1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Software Application Insufficient to Substantially Transform Existing Hardware Components Into a Visitor Management System

Software Application Insufficient to Substantially Transform Existing Hardware Components Into a Visitor Management System

Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.19.17

In a Final Determination published in the Federal Register today, Customs & Border Protection held that application software installed on existing computers and on an ID scanner manufactured in China did not substantially transform the individual elements (IS scanner, labels, printer and barcode scanner) of the Visitor Management System. The scanners and printers functioned as such when imported, and the software, while defining a specific use, did not change the basic function of the hardware. Although the FAR contemplates that an “end product” offered under a TAA-covered contract should have a single country of origin, the CBP found each element of the VMS retained its individual country of origin, two of which were from China, a non-designated country.

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.12.26

DOJ Guidance Backs Away From Disparate Impact Liability

On June 9, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a formal opinion concluding that the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission’s (EEOC) existing interpretations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) disparate-impact liability, including the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP), are unconstitutional. According to the opinion, EEOC’s prior interpretations contemplate liability based on disproportionately adverse effects alone, without regard to an employer’s likely intent, rather than treating disparate impact as an evidentiary mechanism to “smoke out” intentional discrimination. DOJ found that this approach functions as a “qualified racial-proportionality mandate” that places “a racial thumb on the scales, often requiring employers to evaluate the racial outcomes of their policies, and to make decisions based on (because of) those racial outcomes.” The opinion fulfills one mandate of Executive Order 14281, which rejected disparate-impact liability insofar as it “creates a near insurmountable presumption that unlawful discrimination exists wherever there are any differences in outcomes among different [demographic groups].”...

View All Insights