Bill Sponsor
House Bill 2189
115th Congress(2017-2018)
Trade Protection Not Troll Protection Act
Introduced
Introduced
Introduced in House on Apr 27, 2017
Overview
Text
Introduced
Apr 27, 2017
Latest Action
May 3, 2017
Origin Chamber
House
Type
Bill
Bill
The primary form of legislative measure used to propose law. Depending on the chamber of origin, bills begin with a designation of either H.R. or S. Joint resolution is another form of legislative measure used to propose law.
Bill Number
2189
Congress
115
Policy Area
Foreign Trade and International Finance
Foreign Trade and International Finance
Primary focus of measure is competitiveness, trade barriers and adjustment assistance; foreign loans and international monetary system; international banking; trade agreements and negotiations; customs enforcement, tariffs, and trade restrictions; foreign investment. Measures concerning border enforcement may fall under Immigration policy area.
Sponsorship by Party
Democrat
California
Republican
California
Democrat
California
Democrat
Colorado
House Votes (0)
Senate Votes (0)
No House votes have been held for this bill.
Summary

Trade Protection Not Troll Protection Act

This bill amends the Tariff Act of 1930, with respect to unfair practices in the import trade, to consider an industry in the United States to exist if there is in the United States substantial investment in licensing activities that leads to the adoption and development of articles that incorporate the patent, copyright, trademark, mask work, or design.

If the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), at the beginning of an investigation of an alleged unfair practice, identifies a domestic industry as the dispositive issue in question, it shall direct the assigned administrative law judge (ALJ) to:

  • expedite fact finding on the domestic industry requirement, and
  • issue an initial determination on this matter within 100 days after the investigation begins.

Any initial determination by the assigned ALJ shall stay the investigation pending ITC action.

The ITC may determine during an investigation that exclusion of the articles concerned from entry into the United States would not be in the public interest, and terminate the investigation, in whole or in part, without any further determination, after considering the nature of the articles concerned and the effect of exclusion upon:

  • the public health and welfare,
  • the U.S. economy (including competitive conditions),
  • the production of like or directly competitive articles by the complainant and its licensees, and
  • U.S. consumers.

Any person adversely affected by an ITC ruling that identifies a domestic industry as the dispositive issue in question may appeal that ruling, within 60 days after all administrative remedies are exhausted, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

ITC discretion not to exclude any articles concerned, even though an importer has violated the ban on unfair competition, is repealed. If the ITC also determines that exclusion would be in the public interest, it shall direct exclusion of the articles.

During an investigation, if the ITC determines there is reason to believe that an unfair import practice has occurred, and exclusion of the articles concerned would be in the public interest, the ITC may direct the exclusion the articles concerned, after considering the factors mentioned above. (Currently the ITC may not direct an exclusion until an investigation concludes and it determines, as a result of the investigation, that an unfair import trade practice has occurred.)

Text (1)
April 27, 2017
Actions (3)
05/03/2017
Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
04/27/2017
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
04/27/2017
Introduced in House
Public Record
Record Updated
Jan 11, 2023 1:35:55 PM