Sanctions-related Judicial Opinion - U.S. v. Atilla (2nd Cir. 2020) (Jul. 20, 2020)

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.

TURBOFAC Commentary (283 words)

Notes:

1) The excerpted portion of the option is of high practical significance insofar as it undercuts the theory, advanced on several occasions by the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York, that a non-U.S. person may be criminally or civilly charged, under , with “evasion” or “avoidance” of secondary sanctions provisions where none of the conduct at issue is alleged to constitute the “evasion” or “avoidance” of any then-existing “prohibition.” While the 2nd Circuit dealt only with secondary sanctions provisions in this case, the reasoning would presumably extend to any allegation that a non-U.S. person has acted so as to “evade” or “avoid” the imposition of sanctions under one or more “derivative designation” criterion, at least assuming that the conduct at issue does not separately violate an actual sanctions prohibition. The court indirectly finds significance in...

Welcome!

Welcome!

U.S. v. Atilla (2nd Cir. 2020) (Jul. 20, 2020)

TURBOFAC Commentary (283 words)