Flag-European-Union-GettyImages-1031313036-Med

The European Commission has for the first time issued informal guidance under its revised 2022 Notice relating to “novel and unresolved” competition law questions. The two guidance letters, issued on July 9, 2025, both concern the transport sector. The first letter addresses a sustainability agreement aimed at reducing CO2 emissions in European ports by facilitating the transition to battery-electric container-handling equipment, the second looks at an automotive licensing negotiation group for technologies covered by standard essential patents.

To learn more, please read our Client Alert The European Commission issues competition guidance in the transport sector.

On June 30, 2025, the Department of Transportation Office of the Inspector General (DOT OIG) released its audit report assessing the FAA’s efforts to advance beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) drone operations outside the parameters of existing drone regulations.  Among many findings, DOT OIG found that the FAA has approved increasingly complex BVLOS drone operations but identified several shortcomings with respect to the agency’s ability to leverage its industry partnership programs in this space, such as the BEYOND program. The report identified seven recommendations to improve the FAA’s efforts to advance BVLOS operations, many of which are focused on creating efficiencies for and standardizing processes across the FAA’s partnership programs. 

When will the CPSC regulate micromobility products?  

On June 20, 2025, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) re-noticed a proposed rule (“the notice” or “NPR”) on “Lithium-Ion Batteries Used in Micromobility Products and Electrical Systems of Micromobility Products Containing Such Batteries,” which it withdrew just days later. The notice has had an unusually erratic past – it was (1) voted on by the five-person commission in April, (2) initially noticed in early May, (3) withdrawn, (4) re-noticed in June, and (5) again withdrawn. The first withdrawal in May was due to President Trump’s firing of the three Democratic CPSC Commissioners who voted to issue the notice (the two Republicans on the Commission voted against it). After the Democratic Commissioners were reinstated, and the notice was reissued, it appeared that a micromobility rule was finally on its way. However, it was again removed – this time without explanation.

Continue Reading Federal Micromobility Regulations – the Up and Coming 
Courthouse-facade-GettyImages-497221924-Med

In Kiekert de Mexico S.A. de CV v. Brose Jefferson, Inc., another federal court in Michigan relied on the 2023 Airboss ruling regarding “release-by-release” agreements in an order allowing an auto parts supplier in Mexico to reject order-by-order purchase releases from a Michigan purchaser, finding that the “needs” of the buyer under the parties’ agreement were too vague to meet the statute of frauds.

At the heart of this issue is what amount of specificity exactly is required to spell out a “requirements contract,” which is enforceable under the statute of frauds and cannot be terminated on an order-by-order basis. In the absence of sufficient specificity, a release-by-release agreement allows either party to walk away from the “blanket” or “umbrella” supply agreement except as to specific release orders that are issued and accepted.

Continue Reading Another Michigan Auto Parts Agreement Terminated Under Release-By-Release Doctrine

On Thursday, the President signed three Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolutions that effectively prevent California from implementing its zero emission mandates for passenger vehicles and commercial trucks and its stricter emission standards for heavy-duty vehicles. Previously, the Government Accountability Office and the Senate Parliamentarian determined that the Biden Administration EPA’s approvals of these mandates were waivers from federal (Clean Air Act) preemption and not rules for CRA purposes, but the House and Senate nevertheless passed all three resolutions. In signing the resolutions into law, President Trump proclaimed that the resolutions “prohibit the EPA from approving future waivers for California that would impose California’s policy goals across the entire country. . . ending the electric vehicle mandate for good.” That same day, the State of California and ten other states filed suit in a federal district court in California, challenging the three CRA resolutions as unconstitutional and contrary to multiple federal statutes.

This May, Crowell’s Erik Woodhouse spoke on a panel hosted by Windward/RUSI Centre for Finance & Security that explored the implications of the 2025 OFAC maritime sanctions advisory for compliance in the maritime sector. Erik is an International Trade partner and former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Counter Threat Finance and Sanctions at the Department of State.

Watch on-demand: “OFAC 2025: The New Era of Maritime Compliance & What It Means for You.”

Please listen in as hosts Nicole Simonian and Dj Wolff, co-chairs of Crowell’s International Trade Group, and featured guest Dan Wolff, a Transportation, and Litigation and Trial partner, review and consider the impact of the Court of International Trade’s recent decision on the tariffs imposed pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).

Global Trade Talks is a podcast that shares brief perspectives on key global issues on international trade, current events, business, law, and public policy as they impact our lives.

Listen: Crowell.com | PodBean | SoundCloud | Apple Podcasts 

United-States-Supreme-Court-building-GettyImages-617600672-Med

On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court dismissed as improvidently granted the petition for writ of certiorari in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, dba Labcorp, v. Luke Davis, et al., No. 22-55873. As a result of the Court’s dismissal, a federal circuit split on the inclusion of uninjured class members in Rule 23 damages classes remains. While the Court did not reach the petition’s merits, Justice Kavanaugh wrote in dissent that he would have reached the merits and would have held “that a federal court may not certify a damages class that includes both injured and uninjured members.”

For more information about the Court’s recent dismissal, please read our Client Alert Supreme Court Dismisses Cert Petition On Uninjured Class Members As Improvidently Granted.

We are proud to announce that Crowell has again been ranked in Band 2 of the “Transportation: Aviation: Transactional − Nationwide” category in the Chambers USA 2025 guide.

In addition, two of Crowell’s premier Aviation attorneys, Amna Arshad and Mary-Caitlin Ray, are ranked in the “Transportation: Aviation: Regulatory – Nationwide” category. Amna is recognized in Band 2, a testament to her handling of a “wide range of aviation regulatory and compliance issues,” and Mary-Caitlin is listed as “Up and Coming” due in part to her experience “advising clients on regulatory implications for emerging technologies such as eVTOL aircraft or drones.”

A hearty congratulations to all for these notable achievements.

For more information on Crowell’s practices and lawyers rankings at large, please take a look at the firm-wide announcement.

On May 28, 2025, the Court of International Trade granted summary judgment in V.O.S. Selections, Inc. et al v. Donald J. Trump Case No. 25-cv-66, ordering that all the executive orders imposing tariffs on the basis of IEEPA (Executive Order 14193, Executive Order 14194, Executive Order 14195, Executive Order 14257), were declared to be invalid as contrary to law.  The operation of the tariff orders is permanently enjoined and the Court ordered that administrative orders to effectuate the permanent injunction shall be issued within 10 calendar days.

Continue Reading U.S. Court of International Trade Blocks IEEPA Tariffs