From a question for Hillary Clinton during her Secretary of State confirmation hearings:
SHAHEEN: Thank you. The second question is related somewhat, and it deals with trade. We have a company in New Hampshire -- and forgive me for being parochial -- called Goss International that makes large printing presses.
They had Japan come in and dump imports into the market. They went to court and sued under our trade laws and got a judgment in U.S. district court. And Japan retaliated by passing a recovery or a claw back that allowed the company that was doing the dumping to actually appropriate Goss' investments in Japan. And the State Department has really done very little to address this issue in a way that -- despite the court judgment on behalf of the American company.
So what role do you see the State Department playing as companies like Goss are dealing with this violation of U.S. trade laws?
I'm vaguely familiar with the case, but I'm having a hard time figuring out what Senator Shaheen had in mind when saying "Japan retaliated by passing a recovery or a claw back that allowed the company that was doing the dumping to actually appropriate Goss' investments in Japan." Do any commenters know what was going on here? Is she referring to Japan's suspension request in the 1916 Act case?
