Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Cleveland Manufacturer Violated OFAC Sanctions By Allowing Shipments To Iran - Know Your Customer and Know Their Customer

Client Alert
March 30, 2021

Between 2013 and 2017, UniControl exported 21 shipments of its products to two European customers. These 21 shipments were subsequently reexported to Iran, which violated the Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations (“ITSR”) listed in 31 CFR Part 560.

WARNING SIGNS

UniControl encountered multiple alerts before and during this period and failed to take proper actions. In 2010, several years prior to the first of these shipments, a European trade partner of UniControl inquired whether UniControl could supply a significant market it had identified in Iran. UniControl turned down the opportunity but did not confirm that the sales to this European partner were not then being shipped to the Iranian market.

In 2014, UniControl and a European customer entered a sales agreement that listed Iran as a country to which the partner could re-sell these products. In 2016, UniControl offered to ship products directly to a purported third-party European end user, but the customer refused this offer in an attempt to obfuscate the end user. At European trade conferences, UniControl had direct interactions with Iranian nationals, but did not question their European trade partner on the interest. Finally, UniControl received a request from its European partner to remove the “Made in USA” labels from its products with the explanation that the Iranian end user may have issues with the product origin.

FIXING THE PROBLEM

UniControl consulted with outside counsel and then voluntarily self-disclosed these violations. In total, UniControl engaged in 21 prohibited transactions with a total product value of $687,189. The maximum statutory penalty that UniControl faced was $5,423,766. However, once all mitigating and aggravating factors were weighed, UniControl was able to reach a settlement with OFAC for $216,464.

Parallel to UniControl’s cooperation with OFAC and ceasing all shipments to its European trade partners, the company also righted its own “compliance ship.” This began by retaining outside counsel to strengthen their export control procedures. End-user certificates were created to make sure that buyers are not reselling to prohibited end users. These certificates are also requested from second and third level buyers of reexported products. UniControl added a Destination Control Statement within the footer of many of their trade documents to remind recipients of the restrictions on reselling, transferring, manipulating, or otherwise disposing of their products.

For a review of your export policies and processes, or questions on trade compliance, please contact International Law Attorney Kevin Burwell at kdburwell@bmdllc.com or 330-253-3715. 

International LawKevin Burwell
Client Alert

Florida's Recent Ruling on Arbitration Clauses

March 15, 2024Florida’s recent ruling on arbitration clauses provides a crucial distinction in determining whether such clauses are void as against public policy and providers may have the opportunity to include arbitration clauses in their patient consent forms. On March 6, 2024, Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeals reversed and remanded Florida’s Fifteenth Circuit Court ruling of Piero Palacios v. Sharnice Lawson. The Court of Appeals ruled that the parties’ arbitration agreement did not contradict the Legislature’s intent of Florida’s Medical Malpractice Act (the “MMA”), but rather reflects the parties’ choice to arbitrate claims entirely outside of the MMA’s framework. Therefore, the Court found that the agreement was not void as against public policy.Client Alert

Corporate Transparency Act Update 3/14/24

March 14, 2024On March 1, 2024, a federal district court in the Northern District of Alabama concluded that the Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”) exceeded Congressional powers and enjoined the Department of the Treasury from enforcing the CTA against the plaintiffs. National Small Business United v. Yellen, No. 5:22-cv-01448 (N.D. Ala.). On March 11, 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice appealed the district court’s decision to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.Client Alert

The Ohio State University Launches Its Accelerated Bachelor of Science in Nursing Program

February 27, 2024In response to Ohio’s nursing shortage, The Ohio State University College of Nursing is accepting applications for its new Accelerated Bachelor of Science in Nursing program (aBSN). Created for students with a bachelor’s degree in non-nursing fields, the aBSN allows such students to obtain their nursing degree within 18 months. All aBSN students will participate in high-quality coursework and gain valuable clinical experience. Upon completion of the program, graduates will be eligible to take the State Board, National Council of Licensure Exam for Registered Nursing (NCLEX-RN).Client Alert

Another Transparency Obligation: The FinCEN Beneficial Ownership Information Reporting Requirements

February 26, 2024Many physician practices and healthcare businesses are facing a new set of federal transparency requirements that require action now. The U.S. Department of Treasury Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) Beneficial Ownership Information Reporting Requirements (the “Rule”), which was promulgated pursuant to the 2021 bipartisan Corporate Transparency Act, is intended to help curb illegal finance and other impermissible activity in the United States.Client Alert

“In for a Penny, in for a Pound” is No Longer the Case for Florida Lawyers

February 19, 2024On April 1, 2024, newly adopted Rule 1.041 to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedures goes into effect which creates a procedure for an attorney to appear in a limited manner in civil proceedings.  Currently, when a Florida attorney appears in a civil proceeding, he or she is reasonable for handling all aspects of the case for their client.  This new rule authorizes an attorney to file a notice limiting the attorney’s appearance to particular proceedings or specified matters prior to any appearance before the court.  For example, an attorney can now appear for the limited purpose of filing and arguing a motion to dismiss.  Once the motion to dismiss is heard by the court, the attorney may file a notice of termination of limited appearance and will have no further obligations in the case.
Older posts
Newer posts