<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Section 1782 and Private Arbitration: An Update	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/01/20/section-1782-private-arbitration-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/01/20/section-1782-private-arbitration-update/</link>
	<description>The Blog of International Judicial Assistance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2024 01:43:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Case of the Day: In re Application of Laos &#124; Letters Blogatory		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/01/20/section-1782-private-arbitration-update/#comment-22633</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Case of the Day: In re Application of Laos &#124; Letters Blogatory]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Nov 2024 02:25:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=17462#comment-22633</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] international tribunal.&#8221; I&#8217;ve considered this question a few times before, for example here, here and [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] international tribunal.&#8221; I&#8217;ve considered this question a few times before, for example here, here and [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Private International Arbitration And &#167; 1782: Are We Nearer To A Reckoning? &#124; Letters Blogatory		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/01/20/section-1782-private-arbitration-update/#comment-22151</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Private International Arbitration And &#167; 1782: Are We Nearer To A Reckoning? &#124; Letters Blogatory]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Nov 2024 17:28:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=17462#comment-22151</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] the Seventh Circuit and the Eleventh Circuit have also cast doubt on whether a private arbitral tribunal is a tribunal for purposes of the statute. So it could be [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] the Seventh Circuit and the Eleventh Circuit have also cast doubt on whether a private arbitral tribunal is a tribunal for purposes of the statute. So it could be [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Case of the Day: In re Servotronics &#124; Letters Blogatory		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/01/20/section-1782-private-arbitration-update/#comment-1686</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Case of the Day: In re Servotronics &#124; Letters Blogatory]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2018 11:01:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=17462#comment-1686</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] arbitration is a &#8220;foreign or international tribunal&#8221; for purposes of the statute. This 2014 post gives the lay of the land on this issue. In short, the cases are not unanimous, but the only [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] arbitration is a &#8220;foreign or international tribunal&#8221; for purposes of the statute. This 2014 post gives the lay of the land on this issue. In short, the cases are not unanimous, but the only [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Case of the Day: In re Kleimar N.V. &#124; Letters Blogatory		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/01/20/section-1782-private-arbitration-update/#comment-1685</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Case of the Day: In re Kleimar N.V. &#124; Letters Blogatory]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2016 12:42:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=17462#comment-1685</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] about this issue several times, most recently (and perhaps curtly) in April 2016, and earlier here, here and here. Second Circuit precedent has held that private arbitral tribunals are not tribunals [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] about this issue several times, most recently (and perhaps curtly) in April 2016, and earlier here, here and here. Second Circuit precedent has held that private arbitral tribunals are not tribunals [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Case of the Day: In re Application of Grupo Unidos Por El Canal &#124; Letters Blogatory		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/01/20/section-1782-private-arbitration-update/#comment-1684</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Case of the Day: In re Application of Grupo Unidos Por El Canal &#124; Letters Blogatory]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=17462#comment-1684</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] previously noted the uncertainty about whether a private arbitration is within the scope of the statute. The judge, [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] previously noted the uncertainty about whether a private arbitration is within the scope of the statute. The judge, [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Case of the Day: In re Petition of Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals &#124; Letters Blogatory		</title>
		<link>https://lettersblogatory.com/2014/01/20/section-1782-private-arbitration-update/#comment-1683</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Case of the Day: In re Petition of Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals &#124; Letters Blogatory]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2014 11:03:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lettersblogatory.com/?p=17462#comment-1683</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] Cir. 2014). Judge Posner, who wrote the opinion and is also the author of the Heraeus Kulzer and GEA Group cases, continues to show a strong interest in international judicial assistance. The case arose on [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Cir. 2014). Judge Posner, who wrote the opinion and is also the author of the Heraeus Kulzer and GEA Group cases, continues to show a strong interest in international judicial assistance. The case arose on [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
