In the Matter of: Mark Henry (a/k/a Weida Zheng, a/k/a Scott Russel, a/k/a Bob Wilson, a/k/a Joanna Zhong), Inmate Number: 75602-053, FCI Schuylkill, Federal Correctional Institution, Satellite Camp, P.O. Box 670, Minersville, PA 17954; Respondent; Dahua Electronics Corporation (a/k/a Bao An Corporation), 134-12 59th Avenue, Flushing, NY 11355, Related Person Order Denying Privileges, 46480-46481 [2017-21475]
Download as PDF
46480
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 192 / Thursday, October 5, 2017 / Notices
provisions of Part 756 of the
Regulations.
Fifth, a copy of this Order shall be
delivered to the Hussain, and shall be
published in the Federal Register.
Sixth, this Order is effective
immediately and shall remain in effect
until October 3, 2026.
Issued this 28th day of September, 2017.
Karen H. Nies-Vogel,
Director, Office of Exporter Services.
[FR Doc. 2017–21476 Filed 10–4–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
In the Matter of: Mark Henry (a/k/a
Weida Zheng, a/k/a Scott Russel, a/k/a
Bob Wilson, a/k/a Joanna Zhong),
Inmate Number: 75602–053, FCI
Schuylkill, Federal Correctional
Institution, Satellite Camp, P.O. Box
670, Minersville, PA 17954;
Respondent; Dahua Electronics
Corporation (a/k/a Bao An
Corporation), 134–12 59th Avenue,
Flushing, NY 11355, Related Person
Order Denying Privileges
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
A. Denial of Export Privileges of Mark
Henry, a/k/a Weida Zheng, a/k/a Scott
Russel, a/k/a Bob Wilson, a/k/a Joanna
Zhong
On November 19, 2015, in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of
New York, Mark Henry, a/k/a Weida
Zheng, a/k/a Scott Russel, a/k/a Bob
Wilson, a/k/a Joanna Zhong (‘‘Henry’’),
was convicted of violating Section 38 of
the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C.
2778 (2012)) (‘‘AECA’’). Specifically,
Henry was convicted of willfully and
knowingly exporting, causing to be
exported, and attempting to export from
the United States to Taiwan defense
articles listed on the United States
Munitions List, specifically, ablative
materials for use, among other things, as
a protective coating for rocket nozzles,
without the required State Department
license. Henry was sentenced to 78
months in prison for violating Sections
38(b)(2) and (c) of the AECA, along with
three years of supervised release and a
$200 assessment.1
Section 766.25 of the Export
Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR’’ or
1 Henry also was convicted of a second count,
specifically, conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C.
Section 371. He was sentenced on this count to 60
months in prison and three years of supervision
release. His sentence on this count runs
concurrently with his sentence, disused in the text
above, for violating Section 38 of the AECA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 04, 2017
Jkt 244001
‘‘Regulations’’) 1 provides, in pertinent
part, that ‘‘[t]he Director of the Office of
Exporter Services, in consultation with
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 EAA
[Export Administration Act of 1979], 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.
4610(h). The denial of export privileges
under this provision may be for a period
of up to ten (10) years from the date of
the conviction. 15 CFR 766.25(d); see
also 50 U.S.C. 4610(h). In addition,
Section 750.8 of the Regulations states
that the Bureau of Industry and Security
(‘‘BIS’’)’s Office of Exporter Services
may revoke any BIS licenses previously
issued pursuant to the EAA or the
Regulations in which the person had an
interest at the time of his/her
conviction.
BIS received notice of Henry’s
conviction for violating Section 38 of
the AECA, and has provided notice and
an opportunity for Henry to make a
written submission to BIS, as provided
in Section 766.25 of the Regulations.
BIS has not received a submission from
Henry. 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 Henry’s export
privileges under the Regulations for a
period of ten (10) years from the date of
Henry’s conviction. I have also decided
to revoke all licenses issued pursuant to
the Act or Regulations in which Henry
had an interest at the time of his
conviction.
1 The Regulations are currently codified in the
Code of Federal Regulations at 15 CFR parts 730–
774 (2017). The Regulations issued pursuant to the
Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. 4601–
4623 (Supp. III 2015) (available at https://
uscode.house.gov)) (‘‘EAA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’). Since
August 21, 2001, the Act 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 15,
2017 (82 FR 39005 (Aug. 16, 2017)), has continued
the Regulations in effect under the International
Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701,
et seq. (2012)).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
B. Denial of Export Privileges of Related
Person Dahua Electronics Corporation,
a/k/a Bao An Corporation
Section 766.25(h) of the Regulations
provides that the Director of BIS’s Office
of Exporter Services, in consultation
with the Director of BIS’s Office of
Export Enforcement, may take action in
accordance with Section 766.23 of the
Regulations to make applicable to
related persons a denial order that is
being sought or has issued under
Section 766.25. Section 766.23 provides,
in turn, that in order to prevent evasion
of a denial order issued pursuant to Part
766 of the Regulations, including
pursuant to Section 766.25, the denial
order made be made applicable not only
to the respondent, but also to other
persons related to the respondent by
ownership, control, position of
responsibility, affiliation, or other
connection in the conduct of trade or
business.
As provided in Section 766.23, BIS
gave notice to Dahua Electronics
Corporation a/k/a Bao An Corporation
(‘‘Dahua’’) that it intended to deny Mark
Henry’s export privileges pursuant to
Section 766.25 for a period of up to ten
(10) years from the date of his
conviction and intended to make that
denial order applicable to Dahua
pursuant to Sections 766.25 and
766.23.2 BIS also provided notice that it
has reason to believe that Dahua is
related to Henry as set forth in Section
766.23, that is, by ownership, control,
position of responsibility, affiliation, or
other connection in the conduct of trade
or business, and reason to believe that
naming Dahua as a person related to
Henry would be necessary to prevent
evasion of a denial order imposed
against Henry. BIS gave Dahua an
opportunity to oppose its addition as a
related party by informing Dahua that it
could make a written submission
describing why Dahua is not related to
Henry or why a denial order against
Henry should not be applied to Dahua.
Having received no submission from
or on behalf of Dahua, I have decided,
following consultations with BIS’s
Office of Export Enforcement, including
its Director, to name Dahua as a Related
Person and make this Denial Order
applicable to Dahua, thereby denying its
export privileges for ten (10) years from
the date of Henry’s conviction, that is,
until November 19, 2025. I have also
decided to revoke all licenses issued
pursuant to the Act or Regulations in
which Dahua had an interest at the time
of Henry’s conviction.
2 BIS
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
provided notice to Dahua via Henry.
05OCN1
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 192 / Thursday, October 5, 2017 / Notices
Dahua was incorporated in New York
State, and remains listed there as an
active corporation. Henry, a naturalized
U.S. citizen born in China, operated
Dahua out of his residence in Flushing,
New York, and is believed to own
Dahua. He used Dahua to purchase
various items from companies located in
the United States, including tools,
machine parts, materials used in
machinery, and industrial chemicals, for
export to end users or customers located
in Asia, including China and Taiwan.
Operating through Dahua, Henry
received requests for products from
customers located overseas and solicited
orders for those products from suppliers
and manufacturers located in the United
States, including in connection with the
violation of the AECA for which he was
convicted. Thus, I find that Dahua is
related to Henry within the meaning of
Section 766.23, and that Dahua should
be added as a related person to prevent
evasion of this order.
Accordingly, it is hereby ordered:
First, from the date of this Order until
November 19, 2025, Mark Henry, a/k/a
Weida Zheng, a/k/a Scott Russel, a/k/a
Bob Wilson, a/k/a Joanna Zhong, with a
last known address of FCI Schuylkill,
Federal Correctional Institution,
Satellite Camp, P.O. Box 670,
Minersville, PA 17954, and when acting
for or on his behalf, his successors,
assigns, employees, agents, or
representatives, and Dahua Electronics
Corporation, a/k/a Bao An Corporation,
with a last known address of 134–12
59th Avenue, Flushing, NY 11355, and
when acting for or on its behalf, its
successors, assigns, directors, officers,
employees, agents, or representatives
(each ‘‘a Denied Person’’ and
collectively ‘‘the Denied Persons’’) 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, or in any other activity
subject to the Regulations, including but
not limited to:
A. Applying for, obtaining, or using
any license, license exception, or export
control document;
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 engaging
in any other activity subject to the
Regulations; or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:52 Oct 04, 2017
Jkt 244001
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
from any other activity subject to the
Regulations.
Second, no person may, directly or
indirectly, do any of the following:
A. Export or reexport to or on behalf
of a Denied Person any item subject to
the Regulations;
B. Take any action that facilitates the
acquisition or attempted acquisition by
a 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 a 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 a Denied Person of any
item subject to the Regulations that has
been exported from the United States;
D. Obtain from a 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 a Denied
Person, or service any item, of whatever
origin, that is owned, possessed or
controlled by a 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.
Third, in addition to the Related
Person named above, after notice and
opportunity for comment as provided in
section 766.23 of the Regulations, any
other individual, firm, corporation, or
other association or organization or
other person related to a Denied Person
by ownership, control, position of
responsibility, affiliation, or other
connection in the conduct of trade or
business may also be made subject to
the provisions of this Order if necessary
to prevent evasion of this Order.
Fourth, in accordance with Part 756
and Section 766.25(g) of the
Regulations, Henry may file an appeal of
the issuance of this Order against him
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
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
46481
with the provisions of Part 756 of the
Regulations.
Fifth, in accordance with Part 756 and
Section 766.23(c) of the Regulations,
Dahua may file an appeal of its being
named as a related person in this Order
with the Under Secretary of Commerce
for Industry and Security.3 This 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.
Sixth, a copy of this Order shall be
delivered to Henry and Dahua and shall
be published in the Federal Register.
Seventh, this Order is effective
immediately and shall remain in effect
until November 19, 2025.
Issued this 28th day of September, 2017.
Karen H. Nies-Vogel,
Director, Office of Exporter Services.
[FR Doc. 2017–21475 Filed 10–4–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
In the Matter of: Robert J. Shubert, Sr.,
Currently Incarcerated at: Inmate
Number: 96749–020, FCI Coleman Low,
P.O. Box 1031, Coleman, FL 33521; and
With a Prior Known Address at: 417
Hedlund Drive, Warner Robbins, GA
31088
Order Denying Export Privileges
On October 15, 2014, in the U.S.
District Court, Middle District of
Georgia, Robert J. Shubert, Sr.
(‘‘Shubert’’) was convicted of violating
Section 38 of the Arms Export Control
Act (22 U.S.C. 2778 (2012)) (‘‘AECA’’).
Specifically, Shubert was convicted of
knowingly and willfully exporting, from
the United States to Japan, Dual Sensor
Night Vision Goggles designated as
defense articles on the United States
Munitions List, without the required
U.S. Department of State licenses.
Shubert was sentenced to 78 months in
prison, 36 months of supervised release,
a $15,000 fine, and a $300 assessment.
Section 766.25 of the Export
Administration Regulations (‘‘EAR’’ or
‘‘Regulations’’) 1 provides, in pertinent
3 As set forth in Section 766.23(c), the only issues
that may be raised in such an appeal are whether
the person so named is related to the respondent
and whether the order is justified in order to
prevent evasion. Thus, Dahua may not appeal the
issuance of the denial order against Henry.
1 The Regulations are currently codified in the
Code of Federal Regulations at 15 CFR parts 730–
774 (2017). The Regulations issued pursuant to the
Export Administration Act (50 U.S.C. 4601–4623
(Supp. III 2015) (available at https://
uscode.house.gov)) (‘‘EAA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’). Since
E:\FR\FM\05OCN1.SGM
Continued
05OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 192 (Thursday, October 5, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46480-46481]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-21475]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
In the Matter of: Mark Henry (a/k/a Weida Zheng, a/k/a Scott
Russel, a/k/a Bob Wilson, a/k/a Joanna Zhong), Inmate Number: 75602-
053, FCI Schuylkill, Federal Correctional Institution, Satellite Camp,
P.O. Box 670, Minersville, PA 17954; Respondent; Dahua Electronics
Corporation (a/k/a Bao An Corporation), 134-12 59th Avenue, Flushing,
NY 11355, Related Person Order Denying Privileges
A. Denial of Export Privileges of Mark Henry, a/k/a Weida Zheng, a/k/a
Scott Russel, a/k/a Bob Wilson, a/k/a Joanna Zhong
On November 19, 2015, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of New York, Mark Henry, a/k/a Weida Zheng, a/k/a Scott
Russel, a/k/a Bob Wilson, a/k/a Joanna Zhong (``Henry''), was convicted
of violating Section 38 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778
(2012)) (``AECA''). Specifically, Henry was convicted of willfully and
knowingly exporting, causing to be exported, and attempting to export
from the United States to Taiwan defense articles listed on the United
States Munitions List, specifically, ablative materials for use, among
other things, as a protective coating for rocket nozzles, without the
required State Department license. Henry was sentenced to 78 months in
prison for violating Sections 38(b)(2) and (c) of the AECA, along with
three years of supervised release and a $200 assessment.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Henry also was convicted of a second count, specifically,
conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 371. He was sentenced
on this count to 60 months in prison and three years of supervision
release. His sentence on this count runs concurrently with his
sentence, disused in the text above, for violating Section 38 of the
AECA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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 EAA [Export
Administration Act of 1979], 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. 4610(h). The denial of export
privileges under this provision may be for a period of up to ten (10)
years from the date of the conviction. 15 CFR 766.25(d); see also 50
U.S.C. 4610(h). In addition, Section 750.8 of the Regulations states
that the Bureau of Industry and Security (``BIS'')'s Office of Exporter
Services may revoke any BIS licenses previously issued pursuant to the
EAA or the Regulations in which the person had an interest at the time
of his/her conviction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Regulations are currently codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations at 15 CFR parts 730-774 (2017). The Regulations
issued pursuant to the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C.
4601-4623 (Supp. III 2015) (available at https://uscode.house.gov))
(``EAA'' or ``the Act''). Since August 21, 2001, the Act 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 15, 2017 (82 FR 39005 (Aug. 16, 2017)), has continued the
Regulations in effect under the International Emergency Economic
Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq. (2012)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BIS received notice of Henry's conviction for violating Section 38
of the AECA, and has provided notice and an opportunity for Henry to
make a written submission to BIS, as provided in Section 766.25 of the
Regulations. BIS has not received a submission from Henry. 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 Henry's export privileges under the Regulations for a period of
ten (10) years from the date of Henry's conviction. I have also decided
to revoke all licenses issued pursuant to the Act or Regulations in
which Henry had an interest at the time of his conviction.
B. Denial of Export Privileges of Related Person Dahua Electronics
Corporation, a/k/a Bao An Corporation
Section 766.25(h) of the Regulations provides that the Director of
BIS's Office of Exporter Services, in consultation with the Director of
BIS's Office of Export Enforcement, may take action in accordance with
Section 766.23 of the Regulations to make applicable to related persons
a denial order that is being sought or has issued under Section 766.25.
Section 766.23 provides, in turn, that in order to prevent evasion of a
denial order issued pursuant to Part 766 of the Regulations, including
pursuant to Section 766.25, the denial order made be made applicable
not only to the respondent, but also to other persons related to the
respondent by ownership, control, position of responsibility,
affiliation, or other connection in the conduct of trade or business.
As provided in Section 766.23, BIS gave notice to Dahua Electronics
Corporation a/k/a Bao An Corporation (``Dahua'') that it intended to
deny Mark Henry's export privileges pursuant to Section 766.25 for a
period of up to ten (10) years from the date of his conviction and
intended to make that denial order applicable to Dahua pursuant to
Sections 766.25 and 766.23.\2\ BIS also provided notice that it has
reason to believe that Dahua is related to Henry as set forth in
Section 766.23, that is, by ownership, control, position of
responsibility, affiliation, or other connection in the conduct of
trade or business, and reason to believe that naming Dahua as a person
related to Henry would be necessary to prevent evasion of a denial
order imposed against Henry. BIS gave Dahua an opportunity to oppose
its addition as a related party by informing Dahua that it could make a
written submission describing why Dahua is not related to Henry or why
a denial order against Henry should not be applied to Dahua.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ BIS provided notice to Dahua via Henry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having received no submission from or on behalf of Dahua, I have
decided, following consultations with BIS's Office of Export
Enforcement, including its Director, to name Dahua as a Related Person
and make this Denial Order applicable to Dahua, thereby denying its
export privileges for ten (10) years from the date of Henry's
conviction, that is, until November 19, 2025. I have also decided to
revoke all licenses issued pursuant to the Act or Regulations in which
Dahua had an interest at the time of Henry's conviction.
[[Page 46481]]
Dahua was incorporated in New York State, and remains listed there
as an active corporation. Henry, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in
China, operated Dahua out of his residence in Flushing, New York, and
is believed to own Dahua. He used Dahua to purchase various items from
companies located in the United States, including tools, machine parts,
materials used in machinery, and industrial chemicals, for export to
end users or customers located in Asia, including China and Taiwan.
Operating through Dahua, Henry received requests for products from
customers located overseas and solicited orders for those products from
suppliers and manufacturers located in the United States, including in
connection with the violation of the AECA for which he was convicted.
Thus, I find that Dahua is related to Henry within the meaning of
Section 766.23, and that Dahua should be added as a related person to
prevent evasion of this order.
Accordingly, it is hereby ordered:
First, from the date of this Order until November 19, 2025, Mark
Henry, a/k/a Weida Zheng, a/k/a Scott Russel, a/k/a Bob Wilson, a/k/a
Joanna Zhong, with a last known address of FCI Schuylkill, Federal
Correctional Institution, Satellite Camp, P.O. Box 670, Minersville, PA
17954, and when acting for or on his behalf, his successors, assigns,
employees, agents, or representatives, and Dahua Electronics
Corporation, a/k/a Bao An Corporation, with a last known address of
134-12 59th Avenue, Flushing, NY 11355, and when acting for or on its
behalf, its successors, assigns, directors, officers, employees,
agents, or representatives (each ``a Denied Person'' and collectively
``the Denied Persons'') 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, or in any other activity subject to the Regulations,
including but not limited to:
A. Applying for, obtaining, or using any license, license
exception, or export control document;
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 engaging 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 from any other activity subject to the Regulations.
Second, no person may, directly or indirectly, do any of the
following:
A. Export or reexport to or on behalf of a Denied Person any item
subject to the Regulations;
B. Take any action that facilitates the acquisition or attempted
acquisition by a 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 a 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 a Denied Person of any item subject to
the Regulations that has been exported from the United States;
D. Obtain from a 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 a Denied Person, or
service any item, of whatever origin, that is owned, possessed or
controlled by a 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.
Third, in addition to the Related Person named above, after notice
and opportunity for comment as provided in section 766.23 of the
Regulations, any other individual, firm, corporation, or other
association or organization or other person related to a Denied Person
by ownership, control, position of responsibility, affiliation, or
other connection in the conduct of trade or business may also be made
subject to the provisions of this Order if necessary to prevent evasion
of this Order.
Fourth, in accordance with Part 756 and Section 766.25(g) of the
Regulations, Henry may file an appeal of the issuance of this Order
against him 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.
Fifth, in accordance with Part 756 and Section 766.23(c) of the
Regulations, Dahua may file an appeal of its being named as a related
person in this Order with the Under Secretary of Commerce for Industry
and Security.\3\ This 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ As set forth in Section 766.23(c), the only issues that may
be raised in such an appeal are whether the person so named is
related to the respondent and whether the order is justified in
order to prevent evasion. Thus, Dahua may not appeal the issuance of
the denial order against Henry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sixth, a copy of this Order shall be delivered to Henry and Dahua
and shall be published in the Federal Register.
Seventh, this Order is effective immediately and shall remain in
effect until November 19, 2025.
Issued this 28th day of September, 2017.
Karen H. Nies-Vogel,
Director, Office of Exporter Services.
[FR Doc. 2017-21475 Filed 10-4-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P