GRVR ATTORNEYS, INTERNATIONAL TRADE LAW SPECIALISTS
  • Home
  • Who we are
    • Client Dedication
    • Our Legal Team
    • Join Our Team
  • Our Practice
    • Customs and Import
    • 301refunds
    • Export
    • Litigation
    • Section 232 and 301 Tariffs
    • Outsource Your Classification
    • CBP Audits
    • Fines, Penalties, Forfeitures, and Seizures
    • Customs Brokers
    • C-TPAT >
      • Mexico C-TPAT >
        • C-TPAT In English
        • Quienes Somos/About Us
    • Foreign-Trade Zones
    • Antidumping and Countervailing Duties
    • Intellectual Property RIghts
    • Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
    • Manifest Confidentiality
    • Contracts and Incoterms
    • False Claims Act and Whistleblower
  • Blog
  • Resources
    • Newsletter >
      • brokermondernization
    • free online import mini-audit
    • free online export mini-audit
  • Calendar and Events
  • Best Customs Broker Exam Course
  • Contact

CBP Can Exclude Infringing Merchandise Even If It Belongs To An Importer In Bankruptcy

7/12/2010

1 Comment

 
Assume you pour money, sweat, and tears into developing a nifty new technology.  You want to make sure no one steals your hard work, so you file for and receive a patent from the US Government.  You find out that one of your competitors is infringing your patent.  You file a complaint with the International Trade Commission (ITC) under 19 USC § 1337(a)(1)(B).  That section makes unlawful “[t]he importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation by the owner, importer, or consignee, of articles that ... infringe a valid and enforceable United States patent.”  The ITC finds merit in your complaint and orders a formal investigation.  You are confident that the ITC will order (upon the President’s approval) US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to exclude the infringing merchandise.  Then your competitor (the company importing the infringing merchandise) files for bankruptcy.  You are stunned when the bankruptcy judge orders the ITC to immediately stop its investigation.  While the automatic stay in bankruptcy stops collections activities against the bankrupt debtor, it normally cannot stop federal agencies from doing their job.  However, this bankruptcy judge views the ITC investigation as different because it was initiated at the request of a private party, so it was not really the federal government that was being restrained. 

Do you think the bankruptcy judge was correct?
The federal court from the Eastern District of Virginia did not in ITC v. Jaffe, a decision rendered on June 28, 2010.  The court concluded that the bankruptcy judge made a mistake.  The automatic stay in bankruptcy could not prevent the ITC from continuing to investigate the bankrupt debtor.  While the patent owner filed the complaint with the ITC, it was the ITC that initiated the investigation pursuant to its police and regulatory power.  That the patent holder stood to inherit the bond posted by the infringing importer did not mean the patent holder was a creditor, the court reasoned. 

The lesson is that bankruptcy can give companies and individuals valuable breathing room and keep bill collectors at bay, but it does not prevent the ITC from investigating whether the bankrupt debtor is violating someone’s intellectual property rights and it does not prevent CBP from excluding the debtor’s infringing merchandise.
1 Comment

    Oscar Gonzalez

    Principal and a founding member of GRVR Attorneys.

    Archives

    September 2016
    December 2015
    April 2015
    February 2015
    December 2014
    October 2014
    April 2014
    November 2013
    June 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    September 2011
    July 2011
    May 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010

    Categories

    All
    And Forfeitures
    Bankruptcy
    Border Searches
    Bureau Of Industry And Security
    Classification
    Commodity Jurisdiction
    Compliance
    Country Of Origin
    Court Of International Trade
    C TPAT
    C-TPAT
    Customs Broker Exam
    Customs Brokers
    Export
    Export License
    Export Penalties
    Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
    HTSUS
    Immigration
    Importer Self-Assessment
    Incoterms
    Intellectual Property Rights
    International Sales Contracts
    ITRAC
    Litigation
    NAFTA
    OFAC
    Penalties
    Post-Entry Amendments
    Prior Disclosure
    Redelivery
    Sanctions
    Torts Claims Act

    RSS Feed

Picture
  • Home
  • Who we are
    • Client Dedication
    • Our Legal Team
    • Join Our Team
  • Our Practice
    • Customs and Import
    • 301refunds
    • Export
    • Litigation
    • Section 232 and 301 Tariffs
    • Outsource Your Classification
    • CBP Audits
    • Fines, Penalties, Forfeitures, and Seizures
    • Customs Brokers
    • C-TPAT >
      • Mexico C-TPAT >
        • C-TPAT In English
        • Quienes Somos/About Us
    • Foreign-Trade Zones
    • Antidumping and Countervailing Duties
    • Intellectual Property RIghts
    • Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
    • Manifest Confidentiality
    • Contracts and Incoterms
    • False Claims Act and Whistleblower
  • Blog
  • Resources
    • Newsletter >
      • brokermondernization
    • free online import mini-audit
    • free online export mini-audit
  • Calendar and Events
  • Best Customs Broker Exam Course
  • Contact