Intellectual Property

Overview
News
Articles
Links

Customs and Border Protection is responsible for preventing merchandise that infringes U.S. copyrights, trademarks, and other intellectual property rights from entering the country. Customs is also responsible for the enforcement of exclusion ordered issued by the International Trade Commission in Section 337 cases, which generally focus on the enforcement of patent rights.

Trademark Issues

Importers of branded merchandise should be aware that the law prohibits the importation of merchandise bearing a U.S. trademark without the permission of the trademark owner. Thus, importers should be prepared to show authorization from the rights holder. Absent permission, Customs can seize the infringing goods. While Customs can seize any infringing goods, its primary focus is on the interdiction of counterfeit goods. Counterfeit goods are products that bear a mark that copies or simulates a registered trademark. Because counterfeiting is illegal activity, the counterfeited products are often of inferior quality and may pose a risk to health and safety.

Copyrights

Customs also has the power to exclude "piratical" copies of products covered by copyright such as books, music, videos, software, and video games. A piratical copy is one that is produced without the authorization of the copyright holder. Because products imported into the U.S. often include a copyrightable elements (e.g., written instructions, packaging artwork, etc.), copyrights may be a viable alternative to trademark enforcement for companies seeking to prevent the entry of "knock-off products."

Gray Market Goods

It is often possible to find desirable products on sale outside the United States at discounted prices. This creates the possibility that goods will be imported through unauthorized channels. Such goods are called "gray market" or "parallel imports." Because these are genuine products, gray market goods are admissible provided they are not materially different from the products offered for sale in the U.S. As a result, parallel importers must be careful to recognize the differences between their imports and the products authorized for sale in the U.S. Differences such as foreign language labeling, packaging, and formulation may provide a sufficient basis for Customs to exclude the merchandise. Further, companies can seek so-called "Lever Brother Protection" from parallel imports. When granted, Lever Brother Protection requires that parallel imports be labeled as such prior to release.

Recordation

Customs and Border Protection focuses its enforcement efforts on trademarks, copyrights, and trade dress recorded via its electronic system. Recordation is a relatively simple and inexpensive step that provides significant benefits. Recordation publishes the claim for protection to Customs personnel throughout the country and alerts them to the possibility that infringing merchandise is being presented for entry. Recordation should be part of a rights holder's larger strategy of working with Customs to protect its investment in intellectual property.

Section 337

Determining whether a product infringes upon a U.S. patent is often requires the application of complex legal and technical knowledge. Because of the complexity of the issues, the enforcement of patent rights at the border is entrusted to the U.S. International Trade Commission, which has staff attorneys and Administrative Law Judges dedicated to reviewing claims made before the agency. If infringement is found, the ITC can order that the merchandise be excluded from the United States. It falls to Customs and Border Protection to enforce those orders.

Our Role

Barnes/Richardson lawyers have assisted clients with all aspects of the border enforcement of intellectual property law including:

                  Recording trademarks
                  Recording copyrights
                  Developing brand protection materials for training Customs personnel
                  Responding to CBP seizure notices
                  Seeking rulings from CBP to confirm compliance with 337 exclusion orders

Should you have questions or concerns regarding the importation or exclusion of merchandise subject to intellectual property protection, please contact a Barnes/Richardson lawyer.

May 27, 2026: Commerce and USTR Implement Section 232 Relief for Taiwan
May 26, 2026: CBP Ruling Clarifies Price Paid or Payable
May 26, 2026: CBP Updates CAPE Guidance for Entries Flagged for Reconciliation
May 13, 2026: And Suddenly, Shippers Have Choices
May 12, 2026: BIS Set to Publish Notice on Applications for Pharmaceutical Company-Specific Agreements
May 11, 2026: CBP Releases Updated Guidance on 232s for USMCA Medium and Heavy Vehicles
May 8, 2026: Court of International Trade Panel Strikes Down Section 122 Tariffs, Throws Out Most State Suits
May 4, 2026: U.S.& EU Align on Critical Minerals Supply Chain Resilience
Apr. 27, 2026: EU Commissioner Šefcovic on EU-U.S. Steel Talks
Apr. 24, 2026: CIT Decision Highlights CAPE Phase II IEEPA Refund Concerns
Apr. 24, 2026: Potential AD/CVD for Mexican, Vietnamese, & Thai Chassis
Apr. 21, 2026: CAPE Phase 1, Day One, Better Than Feared
Apr. 20, 2026: CBP Updates Guidance on Jones Act Waiver
Apr. 20, 2026: BIS Enforcement Action Against Coastal PVA Technology Signals Continued Scrutiny of EAR99 Exports
Apr. 14, 2026: CBP Publishes CAPE Phase 1 Update
Apr. 10, 2026: CBP Releases First CAPE IEEPA Refund Instructions
Apr. 2, 2026: Big Changes to Tariffs on Steel, Aluminum, Copper and their Derivative Articles
Apr. 1, 2026: CBP Publishes New Applications for ACE Portal Accounts
Mar. 31, 2026: CIT Potentially Broadens the Path for IEEPA Refunds—But the End Is Not Here Yet
Mar. 30, 2026: Section 232 Steel/Aluminum Content Reporting "Guidance"
Mar. 20, 2026: CBP Ruling Clarifies Customs Business, Addresses AI
Mar. 16, 2026: USTR Initiates Forced Labor Section 301 Investigation
Mar. 12, 2026: Here Come the Section 301 Investigations
Mar. 12, 2026: CBP Updates Court on IEEPA Refund Process and Technology
Mar. 11, 2026: AD/CVD Petitions Announced on Lithium Battery Chemicals from China
Mar. 10, 2026: Bills Introduced in House and Senate to Restrict Non-Resident Importers
Mar. 9, 2026: States Challenge Section 122 Tariffs
Mar. 6, 2026: Customs Proposes IEEPA Refund Process to Court
Mar. 4, 2026: CIT Orders Refunds; Appeal Likely
Mar. 2, 2026: IEEPA Case Expedited to CIT for Relief
Feb. 27, 2026: New AD/CVD Petitions on Truck Bed Covers from China
Feb. 27, 2026: "Trade Deals" Under Reciprocal Tariff Framework Have Uncertain (and Maybe Varying) Futures
Feb. 27, 2026: Battle of 122 Tariffs: Is it 10 or 15%?
Feb. 27, 2026: Wither De Minimis After the Supreme Court IEEPA Decision?
Feb. 11, 2026: Legislation Introduced to End First Sale
Feb. 10, 2026: United States & Bangladesh Agreement on Reciprocal Trade
Feb. 9, 2026: U.S. and India Announce Interim Trade Deal
Feb. 6, 2026: Secondary Tariffs Threatened on Countries Selling Oil to Cuba
Feb. 6, 2026: U.S. Finalizes Terms on Trade Agreement with Argentina
Feb. 3, 2026: Answering Dumping Questionnaires Just Got Harder
Feb. 2, 2026: Apparent India/U.S. IEEPA Duty Deal Reached
Feb. 1, 2026: El Salvador and Guatemala Get IEEPA Deals
Jan. 26, 2026: BIS and Customs Funding Appropriations: Where We Are and What's It All Mean
Jan. 26, 2026: Trump Threatens to Increase Korean Tariffs to 25%
Jan. 20, 2026: Trump Threatens Europeans With More Tariffs Over Greenland
Jan. 15, 2026: Negotiations Chosen Over Tariffs for Critical Minerals, For Now
Jan. 15, 2026: New 25% Tariff Imposed on Certain Semiconductor Imports

View Archive

Jan. 22, 2025: Webinar: What We Know After the Inauguration
Sep. 9, 2024: McPherson to Co-Moderate Export Enforcement Discussion
Jun. 2, 2023: BRC and Attorneys Ranked in 2023 Chambers Guide
April 01, 2014: BRC Partner David Forgue Speaks at ITCC Workshop
February 5, 2013: Detentions, Exclusions, and Customs Protests
By: Lawrence M. Friedman
May-June 2012: White House International Trade Initiatives
By: David G. Forgue

U.S. Customs & Border Protection Seizure Information