Source: https://regulations.justia.com/regulations/fedreg/2013/12/19/2013-30211.html
Timestamp: 2019-11-22 15:23:22
Document Index: 72430761

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 756', 'art 560', 'arts 730', '§ 2401', '§ 2410', '§ 2410', 'art 756', 'art 756', 'art 560', 'art 756']

In the Matter of: Mohammed Soroush Mahalaty, a/k/a Mohammad Soroush,a/k/a Mike Soroush, 18 Clinton Lane, Jericho, NY 11753; Order Denying Export Privileges, 76814-76815 [2013-30211] :: Department Of Commerce :: Regulation Tracker :: Justia
Justia Regulation Tracker Department Of Commerce In the Matter of: Mohammed Soroush Mahalaty, a/k/a Mohammad Soroush,a/k/a Mike Soroush, 18 Clinton Lane, Jericho, NY 11753; Order Denying Export Privileges, 76814-76815 [2013-30211]
In the Matter of: Mohammed Soroush Mahalaty, a/k/a Mohammad Soroush,a/k/a Mike Soroush, 18 Clinton Lane, Jericho, NY 11753; Order Denying Export Privileges, 76814-76815 [2013-30211]
Download as PDF 76814 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2013 / Notices comply with the provisions of Part 756 of the Regulations. VI. A copy of this Order shall be delivered to the Bobel. This Order shall be published in the Federal Register. Issued this 13th day of December, 2013. Eileen M. Albanese, Acting Director, Office of Exporter Services. [FR Doc. 2013–30208 Filed 12–18–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Bureau of Industry and Security In the Matter of: Mohammed Soroush Mahalaty, a/k/a Mohammad Soroush, a/k/a Mike Soroush, 18 Clinton Lane, Jericho, NY 11753; Order Denying Export Privileges emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES On October 3, 2012, in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York Mohammed Soroush Mahalaty, a/k/a Mohammad Soroush a/k/a Mike Soroush (‘‘Mahalaty’’), was convicted of violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2006 & Supp. IV 2010)) (‘‘IEEPA’’). Specifically, Mahalaty was convicted of violating IEEPA by unlawfully, willfully, and knowingly exporting, selling, and supplying financial services from the United States to and in Iran, by among other things, conducting financial transactions for the purpose of, and which had the effect of, violating, and which facilitated the violation of, the prohibitions set forth in the Executive Orders and the Regulations issued under the IEEPA, including the Iranian Transaction Regulations set forth in 31 CFR part 560, including specifically using the hawala system to transfer money into Iran which money Mahalaty believed was intended for investment in Iran. Mahalaty was sentenced to time served, three years of supervised release, a $400 assessment, $5,000 fine and restitution of $739,377.31. Section 766.25 of the Export Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR’’ or ‘‘Regulations’’) 1 provides, in pertinent part, that ‘‘[t]he Director of the Office of Exporter Services, in consultation with 1 The Regulations are currently codified in the Code of Federal Regulations at 15 CFR parts 730– 774 (2013). The Regulations issued pursuant to the Export Administration Act (50 U.S.C. app. §§ 2401– 2420 (2000)) (‘‘EAA’’). Since August 21, 2001, the EAA has been in lapse and the President, through Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001 (3 CFR, 2001 Comp. 783 (2002)), which has been extended by successive Presidential Notices, the most recent being that of August 8, 2013 (78 FR 49107 (August 12, 2013)), has continued the Regulations in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2006 & Supp. IV 2010)). VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:41 Dec 18, 2013 Jkt 232001 the Director of the Office of Export Enforcement, may deny the export privileges of any person who has been convicted of a violation of the Export Administration Act (‘‘EAA’’), the EAR, or any order, license or authorization issued thereunder; any regulation, license, or order issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701–1706); 18 U.S.C. 793, 794 or 798; section 4(b) of the Internal Security Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 783(b)), or section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778).’’ 15 CFR 766.25(a); see also Section 11(h) of the EAA, 50 U.S.C. app. § 2410(h). The denial of export privileges under this provision may be for a period of up to 10 years from the date of the conviction. 15 CFR 766.25(d); see also 50 U.S.C. app. § 2410(h). In addition, Section 750.8 of the Regulations states that the Bureau of Industry and Security’s Office of Exporter Services may revoke any Bureau of Industry and Security (‘‘BIS’’) licenses previously issued in which the person had an interest in at the time of his conviction. I have received notice of Mahalaty’s conviction for violating the IEEPA, and have provided notice and an opportunity for Mahalaty to make a written submission to BIS, as provided in Section 766.25 of the Regulations. I have not received a submission from Mahalaty. Based upon my review and consultations with BIS’s Office of Export Enforcement, including its Director, and the facts available to BIS, I have decided to deny Mahalaty’s export privileges under the Regulations for a period of five years from the date of Mahalaty’s conviction. I have also decided to revoke all licenses issued pursuant to the Act or Regulations in which Mahalaty had an interest at the time of his conviction. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered I. Until October 3, 2017, Mohammed Soroush Mahalaty, a/k/a Mohammad Soroush, a/k/a Mike Soroush, with a last known address at: 18 Clinton Lane, Jericho, NY 11753, and when acting for or on behalf of Mahalaty, his representatives, assigns, agents or employees (the ‘‘Denied Person’’), may not, directly or indirectly, participate in any way in any transaction involving any commodity, software or technology (hereinafter collectively referred to as ‘‘item’’) exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, including, but not limited to: A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, License Exception, or export control document; PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 B. Carrying on negotiations concerning, or ordering, buying, receiving, using, selling, delivering, storing, disposing of, forwarding, transporting, financing, or otherwise servicing in any way, any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, or in any other activity subject to the Regulations; or C. Benefitting in any way from any transaction involving any item exported or to be exported from the United States that is subject to the Regulations, or in any other activity subject to the Regulations. II. No person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the following: A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of the Denied Person any item subject to the Regulations; B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted acquisition by the Denied Person of the ownership, possession, or control of any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States, including financing or other support activities related to a transaction whereby the Denied Person acquires or attempts to acquire such ownership, possession or control; C. Take any action to acquire from or to facilitate the acquisition or attempted acquisition from the Denied Person of any item subject to the Regulations that has been exported from the United States; D. Obtain from the Denied Person in the United States any item subject to the Regulations with knowledge or reason to know that the item will be, or is intended to be, exported from the United States; or E. Engage in any transaction to service any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States and which is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person, or service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or controlled by the Denied Person if such service involves the use of any item subject to the Regulations that has been or will be exported from the United States. For purposes of this paragraph, servicing means installation, maintenance, repair, modification or testing. III. After notice and opportunity for comment as provided in Section 766.23 of the Regulations, any other person, firm, corporation, or business organization related to Mahalaty by affiliation, ownership, control or position of responsibility in the conduct of trade or related services may also be subject to the provisions of this Order if E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM 19DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 244 / Thursday, December 19, 2013 / Notices necessary to prevent evasion of the Order. IV. This Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect until October 3, 2017. V. In accordance with Part 756 of the Regulations, Mahalaty may file an appeal of this Order with the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry and Security. The appeal must be filed within 45 days from the date of this Order and must comply with the provisions of Part 756 of the Regulations. VI. A copy of this Order shall be delivered to the Mahalaty. This Order shall be published in the Federal Register. Issued this 13th day of December 2013. Eileen M. Albanese, Acting Director, Office of Exporter Services. [FR Doc. 2013–30211 Filed 12–18–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–570–997, C–580–873, C–583–852] Non-Oriented Electrical Steel From the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Postponement of Preliminary Determinations in the Countervailing Duty Investigations Enforcement and Compliance, formerly Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. AGENCY: Austin Redington at (202) 482–1664 or Nancy Decker at (202) 482–0196, AD/ CVD Operations, Office I, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES Background On November 6, 2013, the Department of Commerce (the Department) initiated countervailing duty investigations on non-oriented electrical steel (NOES) from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan.1 Currently, the preliminary determinations are due no later than January 10, 2013. 1 See Non-Oriented Electrical Steel from the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan: Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigations, 78 FR 68412 (November 14, 2013). 16:41 Dec 18, 2013 Jkt 232001 Dated: December 13, 2013. Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance. [FR Doc. 2013–30262 Filed 12–18–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: VerDate Mar<15>2010 Postponement of Due Date for Preliminary Determinations Section 703(b)(1) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), requires the Department to issue the preliminary determination in a countervailing duty investigation within 65 days after the date on which the Department initiated the investigation. However, if the petitioner makes a timely request for a postponement, section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act allows the Department to postpone making the preliminary determination until no later than 130 days after the date on which the administering authority initiated the investigation. On November 26, 2013, AK Steel Corporation, the petitioner in these investigations, requested that the deadline for the preliminary determination in each of these cases be postponed in accordance with 19 CFR 351.205(b)(2). Therefore, in accordance with section 703(c)(1)(A) of the Act, we are fully postponing the due date for the preliminary determinations to no later than 130 days after the day on which the investigations were initiated. However, as that date falls on a Sunday (i.e., March 16, 2014), the deadline for completion of the preliminary determinations is now March 17, 2014, the next business day. This notice is issued and published pursuant to section 703(c)(2) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.205(f)(1). DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE International Trade Administration [C–533–856] Steel Threaded Rod From India: Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and Alignment of Final Determination With Final Antidumping Determination Enforcement and Compliance, formerly Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce. SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (‘‘the Department’’) preliminarily determines that countervailable subsidies are being provided to producers and exporters of steel threaded rod from India. The period of investigation (‘‘POI’’) is January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012. For AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76815 information on the estimated subsidy rates, see the ‘‘Suspension of Liquidation’’ section of this notice. DATES: Effective Date: December 19, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brooke Kennedy, AD/CVD Operations, Office III, Enforcement and Compliance, International Trade Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone: (202) 482–3818. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Scope of the Investigation The merchandise covered by this investigation is steel threaded rod. Steel threaded rod is certain threaded rod, bar, or studs, of carbon quality steel, having a solid, circular cross section, of any diameter, in any straight length, that have been forged, turned, cold-drawn, cold-rolled, machine straightened, or otherwise cold-finished, and into which threaded grooves have been applied. In addition, the steel threaded rod, bar, or studs subject to this investigation are non-headed and threaded along greater than 25 percent of their total length. A variety of finishes or coatings, such as plain oil finish as a temporary rust protectant, zinc coating (i.e., galvanized, whether by electroplating or hotdipping), paint, and other similar finishes and coatings, may be applied to the merchandise. For a complete description of the scope of the investigation, see Appendix 1 to this notice. Methodology The Department is conducting this countervailing duty (‘‘CVD’’) investigation in accordance with section 701 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (‘‘the Act’’). For a full description of the methodology underlying our preliminary conclusions, see the Preliminary Decision Memorandum.1 The Preliminary Decision Memorandum is a public document and is on file electronically via Enforcement and Compliance’s Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Centralized Electronic Service System (‘‘IA ACCESS’’). IA ACCESS is available to registered users at http:// iaaccess.trade.gov, and is available to all parties in the Central Records Unit, room 7046 of the main Department of 1 See Memorandum from Gary Taverman, Senior Advisor for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations, to Paul Piquado, Assistant Secretary for Enforcement and Compliance, ‘‘Decision Memorandum for the Preliminary Determination in the Countervailing Duty Investigation on Steel Threaded Rod from India,’’ dated concurrently with this notice (‘‘Preliminary Decision Memorandum’’). E:\FR\FM\19DEN1.SGM 19DEN1
[Pages 76814-76815]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30211]
In the Matter of: Mohammed Soroush Mahalaty, a/k/a Mohammad
Soroush, a/k/a Mike Soroush, 18 Clinton Lane, Jericho, NY 11753; Order
On October 3, 2012, in the U.S. District Court, Southern District
of New York Mohammed Soroush Mahalaty, a/k/a Mohammad Soroush a/k/a
Mike Soroush (``Mahalaty''), was convicted of violating the
(2006 & Supp. IV 2010)) (``IEEPA''). Specifically, Mahalaty was
convicted of violating IEEPA by unlawfully, willfully, and knowingly
exporting, selling, and supplying financial services from the United
States to and in Iran, by among other things, conducting financial
transactions for the purpose of, and which had the effect of,
violating, and which facilitated the violation of, the prohibitions set
forth in the Executive Orders and the Regulations issued under the
IEEPA, including the Iranian Transaction Regulations set forth in 31
CFR part 560, including specifically using the hawala system to
transfer money into Iran which money Mahalaty believed was intended for
investment in Iran. Mahalaty was sentenced to time served, three years
of supervised release, a $400 assessment, $5,000 fine and restitution
of $739,377.31.
I have received notice of Mahalaty's conviction for violating the
IEEPA, and have provided notice and an opportunity for Mahalaty to make
Regulations. I have not received a submission from Mahalaty.
have decided to deny Mahalaty's export privileges under the Regulations
for a period of five years from the date of Mahalaty's conviction. I
have also decided to revoke all licenses issued pursuant to the Act or
Regulations in which Mahalaty had an interest at the time of his
I. Until October 3, 2017, Mohammed Soroush Mahalaty, a/k/a Mohammad
Soroush, a/k/a Mike Soroush, with a last known address at: 18 Clinton
Lane, Jericho, NY 11753, and when acting for or on behalf of Mahalaty,
his representatives, assigns, agents or employees (the ``Denied
or business organization related to Mahalaty by affiliation, ownership,
[[Page 76815]]
until October 3, 2017.
V. In accordance with Part 756 of the Regulations, Mahalaty may
VI. A copy of this Order shall be delivered to the Mahalaty. This
[FR Doc. 2013-30211 Filed 12-18-13; 8:45 am]