OFAC Continues Focus on the Reinsurance Industry: General Re and Iran
Client Alert | 1 min read | 06.30.11
True to its word, OFAC has continued to announce settlements of what is reported to be a pipeline of dozens of cases in the insurance/reinsurance industry with yesterday's $59,130 settlement with General Reinsurance for reinsurance claim payments to Steamship Mutual Underwriting Association Limited for losses arising from National Iranian Tanker Company operations.
The settlement is significant for a number of reasons. While OFAC found the apparent violations "non-egregious" and Gen Re voluntarily disclosed the apparent violations, the payments "were pursuant to its facultative reinsurance obligation" and therefore this case represents another guide to OFAC's views on facultative arrangements. Perhaps most significantly, OFAC's announcement reflects a "risk-based" expectation for compliance; one of the mitigating factors cited is that "Gen Re subsequently . . . implemented training programs for personnel who have a high probability of encountering sanctioned transactions."
For questions about the Gen Re case or OFAC compliance obligations generally, please contact those listed on this alert.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.26.25
From ‘Second’ to ‘First:’ Federal Circuit Tackles Obvious Claim Errors
Patent claims must be clear and definite, as they set the boundaries of the patentee’s rights. Occasionally, however, claim language contains errors, such as typographical mistakes or incorrect numbering. Courts possess very limited authority to correct such errors. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has emphasized that judicial correction is appropriate only in rare circumstances, where (1) the error is evident from the face of the patent, and (2) the proposed correction is the sole reasonable interpretation in view of the claim language, specification, and prosecution history. See Group One, Ltd. v. Hallmark Cards, Inc., 407 F.3d 1297, 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) and Novo Indus., L.P. v. Micro Molds Corp., 350 F.3d 1348, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
Client Alert | 5 min read | 11.26.25
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.25.25
Brussels Court Clarifies the EU’s SPC Manufacturing Waiver Regulation Rules
Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.24.25
