Chambers Global 2018 Highly Ranks Blank Rome Shipping

Mainbrace | March 2018 (No.1)

Chambers Global 2018 recognized both Blank Rome LLP and John D. Kimball, Partner and Co-Chair of the Firm’s Maritime & International Trade practice group, as leaders in Shipping: Litigation—Global-wide. Continue readingChambers Global 2018 Highly Ranks Blank Rome Shipping”

Blank Rome Maritime Practice Ranked in U.S. News and World Report—Best Lawyers® 2018 “Best Law Firms”

Mainbrace | March 2018 (No.1)

Blank Rome LLP is pleased to announce that the Firm’s maritime practice was highly ranked both nationally and regionally in the U.S. News & World Report—Best Lawyers® 2018 “Best Law Firms” survey.

Blank Rome’s industries and services recognized in this year’s survey include: Continue reading “Blank Rome Maritime Practice Ranked in U.S. News and World Report—Best Lawyers® 2018 “Best Law Firms””

Three Technological Developments for the Maritime Industry to Watch in 2018

Mainbrace | March 2018 (No.1)

Sean T. Pribyl

Emerging technologies continue to permeate various sectors of the maritime industry. As with the advent of steam power, electrical energy, and computerized automation in prior industrial revolutions, the maritime industry is experiencing advances in cyber-physical systems and digitaliza­tion in this “fourth industrial

revolution.” Innovative technologies are transforming indus­tries across the globe, and in 2018, these three technological developments are worth watching: Smart Ships, drones, and innovative collabora­tion. Each will continue to impact maritime operations.

Smart Ships

In 2018, expect the marine sector to continue the trend towards advanced automation in so-called Smart Ships. We pre­viously outlined (see Mainbrace: June 2017, No. 3) the benefits, practical uses, and chal­lenges of Unmanned Surface Vessels (“USV”) or Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (“MASS”) (hereafter “Smart Ships”), and how evolving ship intelligence will impact future vessels, shipyards, vendors, and design and engineering firms. Continue reading “Three Technological Developments for the Maritime Industry to Watch in 2018”

A Bump in the Road for the Collection of Evidence for Use in Foreign Legal Proceedings

Mainbrace | March 2018 (No.1)

W. Cameron Beard and Lauren B. Wilgus

As discussed in prior issues of Mainbrace, parties to for­eign legal proceedings can collect evidence in the United States for use abroad by invoking a U.S. statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1782 (“section 1782”). Section 1782 is a powerful tool, and allows either foreign courts or foreign litigants to seek orders directly from U.S. federal district courts for the taking of testimony or the disclosure of documents in this country. Notably, litigants can often obtain section 1782 relief quickly and without undue burden or delay, because the statute can be invoked independently of, and does not require prior resort to, the Hague Evidence Convention.

Various disputes regarding the proper scope of section 1782 have arisen over the years. Some of the major disputes have been conclusively resolved. For exam­ple, in 2004 the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a significant conflict among the lower federal courts, and ruled that under section 1782 a foreign party may obtain broad dis­covery of the kind generally available in U.S. litigation, even if such discovery would not be allowed under the laws of the foreign forum where litigation is pending. Other vexing issues, however, remain unresolved. For example, the ques­tion of whether section 1782 may be used for the collection of evidence for purely private arbitrations remains unsettled. We have discussed these and other issues previously. Continue reading “A Bump in the Road for the Collection of Evidence for Use in Foreign Legal Proceedings”

Trump and the Maritime Industry: A Look Back and Forward

Mainbrace | March 2018 (No.1)

Joan M. Bondareff and Stefanos N. Roulakis

We have completed one year with the Trump administra­tion, so it is therefore a good time to assess whether he has made any drastic changes in his administration’s approach to the maritime industry. In short, there have not been any major changes. But as with almost everything involving the federal government, minor changes can have great effects.

The First Year

AROUND THE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
The president has put in place his appointees to key mar­itime positions: Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao, who has a significant maritime background as the former Deputy MARAD Administrator; Rear Admiral (“RADM”) Mark Buzby, the new MARAD Administrator and former Commander of the U.S. Military Sealift Command; Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke, who oversees oil and gas development as well as off­shore wind on the Outer Continental Shelf (“OCS”); and Secretary of Homeland Security (“DHS”) Kirstjen Nielsen, who oversees the Coast Guard (among other agencies). Additionally, Chief of Staff John Kelly is intimately familiar with the Coast Guard from his time undertaking joint operations with the agency while he was in the military. Unlike previous administrations, at least there are political and experienced appointees in place to set maritime policy. We will discuss below what new policies they have put in place. Continue reading “Trump and the Maritime Industry: A Look Back and Forward”

Environmental Compliance Aboard Commercial Ships: Electronic Recordkeeping Is Overdue

Mainbrace | March 2018 (No.1)

Gregory F. Linsin and Kierstan L. Carlson

Environmental laws and regulations in the United States impose substantial recordkeeping and reporting obliga­tions on regulated industries. These requirements are designed to document a company’s compliance with the requirements and limitations established by the regulatory scheme as well as any applicable environmental permits. Regulated companies also are required to maintain their compliance documentation and to submit periodic com­prehensive reports to regulators detailing their compliance with environmental standards. These records are used by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the delegated state regu­latory agencies to monitor compliance and, if permit exceedances or irregu­larities in the compliance records are detected, to evaluate the need for enforcement actions.

These substantial recordkeeping and reporting requirements were par­ticularly onerous on both industry and government, in part because records historically were required to be maintained and submitted in hard copy, which presented challenges inherent in managing enormous volumes of paper. Until recently, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the EPA have resisted transitioning to electronic recordkeeping systems for environmental compli­ance data. This resistance was rooted in concerns about the reliability and security of electronic reporting (e.g., the gov­ernment wanted assurance that data submitted by private parties had not been manipulated and that the govern­ment’s ability to verify that the records were prepared and signed by a responsible corporate representative remained intact). Nevertheless, in the last few years and in light of the enhanced reliability of electronic information systems, the EPA decided to enter the 21st century: Continue reading “Environmental Compliance Aboard Commercial Ships: Electronic Recordkeeping Is Overdue”

NY Bankruptcy Courts Grapple with Territorial Limits

Mainbrace | March 2018 (No.1)

Rick Antonoff, Michael B. Schaedle, Bryan J. Hall, and Matthew E. Kaslow

In a pair of recent opinions from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, two judges took varying approaches to the issues of 1) their ability to assert personal jurisdiction over foreign defendants, and 2) applica­tion of U.S. laws to transactions that occur, at least in part, outside of the United States.

The first opinion, from Judge Sean H. Lane, denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss a lawsuit seeking to avoid and recover money initially transferred to correspondent bank accounts in New York designated by the defendants, before being further transferred outside of the United States to complete transactions under investment agreement executed outside of the United States and governed by foreign law. On remand after a district judge ruled that the defendants’ use of correspondent banks in the United States was sufficient for the bankruptcy court to have personal jurisdiction over them, Judge Lane held that the doctrine of international comity and the presumption against extra­territoriality did not prevent application of U.S. law to avoid transfers under the Bankruptcy Code. The second opinion, from Judge James L. Garrity, Jr., dismissed a bankruptcy trustee’s claims to avoid and recover transfers under U.S. bankruptcy law that occurred entirely outside the territory of the United States. Continue reading “NY Bankruptcy Courts Grapple with Territorial Limits”