Ed. Note: if you’re new to TURBOFAC, please take note that the text string filtration function generally shouldn’t be used for terms such as “ordinarily resident,” “causing” or “new debt”. For research on the meaning of words and phrases such as those, i.e. terms central to the key legal issues in sanctions law that appear on a cross-programmatic basis, you’re typically better off locating and checking the appropriate box in the “Key Legal Issues” search category, which will limit the results to those that have been manually assessed as being relevant for the interpretation of the terms at issue.
Try typing your search term (“ordinarily resident,” “new debt,” or something else) in the “Find a Search Filter” box at the top of the page, and the corresponding “Key Legal Issues” check box will pop up instantly, if one exists. Once you check the box (e.g. “new debt,” with ~55 results), you can always use the text string filtration function to further refine your search (e.g. by typing “invoice” and narrowing the ~55 results to ~10).
Note in addition that the same applies to text string searches such as “14071” (if you’re looking for items related to EO 14071). By typing “14071” in the “Find a Search Filter” field up top, you will be able to instantly narrow the results down to items manually assessed as relating to EO 14071. Ditto terms such as “515.204” or “Iran General License G” (try the “Discrete Legal Provision” search category).
Please contact [email protected] or [email protected] with any questions on search results and efficiency.
Please click "Apply Text String Filters" again after clicking the "Close" button immediately below.
1) Read in conjunction with United States v. Griffith (1:20-cr-00015) (2021); OFAC "Licensing Determination".
This brief, which is likely to generally reflect OFAC’s views given the coordination between the DOJ and OFAC evident from the document linked above, is notable for its application of the logic of the United States v. Amirnazmi opinion to situations where live presentations at conferences may or may not qualify for the informational materials exemption. Here, the government acknowledges that the U.S. person’s attendance and presentation at the North Korean-located conference could have, in principle, qualified for the informational materials exemption, but the presentation was “Griffith’s presentation and his answers to questions were ‘bespoke’ and created for the DPRK’s specific interests and pre-approved topics”.
Note however that there is something to be said...