Cross-border & International Transaction
Showing 157 - 162 of 348 results.
Cross-Border IP License Agreement Review Attorney Guides Royalty Audit
Cross-border IP license agreement review attorney can assess royalty terms, audit rights, reports, and shortfall remedies. Royalty disputes often start with vague terms, weak record access, or unclear rules for foreign sales and deductions. A focused review can test how fees are set, what records may be checked, who pays audit costs, and what happens if an audit finds a shortfall.
Read more
International Trademark Infringement Cease and Desist Attorney Guide
An international trademark infringement cease and desist attorney typically issues formal notices to stop unauthorized cross-border brand exploitation. Discovering that a foreign entity is copying your products frequently causes significant financial concern for brand owners. Legal professionals analyze foreign business structures, document evidence of counterfeit goods, and calculate potential statutory damages. Sending a well-structured demand letter often forces infringers into settlement negotiations before federal litigation becomes necessary.
Read more
How Prejudgment Attachment of Foreign Bank Accounts Works
Prejudgment attachment of foreign bank accounts may preserve reachable assets before a final money judgment.Article 62 sets statutory grounds for attaching property before judgment. Cross-border bank accounts raise separate questions about the proper garnishee, levy mechanics, and foreign branches. Rule 64 allows federal courts to use applicable state attachment remedies.
Read more
Overseas Entity Capital Remittance and OFAC Compliance Guide
Overseas entity capital remittance compliance requires navigating OFAC sanctions, tax reporting, and foreign exchange laws under federal authority. Executing international fund transfers requires managing complex regulatory frameworks. Understanding federal statutory standards helps protect corporate assets and mitigate civil or criminal enforcement risks.
Read more
SIAC International Arbitration Attorney: Award Enforcement Strategies
Confirming an award and collecting on it are two different proceedings. Confirmation converts the award into a U.S. .udgment. Under the New York Convention as implemented by the Federal Arbitration Act, a petition may be brought within three years of the award — a longer window than domestic awards receive. Confirmation does not, by itself, restrain anything. Restraining assets requires separate enforcement steps, and a respondent who sees the petition coming has time to move money. The grounds for resisting are narrow and exclusive. Article V lists them: no valid agreement, inadequate notice, the tribunal exceeded its mandate, defective composition, annulment at the seat, or public policy. U.S. .ourts construe these narrowly and do not revisit the merits — which is why an arbitral award is generally easier to enforce here than a foreign court judgment. A parallel set-aside action changes the calculus. Where the losing party moves to annul at the seat, a U.S. .ourt may adjourn the enforcement proceeding pending that outcome. For an award seated in Singapore, that means the timing of your U.S. .etition and the status of any Singapore proceeding have to be managed together. Jurisdiction over the respondent still matters. A petition in New York needs a basis — assets here, or a presence sufficient to support it. Locating those assets is work that belongs before the petition, not after.
Read more
KCAB International Arbitration Attorney for Contract Disputes
KCAB charges by the amount in dispute, not by the hour. Arbitrator fees and administrative charges are calculated on the claim value under a published schedule. A proceeding that runs longer does not, by itself, increase what the tribunal costs — which distinguishes KCAB from institutions that bill arbitrator time. Counsel fees still scale with duration, and they remain the larger share of any budget. Which rules apply is decided by your arbitration clause. KCAB administers international cases under a separate set of rules from domestic ones, and clauses that do not specify create an argument before the merits are reached. Document production works differently than U.S. .itigation. International arbitration follows a narrower model: requests must identify specific documents or narrow categories, and broad discovery is unavailable. For a U.S. .arty, this changes evidence strategy from the outset. What you cannot obtain later, you must secure before the dispute begins. The reason to arbitrate is usually enforcement. Korea and the United States are both parties to the New York Convention, so an award rendered in Seoul is enforceable in U.S. .ourts. A Korean court judgment is not — there is no treaty between the two countries on recognition of judgments. For contracts with Korean counterparties, that gap is often the whole case for an arbitration clause.
Read more