International Trade Bulletin - Volume 1, Issue 9
Client Alert | 1 min read | 07.10.06
Inside this issue:
- EUROPE IN THE SPOTLIGHT
- EU Anti-Dumping: The Latest Series of Anti-Dumping Measures Proposed by the EU Clearly Show the Fingerprints of a More Liberalized Policy
- Market Access: The European Commission Formally Kicked Off Its Strategic Review of EU-China Trade Relations on 7th July With a High-Profile Conference in Brussels
- CHINA IN THE SPOTLIGHT
- U.S. EXPORT CONTROLS: US-India Agreement May Give U.S.-India Tech Transfers A Yellow Light
- U.S. SANCTIONS: State Department Shifts Policies Toward Venezuela and Libya on Trade Sanctions
- TECHNOLOGY: New U.S. Legislation Could Impose Significant Penalties Against U.S. Companies that Provide Information to Internet-Restricting Countries Such as China
- CUSTOMS: Potential Backlog in U.S. Validations Causes Concern for C-TPAT Members
- TRANSPORTATION: Supporters of U.S. Department of Transport's (“DOT”) Foreign Control Proposal Seek Changes to Expand Foreign Control While Opponents Argue the Rule Already Permits Too Much Foreign Control
- ANTI-BOYCOTT OAC Issues Proposed Anti-Boycott Penalty Guidelines
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25
Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality
On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument.
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.11.25
Director Squires Revamps the Workings of the U.S. Patent Office
Client Alert | 8 min read | 12.10.25
Creativity You Can Use: CJEU Clarifies Copyright for Applied Art
Client Alert | 4 min read | 12.10.25
Federal Court Strikes Down Interior Order Suspending Wind Energy Development

