Source: https://www.kslaw.com/people/jeffrey-telep?locale=en
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 22:25:12+00:00

Document:
Jeff Telep focuses on the litigation of high-profile international trade disputes. As a partner in our International Trade practice, Jeff represents corporate clients in Section 337 investigations at the U.S. International Trade Commission; antidumping and countervailing duty investigations under the Tariff Act of 1930; customs investigations; other commercial litigation and arbitration; and international trade compliance matters. Jeff is the President the ITC Trial Lawyers Association, the premier association of Section 337 trial lawyers.
With more than 25 years of experience, Jeff represents clients in unfair trade practice investigations at the U.S. ITC under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as well as in anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigations; customs civil penalty investigations, seizures and forfeitures; international arbitrations; and other commercial litigation. Jeff has represented clients in multiple industries, including semiconductors, telecommunications equipment, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, automotive, and other consumer and industrial goods.
Jeff also counsels clients on international trade regulatory matters. These include Office of Foreign Assets Control economic sanctions matters, Customs and foreign trade zone issues, and Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering issues.
Jeff is on Georgetown University's International Trade Update Advisory Board and served for three years on Law360’s Advisory Board for Intellectual Property to advise on developments under Section 337 of the Tariff Act. He was appointed by the Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of International Trade to the Court’s Rules Advisory Committee for two consecutive five-year terms. Jeff also is a member of the Board of Directors of the American Danish Business Council (2014–2017).
Previously, Jeff spent six years as a trial attorney with the Civil Division of the Department of Justice. During his tenure, he was lead counsel in more than 75 international trade disputes.
Certain Motorized Self-Balancing Vehicles, Inv. No. 337-TA-1000 (represents Respondents Contixo Co. and ZTO Trading, Ltd.).
Certain Personal Transporters, Components Thereof, And Manuals Therefor, Inv. No. 337-TA-935 (represents Respondents PowerUnion (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd.; Ninebot (Tianjin) Technology Co., Ltd.; and Ninebot, Inc.).
Certain Wireless Devices, Including Mobile Phones and Tablets II, Inv. No. 337-TA-905 (represented Nokia Inc. and Nokia Corp.).
Certain Multiple Mode Outdoor Grills And Parts Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-895 (represented respondents W.C. Bradley Co. and Rankam Metal Products Manufactory Ltd., and Zhejiang Fudeer Electric Appliance Co., Ltd.).
Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets, and Mobile Phones, Components Thereof, and Associated Software, Inv. No. 337-TA-882 (represented Rhapsody International Inc.).
Certain Integrated Circuit Devices and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-873 (represented Nokia Inc. and Nokia Corp.).
Certain Mobile Handset Devices and Related Touch Keyboard Software, Inv. No. 337-TA-864 (represented Personal Communications Devices).
Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making Same, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-855 (represented Magnetic Component Engineering).
Certain CMOS Image Sensors and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-846 (represented Nokia Inc. and Nokia Corp.).
Certain Portable Communication Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-827 (represented Nokia Inc. and Nokia Corp.).
Certain Electronic Devices With Image Processing Systems, Components Thereof, And Associated Software, Inv. No. 337-TA-724 (represented Advanced Micro Devices).
Certain Personal Data and Mobile Communications Devices and Related Software, Inv. No. 337-TA-710 (represented Nokia Inc. and Nokia Corp.).
Certain Dynamic Random Access Memory Semiconductors and Products Containing the Same, Including Memory Modules, Inv. No. 337-TA-707 (represented Infineon AG).
Certain Semiconductor Integrated Circuits and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-665 (represented Qimonda AG).
Certain Flash Memory Chips and Products Containing The Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-664 (represented Spansion, Inc.).
Certain Semiconductor Integrated Circuits Using Tungsten Metallization and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-648 (represented Qimonda AG).
Certain Nitrile Gloves, Inv. No. 337-TA-608 (represented Tillotson Corporation).
Certain Semiconductor Chips With Minimized Chip Package Size and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-605 (represented Broadcom Corporation).
Certain Lighting Products, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-594 (represented Cooper Lighting).
US Magnesium LLC v. United States, __ F.3d __, (Fed. Cir. 2016) (represented US Magnesium in an appeal of the decision of the U.S. Court of International Trade on a cost accounting issue).
Interdigitial Communications, LLC v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. 2013) (represented Hewlett-Packard in amicus brief in support of appellant on Section 337 domestic industry issue).
PSC VSMPO-Avisma v. United States, 688 F.3d 751 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (represented US Magnesium in an appeal that reversed the U.S. Court of International Trade’s antidumping decision on a cost accounting issue).
GPX Int’l Tire Corp. v. United States, 666 F.3d 732 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (represented Bridgestone Tire in challenge to the application of the countervailing duty law to non-market economy countries).
SKF USA, Inc. v. United States, 556 F.3d 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (represented the American Furniture Manufacturers’ Committee in successful defense of the constitutionality of the Continued Dumping And Subsidy Offset Act).
Canadian Lumber Trade Alliance v. United States, 517 F.3d 1319 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (represented US Magnesium in arguing for the application of the Continued Dumping And Subsidy Offset Act to goods imported from NAFTA countries).
Magnola Metallurgy, Inc. v. United States, 508 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (represented US Magnesium in successful defense of Commerce Department’s countervailing duty determination on magnesium from Canada).
Norsk Hydro Canada, Inc. v. United States, 472 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (represented US Magnesium in successful challenge to the U.S. Court of International Trade’s decision requiring duty assessment set off in countervailing duty case on magnesium from Canada).
Hynix Semiconductor, Inc. v. United States, 424 F.3d 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (represented Micron Technology in defense of the Commerce Department’s antidumping duty determination on DRAMs from Korea).
CEMEX, SA v. United States, 384 F.3d 1314 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (represented the Ad Hoc Committee of AZ-NM-TX-FL Producers of Gray Portland Cement in a challenge to customs’ interpretation of the deemed liquidation statute).

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