U.S. Code » Title 50 » Chapter CHAPTER 56— EXPORT ADMINISTRATION

50 U.S.C. § 1213

POST-SHIPMENT VERIFICATION OF EXPORT OF HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTERS.

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 50 CasesGoogle Scholar
“(a)Required Post-Shipment Verification.—The Secretary of Commerce shall conduct post-shipment verification of each digital computer with a composite theoretical performance of more than 2,000 millions of theoretical operations per second (MTOPS) that is exported from the United States, on or after the date of the enactment of this Act [Nov. 18, 1998], to a country specified in subsection (b).“(b)Covered Countries.—For purposes of subsection (a), the countries specified in this subsection are the countries listed as ‘Computer Tier 3’ eligible countries in section 740.7 of title 15 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect on June 10, 1997, subject to modification by the President under section 1211(e).“(c)Annual Report.—The Secretary of Commerce shall submit to the congressional committees specified in section 1215 an annual report on the results of post-shipment verifications conducted under this section during the preceding year. Each such report shall include a list of all such items exported from the United States to such countries during the previous year and, with respect to each such export, the following:“(1) The destination country.“(2) The date of export.“(3) The intended end use and intended end user.“(4) The results of the post-shipment verification.“(d)Explanation When Verification Not Conducted.—If a post-shipment verification has not been conducted in accordance with subsection (a) with respect to any such export during the period covered by a report, the Secretary shall include in the report for that period a detailed explanation of the reasons why such a post-shipment verification was not conducted.“(e)Adjustment of Performance Levels.—Whenever a new composite theoretical performance level is established under section 1211(d), that level shall apply for purposes of subsection (a) of this section in lieu of the level set forth in subsection (a).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1976–1981 · leading case: Bata Shoe Co. v. United States, 219 Ct. Cl. 240 (Ct. Cl. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bata Shoe Co. v. United States, 219 Ct. Cl. 240 (Ct. Cl. 1979). · cites it 6× “Trial Judge Bernhardt reviewed each of the statutory factors in 50 U.S.C. § 1213 (e) (1970) and found that plaintiff was entitled to favorable consideration under each factor.”
A. C. Ball Co. v. United States, 209 Ct. Cl. 223 (Ct. Cl. 1976). “Section 103(e) ( 50 U.S.C. § 1213 (e) (1070)) of the Act provides as follows: “Bxceasive profits.”
Kilgore Corp. v. United States, 222 Ct. Cl. 189 (Ct. Cl. 1979). · cites it 2× “Comparison of war and peactime products, § 103(e), 50 U.S.C. § 1213 (e). This is not a case of a sudden conversion of production, on a declaration of war, from lipsticks to cartridges.”
Fairchild Indus., Inc. v. United States, 227 Ct. Cl. 319 (Ct. Cl. 1981). “II The carryforward in renegotiation applicable to the 1967 years is prescribed in 50 U.S.C. § 1213 (m). It is of course available for losses incurred in renegotiable business only, and only to the extent not incurred by "gross inefficiency.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.