Publication,

US CHIPS Act & New Export Control

US | EN
Current site :    US   |   EN
Australia
China
China Hong Kong SAR
Japan
Singapore
United States
Global

We set out in this article the background to, and the expected effects of, the US CHIPS Act aimed at boosting domestic US research and manufacturing capacity in relation to semiconductors, and its effect in China Mainland and potentially Hong Kong SAR.  If you have any questions or feedback, please get in touch.

DOWNLOAD PUBLICATION
US CHIPS ACT & NEW EXPORT CONTROL

Download

1.39MB, 4 Pages

Any reference to “Hong Kong” or “Hong Kong SAR” in this article shall be construed as a reference to “Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China”.

LATEST THINKING
Insight
In the 10 years since the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, lack of subject matter eligibility under Title 35 of the U.S. Code, Section 101, has become the first line of defense in patent litigation, especially in the software industry.[1]

01 November 2024

Insight
In No. 4:13-cv-01895 (E.D. Mo. Sept. 27, 2024) (“Opinion”), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri addressed the issue of whether the secrecy laws of another country may prevent discovery in the United States. Specifically, the Plaintiff filed a motion to compel the Defendants to respond to discovery seeking sales information regarding the products accused of infringing the Plaintiff's patents. In opposing the Plaintiff's motion, the Defendants requested a protective order barring the production of such information under Chinese secrecy law. The Defendants urged that a protective order should be granted because the production of information responsive to the Plaintiff's discovery requests could expose Defendants to broad sanctions under the People's Republic of China's (PRC) recently enacted Counterespionage Law. The Defendants relied on the declaration of a Chinese attorney and a letter from the local Bureau of Commerce. The district court acknowledged that it had previously rejected arguments based on China’s Data Security Laws, its Cybersecurity Law, and its Personal Information Protection Law and similarly concluded that the threat of sanctions under the Counterespionage Law was speculative. As such, the court granted the Plaintiff's motion to compel and denied the Defendants' motion for a protective order. dispute resolution and litigation-cross border investigation and litigation

24 October 2024

Insight
On June 21st, 2024, the U.S. Treasury Department issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (the “NPRM”) for implementing EO 14105 Addressing United States Investments in Certain National Security Technologies and Products in Countries of Concern, issued in August 2023 (“EO 14105”). The NPRM restricts U.S. investment in sensitive technologies developed in countries of concern, specifically listing the PRC (inclusive Hong Kong and Macau). The NPRM seeks public comment on the entirety of the proposed rule. The public will have until August 4, 2024, to provide comments. A final regulatory text will be issued at an unspecified later date.

01 July 2024