Source: https://www.dorsey.com/services/international_arbitration_litigation
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 11:44:48+00:00

Document:
SOLVING PROBLEMS AROUND THE GLOBE.
The development of the global marketplace has, inevitably, been accompanied by the globalization of disputes. Our International Arbitration and Litigation practice group draws upon our transnational capabilities to help clients resolve cross-border business conflicts. We are adept at advancing our clients’ interests through negotiation, mediation, arbitration and litigation anywhere in the world.
We represent international clients before, among others, the ICC, the International Court of Arbitration, the London Court of International Arbitration, the American Arbitration Association’s International Centre for Dispute Resolution, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law and many other international organizations.
In the U.S. courts, the members of our group have extensive experience with the special legal issues that arise in disputes involving cross-border transactions, including in personam jurisdiction, forum non conveniens, choice of law, enforcement of arbitration clauses, concurrent litigation in multiple countries, international discovery, foreign sovereign immunity and the enforcement of foreign judgments.
Through our international offices and our relationships with foreign counsel, we have the ability to prosecute and defend the interests of our clients around the globe. Our U.S. attorneys work closely with our partners in Hong Kong, Shanghai and London to ensure that our clients are represented in key international markets. We also have relationships with counsel on every continent, giving us truly a global reach.
APCO Sales, Inc. v. LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. f/k/a Goldstar International, Inc. (AAA Int’l Centre for Dispute Resolution). Lead counsel for Korean company in dispute with sales representative involving claims of breach of contract and defamation; favorably settled.
Magnum Research v. Israeli Military Industries, Ltd. (ICC Int’l Ct. of Arbitration). Lead claimant’s counsel in dispute concerning patent and trademark rights to Desert Eagle® pistol; favorable interim award after first phase of hearings precipitated favorable settlement.
Nicola Products Ltd. v. NI Corporation (Japan Commercial Arbitration Rules). Counsel for the Japanese respondent defending contract claims asserted by the Canadian claimant; claims dismissed.
Eldorado Stone, LLC v. Magic Stone Korea Co., Ltd., et. al. (AAA Int'l Centre for Dispute Resolution). Counsel to American claimant asserting breach of contract and intellectual property claims against South Korean and Chinese respondents; won award of money damages and injunctive relief.
Thomson-CSF v. Northwest Aerospace Training Corporation (ICC Int'l Ct. of Arbitration). Lead respondent's counsel for airline pilot training company in dispute with manufacturer of Airbus A340 aircraft stimulator; favorable award.
Aero Falcon, S.A. v. G. Andrew Deutsch and Falcon Jet Aircraft (N.J.) Lead counsel for owner of jet aircraft distributor in Argentina brought by prior owner alleging interference with contract and related claims; favorable decision after three week trial.
Cargill Financial Services International, Inc. v. Inkombank (N.Y.) Counsel to U.S. company, as agent for five British banks, suing to recover balance on a defaulted letter of credit issued by Russian bank; obtained a $9.2 million judgment.
Consarc Corp. v. Iraqi Ministry of Industry (D.D.C. and D.C. Cir.) Lead counsel to U.S. and European engineering firm in litigation against Iraqi ministry and banks and the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control; on fraud claim obtained $55 million punitive damage judgment against a foreign government agency, one of the largest to date in a Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act Case.
DaimlerChrysler UK Limited and DaimlerChrysler AG v. Classic Cars UK (English High Court, Chancery Division) Represented German car manufacturer and UK affiliate in trademark infringement, passing off, and domain name action; obtained damages and costs.
Hermes, S.A. v. Hermes Furriers, Ltd. (S.D.N.Y.) Counsel to French fashion manufacturer and retailer against New York company infringing plaintiff’s tradename; defendant enjoined and assessed damages.
In the Matter of Certain Electrically-Resistive Monocomponent Toner and “Black Powder” Preparations Therefor (U.S. International Trade Commission)Respondents’ counsel in Tariff Act Section 337 proceeding involving claims that respondents’ importation and sale of copier toner constituted unfair acts and unfair methods of competition by reason of alleged conduct actionable under U.S. antitrust laws and under common law and statutory law of unfair competition; claims dismissed.
Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. v. United States and Mitsui Denman (Ireland) Ltd. (U.S. International Trade Commission and Court of International Trade) Trial and appellate counsel to Irish respondent-intervenor in antidumping case; successful defense confirmed on appeal.
Shanghai Automation Instrument Co., et al. v. Dennis Kuel, et al. (N.D. Cal.) Represented Chinese company against several Silicon Valley corporations alleging conversion; obtained $22 million judgment.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.