PODCAST: Trade and Jobs: What Trump Can and Can’t Do in the First 100 Days — C&M’s First 100 Days Series
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.20.16
Trade with Mexico and China were top issues for the Trump campaign, and recent developments suggest corporations may be in store for significant change under a Trump Administration. Could we be looking at an entirely different economic framework after January 20? How will manufacturers be impacted? Crowell & Moring International Trade Group partners Daniel Cannistra and John Brew discuss anxiety in the marketplace and how trade could change under President Trump.
Covered in this 23 minute podcast:
- What are Trump’s promises on trade and can he fulfill them? What authority does the president have to alter trade agreements? What challenges might he face?
- NAFTA and the possibility of tariffs on Mexican imports.
- What can Trump do with respect to China?
- What is the likelihood that the proposed border adjustment tax could go through?
- What is a trade war, and what might cause it?
- What agencies should large, multinational companies be looking to throughout the first 100 days to watch for trade updates?
Click below to listen or access from one of these links:
PodBean | SoundCloud | iTunes
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
