International Trade Bulletin - Volume 1, Issue 4
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.01.06
Inside this issue:
- CHINA IN THE SPOTLIGHT
- Intellectual Property: The U.S. and Japan recently announced a joint initiative to strengthen the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR) in China and other third countries
- Market Access: The World Trade Organization completed its first Trade Policy Review report of China which concludes that, although China has achieved success in its trade and investment reforms, it still faces challenges
- EUROPE IN THE SPOTLIGHT
- Customs: The recent EU WTO "victory" over the U.S. on customs practices in Europe may seem like a blow to businesses facing customs clearance problems in the EU
- Counterfeit: The EU is to introduce harmonized criminal sanctions and heavy fines for infringements of intellectual property rights throughout the EU
- BILATERAL TRADE: Cross Lander's Investment in Romanian Auto Company Hits Rocky Terrain
- INVESTMENT: Representative Edward Markey, member of the House Homeland Security Committee, announces his intention to introduce an amendment to the Safe Ports Bill requiring inspection of all cargo coming into U.S. seaports
- TRADE REMEDIES: Is Zeroing Finally Dead?
- EXPORT CONTROLS: Recent Cancelled Sale of U.S. Computer Technology to China Highlights Concern over New Planned “Catch-All” Export Rule
- TRADE RETALIATION: The EU imposes punitive duties on eight additional U.S. products as retaliation against the U.S. Byrd law
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 01.13.26
Colorado Judge Quashes DOJ Gender-Related Care Subpoena
On January 5, 2026, District of Colorado Magistrate Judge Cyrus Chung issued a recommendation that the district court grant a motion to quash a Department of Justice (DOJ) administrative subpoena that sought records about the provision of gender-related care by Children’s Hospital Colorado (Children’s) in In re: Department of Justice Administrative Subpoena No. 25-1431-030, U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, No. 1:25-mc-00063. The court concluded that the DOJ had failed to carry its “light” burden, noting that no other courts that had considered the more than 20 similar subpoenas issued by DOJ had ruled in the DOJ’s favor.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 01.13.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 01.13.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 01.07.26
