Comments on: Silicon Valley Firm Settles Export Charges http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/404 Latest News on DDTC, BIS, OFAC, and other export law matters Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:06:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: MO http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/404/comment-page-1#comment-20667 MO Thu, 09 Oct 2008 23:07:10 +0000 http://www.exportlawblog.com/?p=404#comment-20667 Could the Iranian national have been here on an F-1 or H1B visa? Could the Iranian national have been here on an F-1 or H1B visa?

]]> By: Clif Burns http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/404/comment-page-1#comment-20666 Clif Burns Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:30:49 +0000 http://www.exportlawblog.com/?p=404#comment-20666 The settlement docs don't provide any information on how the violation came to BIS's attention or how Maxim handled it, other than it is clear that there wasn't a voluntary disclosure by Maxim to BIS. Usually BIS learns of these things from disgruntled employees, freight forwarders who notice a violation or customs inspections of outbound goods. Here it looks like something else might have triggered the investigation. Counts 1 and 2 deal with a deemed export to a PRC national. The PRC national was hired on June 10 but the license application wasn't made until June 15. I suspect that the date discrepancy appeared in the application in such a way as to suggest that the disclosures started on June 10 and that caused BIS to launch an investigation. This is just a speculation, of course, but not an unreasonable one given the description of this incident in the charging and settlement docs. The settlement docs don’t provide any information on how the violation came to BIS’s attention or how Maxim handled it, other than it is clear that there wasn’t a voluntary disclosure by Maxim to BIS.

Usually BIS learns of these things from disgruntled employees, freight forwarders who notice a violation or customs inspections of outbound goods. Here it looks like something else might have triggered the investigation. Counts 1 and 2 deal with a deemed export to a PRC national. The PRC national was hired on June 10 but the license application wasn’t made until June 15. I suspect that the date discrepancy appeared in the application in such a way as to suggest that the disclosures started on June 10 and that caused BIS to launch an investigation.

This is just a speculation, of course, but not an unreasonable one given the description of this incident in the charging and settlement docs.

]]> By: John Liebman http://www.exportlawblog.com/archives/404/comment-page-1#comment-20665 John Liebman Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:08:12 +0000 http://www.exportlawblog.com/?p=404#comment-20665 Of interest to the readers, I believe, would be some insight regarding how this violation came to BIS' attention and how Maxim handled it. Of interest to the readers, I believe, would be some insight regarding how this violation came to BIS’ attention and how Maxim handled it.

]]>