Beau Jackson

• Representing an employee-owned Kansas manufacturer of agriculture machinery and custom-molded industrial products in relation to various international business issues.
• Assisting a Kansas manufacturer of lawn care equipment with various customs and international trade issues.
• Representing a privately-held Kansas manufacturer of medical and consumer products with respect to intellectual property matters.
• Successfully represented Otter Products LLC in a high-profile, precedential customs case before the U.S. Court of International Trade and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, concerning the proper tariff classification of protective cases for electronic devices.
• Represented two importers before U.S. Customs & Border Protection, obtaining the release of products allegedly bearing counterfeit trademarks.
• Helped a consortium of technology companies advocate before Congress and the U.S. Trade Representative regarding intellectual property issues in international trade negotiations.
• Helped a multinational agriculture company advocate before Congress and the U.S. Trade Representative regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership and renewal of the African Growth & Opportunity Act.

• Represented a Kansas educational company before the Department of Commerce and USTR with respect to trade remedies on solar panels. Achieved orders exempting the client’s imports from all antidumping and countervailing duties, as well as from ancillary safeguards measures.

Representative ITC Cases (not exhaustive)

• Represented cable set-top box supplier as successful respondent in a high-profile Section 337 proceeding, where the Commission found no violation against client due to lack of infringement at the time of importation. Certain Digital Video Receivers & Hardware & Software Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1001.
• Represented leading consumer and medical mattress suppliers as successful respondents in a Section 337 proceeding, where the ITC found no violation as to one patent and declined to issue remedies as to another patent due to public interest concerns. Certain Air Mattress Systems & Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-971. In a related case against the same respondent clients (Inv. No. 337-TA-999), the complainant withdrew all claims and voluntarily terminated the case without obtaining any relief or settlement.
• Represented leading inflatable products company as a Section 337 complainant, obtaining ITC consent orders that completely bar the accused products from the U.S. market. Certain Inflatable Products With Tensioning Structures & Processes for Making the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1009.
• Represented the world’s top mobile chipset supplier as successful respondent in a Section 337 proceeding, where the ALJ found no violation and recommended no remedies against client even in the event the Commission were to find a violation. The full ITC decided not to review the case, thereby upholding the ALJ’s determinations. Certain Consumer Electronics & Display Devices With GPUs, Inv. No. 337-TA-932.
• Represented multinational technology company as successful respondent in a Section 337 case where, in a precedent-setting decision, the Commission found no violation based, in part, on the complainant’s failure to establish a domestic industry. Certain Multimedia Display & Navigation Devices & Systems, Inv. No. 337-TA-694.
• Represented semiconductor technology company as successful complainant in a precedential Section 337 bond forfeiture proceeding. In the first such proceeding in more than a decade, the client fully recouped the bonds posted by respondents in relation to exclusion and cease and desist orders. Certain Semiconductor Chips With Minimized Chip Package Size, Inv. No. 337-TA-605.