # 24-02970).