Law Firms Connected To Plaintiffs/Defendants In Libertad Act Lawsuits Facing Off In Lawsuit Against PAHO For Cuban Doctor Payments In Brazil

Ramona Matos Rodriguez, Tatiana Carballo Gomez, Fidel Cruz Rodrigue, and Russela Margarita Rivero Sarabia, plaintiffs, v. Pan American Health Organization, defendant. [1:20-cv-00928, Southern District Court- Miami Division].

Cooper & Kirk, PLLC (plaintiff)
Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP (plaintiff)
Dubbin & Kravetz (plaintiff)
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr LLP (defendant)

Judgement- 1 Page (3/29/22)
Opinion- 24 Pages (3/29/22)
Transcript Of Status Conference United States District Judge- 17 Pages (1/28/22)
Class Action Complaint- 85 Pages (11/30/2018)

Excerpt From Judgement
This cause came on to be heard on the record on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and was argued by counsel. On consideration thereof, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the District Court’s judgment denying PAHO’s motion to dismiss the 18 U.S.C. § 1589(b) claim be affirmed and the case be remanded for further proceedings, in accordance with the opinion of the court filed herein this date.

Excerpt From Opinion
Finally, we note that the United States has submitted an amicus brief affirming that, in its view, WHO Constitution Article 67(a) is not self-executing. “Respect is ordinarily due the reasonable views of the Executive Branch concerning the meaning of an international treaty.” El Al Israel Airlines, Ltd. v. Tsui Yuan Tseng, 525 U.S. 155, 168 (1999). The Executive Branch’s position reinforces our decision.

LINK: Libertad Act Lawsuit Filing Statistics

LUIS MANUEL RODRIGUEZ, MARIA TERESA RODRIGUEZ, a/k/a MARIA TERESA LANDA, ALFREDO RAMON FORNS, RAMON ALBERTO RODRIGUEZ, RAUL LORENZO RODRIGUEZ, CHRISTINA CONROY, and FRANCISCO RAMON RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiffs, v. IMPERIAL BRANDS PLC, CORPORACIÓN HABANOS, S.A., WPP PLC, YOUNG & RUBICAM LLC, and BCW LLC, a/k/a BURSON COHN & WOLFE LLC [1:20-cv-23287; Southern Florida District].

Berenthal & Associates (plaintiff)
Rodriguez Tramont & Nunez (plaintiff)
Nelson Mullins (defendant)
Allen & Overy (defendant)
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr (defendant)
Broad & Cassel (defendant)
Akerman (defendant)
Trenam, Kemker, Scharf, Barkin, Frye, O’Neill & Mullis (defendant)
Rabinowitz, Boudin, Standard, Krinsky & Lieberman (defendant)
Strook & Strook & Lavan (defendant)

ROBERT M. GLEN VS. TRIPADVISOR LLC, TRIPADVISOR, INC., ORBITZ, LLC, TRIP NETWORK, INC. D/B/A CHEAPTICKETS, KAYAK SOFTWARE CORPORATION, BOOKING HOLDINGS, INC., EXPEDIA, INC., EXPEDIA GROUP, INC., HOTELS.COM, L.P., HOTELS.COM GP, LLC, and TRAVELSCAPE LLC D/B/A TRAVELOCITY [2:19-cv-01683; Nevada District] On 16 December 2019, plaintiff requested dismissal without prejudice, which was granted; action consolidated with 1:19-cv-01809 in Delaware District.

Rice Reuther Sullivan & Carroll, LLC (plaintiff)
Reid Collins & Tsai LLP (plaintiff)
Andrews & Springer LLC (plaintiff)
Walden Macht & Haran (defendant- Trip Advisor)
Potter Anderson & Corroon, LLP (defendant- Trip Advisor)
Scott Douglass McConnico (defendant- Expedia)
Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP (defendant- Booking)
Dubbin & Kravetz (amicus)
Baker McKenzie (defendant- Booking)
Ballard Spahr LLP (defendant- Expedia)
Morris James LLP (defendant- Booking)
Duane Morris LLP (defendant- Booking)
Cooch and Taylor, P.A. (amicus)

Reuters Americas
London, United Kingdom
31 March 2022

(Reuters) - The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), an international body that promotes health initiatives in the Americas, must face a lawsuit by Cuban doctors accusing it of helping arrange a program in which they were compelled to work in Brazil against their will, violating human trafficking laws.

A unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled Tuesday that PAHO's status as an international organization did not make it immune from the lawsuit because the doctors had accused it of financial misconduct within the United States. Samuel Dubbin of Dubbin & Kravetz, a lawyer for the doctors, said in a statement that PAHO "will finally be held accountable for profiting more than $75 million off the backs of thousands of Cuban professionals."

PAHO could not immediately be reached for comment.

The case, brought by four doctors in 2018 in the Southern District of Florida and transferred in 2020 to Washington, D.C., district court, centers on the so-called Mais Medicos program, in which Cuba in 2012 agreed to send doctors to work in Brazil, which would pay for their services, using PAHO as an intermediary. The Cuban government received 85% of the money paid by Brazil, with just 10% going to the doctors and 5% retained by PAHO as a fee. The funds passed through PAHO's U.S.-based bank account.

The doctors in their lawsuit said that they had escaped from the program to the United States. They alleged they were forced to work under the threat of punishment by their government and paid far less than the value of their work. They are seeking to represent a class of similarly situated doctors in the program. The doctors said that PAHO violated the Trafficking Victims Protection Act by facilitating the program. PAHO moved to dismiss the lawsuit, citing a U.S. law that gives international organizations the same immunity from being sued as foreign governments under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.

U.S. District Judge James Boasberg agreed that claims related to PAHO's activities outside the United States were barred, and dismissed them. However, he said claims could proceed based on PAHO's financial activity because the FSIA does not apply when an action "is based upon a commercial activity carried on in the United States."

On appeal, PAHO argued that the doctors' action was not "based upon" the financial transactions in the United States, but rather on foreign conduct. In Tuesday's opinion penned by U.S. Circuit Judge Karen Henderson, the D.C. Circuit said that the financial transactions, allegedly made in furtherance of trafficking, could stand on their own as a cause of action. Circuit Judges David Tatel and Cornelia Pillard joined in the opinion.

January 2022 Agricultural Commodities/Food Products Exports To Cuba Increase 14.5%.

ECONOMIC EYE ON CUBA©
March 2022

January 2022 Food/Ag Exports To Cuba Increase 14.5%- 1
57th Of 207 January 2022 U.S. Food/Ag Export Markets- 2
2022 Exports Increase 14.5%- 2
Cuba Ranked 75th Of U.S. Ag/Food Export Markets- 2
January 2022 Healthcare Product Exports US$0.00- 2
January 2022 Humanitarian Donations US$398,943.00- 3
Obama Administration Initiatives Exports Continue- 3
U.S. Port Export Data- 16

JANUARY 2022 FOOD/AG EXPORTS TO CUBA INCREASE %- Exports of food products and agricultural commodities from the United States to the Republic of Cuba in January 2022 were US$21,783,159.00 compared to US$19,018,549.00 in January 2021 and US$13,421,660.00 in January 2020.

January 2022 Exports Included: Chicken Leg Quarters (Frozen); Chicken Meat (Frozen); Chicken Legs (Frozen); While Chickens; Woodpulp; Coffee Beans; Bean Seeds for sowing.

This report contains information on exports from the United States to the Republic of Cuba- products within the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act (TSREEA) of 2000, Cuban Democracy Act (CDA) of 1992, and regulations implemented (1992 to present) for other products by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the United States Department of the Treasury and Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) of the United States Department of Commerce.

The TSREEA re-authorized the direct commercial (on a cash basis) export of food products (including branded food products) and agricultural commodities from the United States to the Republic of Cuba, irrespective of purpose. The TSREEA does not include healthcare products, which remain authorized and regulated by the CDA.

Click here for a list of agricultural commodities eligible for export to Cuba under Section 902(1) of the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000

Complete Report In PDF Format

44th Libertad Act Lawsuit Filed. Plaintiffs Suing Melia Hotels In Spain Now Suing Expedia In U.S. "Expedia Group does not list hotels on the Expedia Group websites for charitable purposes."

CENTRAL SANTA LUCIA, L.C., PLAINTIFF, V. EXPEDIA GROUP, INC., DEFENDANT. (1:22-CV-00367; Delaware District) 

Cross & Simon, LLC (plaintiff)
Berliner Corcoran & Rowe LLP (plaintiff)
Fields LLC (plaintiff)
Ballard Spahr LLP (defendant)

Complaint (3/22/22)
Link To Libertad Act Lawsuit Filing Statistics

Excerpts From Complaint 

Central Santa Lucia brings this action to recover damages and interest under the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (LIBERTAD) Act of 1996, codified at 22 U.S.C. § 6021, et seq. (the “Helms-Burton Act” or “Act”) against Expedia for trafficking in property that was confiscated by the Cuban Government on or after January 1, 1959, and as to which Central Santa Lucia owns claims. 

The Confiscated Property includes real property located in or near Holguin province, Cuba that, until it was confiscated by the Cuban government in 1960, was owned by Santa Lucia Company, S.A., a Cuban corporation. The Confiscated Property consists of Santa Lucia Company, S.A. and approximately 102,300 acres of land, including thirty-five miles of oceanfront property that in some parts extended 8 miles inland. The following beaches (as they are currently known) are located on the Confiscated Property: Playa Blanca; Playa Pesquero; Playa Yuraguanal; Playa Esmeralda; and Playa Guardalavaca. 

A number of luxury hotels are currently located on the Confiscated Property including, but not limited to: Hotel Brisas Guardalavaca; Club Amigo Atlantico-Guardalavaca; Paradisus Rio de Oro; Sol Rio de Luna y Mares; Hotel Turquesa Holguin; Fiesta Americana Costa Verde; Hotel Playa Costa Verde; Playa Pesquero Resort Suite and Spa Hotel; Iberostar Selection Holquin; Villa Don Lino; Memories Holquin; and the Iberostar Selection Almirante. 

Under the agency model, Expedia Group facilitates travel bookings and acts as the agent in the transaction, passing reservations booked by the traveler to the relevant travel provider with Expedia Group receiving commissions or ticketing fees from the travel supplier and/or the traveler. Customers pay at the time of stay under this model, referred to as “Hotel Collect.” The agency model accounted for 24% of Expedia Group’s revenue in 2020. 

On May 23, 2017, Expedia Group announced that it had started offering online booking for hotels in Cuba. Veronica Vega, Expedia Area Manager for the Caribbean, stated that, “I see a lot of potential. We are talking about the largest country in the Caribbean with significant hotel expansion plans,” and that, “We are very excited about being able to facilitate travel and give people the independence to select their itinerary.” 1 57. Expedia Group entered into a settlement agreement with the Office of Foreign Assets Controls (“OFAC”) on May 17, 2019, regarding 2,221 potentially non-compliant Cubarelated travel transactions that occurred between 2011-2014. 

Expedia Group websites still facilitate online booking for hotels in Cuba and Expedia Group has never announced a withdrawal from the Cuban market. 62. Expedia Group websites advertise hotels on the Confiscated Property and enable the hotels, Grupo de Administración Empresarial S.A. (“GAESA”), and the Cuban government to normalize the appearance of the Cuban military’s involvement in the tourism and hotel industry in Cuba.2 63. Expedia Group websites facilitate the payment of hard currency to the Cuban government and military, including GAESA. 

Expedia Group is profiting from trafficking in the Confiscated Property by or through its retail brands that advertise, publicize, and/or facilitate the booking of rooms at hotel properties in Holguin province. 74. Expedia Group does not list hotels on the Expedia Group websites for charitable purposes. 

Links To Related Posts About Plaintiff’s Spain-Filed Lawsuit 

Lawsuit Against Spain's Melia Hotels International Takes Another Turn... Government Of Spain Never Served Cuba. Repeat. Start Again.  July 06, 2021 

In Lawsuit Filed In Spain Against Melia Hotels, Plaintiff Argues That Government Of Cuba Is Not Required To Be A Defendant; Melia Hotels Says Otherwise.  February 10, 2021 

Court In Spain Requires Government Of Cuba And Gaviota Tourism Company Be Included In "Unjust Enrichment" Lawsuit Against Melia Hotels International.  January 16, 2021 

Plaintiffs Appeal Dismissal Of Lawsuit In Spain Against Melia Hotels; Plaintiffs Sue In U.S.; Why Did Melia Hotels Offer US$5 Million Then US$3,197.75?  October 05, 2019

43rd Libertad Act Lawsuit Filed In Delaware. Previous Plaintiff Lawsuit Dismissed In Texas. New Plaintiff, Same Defendant.

SIERRA ET AL V. TRAFIGURA TRADING, LLC (1:22-cv-00366; Delaware District).

Cross Castle LLC (plaintiff)
McGuire Woods LLP (defendant)

Order (3/15/22)
Complaint (3/22/22)
Link To Libertad Act Lawsuit Filing Statistics

Excerpts From Complaint: 

Defendant is trafficking in the Confiscated Property in violation of the Act. Specifically, Defendant causes, participates in, and/or profits from the Trafigura Group’s and its Mining Group’s mining operations in Cuba, and those mining operations use the Confiscated Property. 73. According to their 2016 Annual Report, the Trafigura Group and its Mining Group entered into a joint venture with the Cuban Government to make a large investment in mining operations on the island: “The project is another illustration of Trafigura Mining Group’s ability to put its expertise and investment to work in challenging economic or political environments. Work is so far proceeding to plan, and the mine is expected to start production towards the end of 2017.” 74. The mining operation—referred to as the Castellanos lead and zinc mine—is conducted through EMINCAR, a joint venture between the Trafigura Group including its Mining Group (which owns a 49 percent interest) and Cuban state agency Geominera (which owns a 51 percent interest). With a capital outlay equivalent to $230 million, construction was completed in 18 months from start to finish. According to financial reports, the Trafigura Group and its Mining Group invested at least $230 million in the venture through a loan to EMINCAR. 

Links To Related Posts About Plaintiff 

HILDA M. CASTANEDO ESCALON, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF HILDA CASTANEDO AND THE ESTATE OF EMMA DIAZ, Plaintiffs, v. TRAFIGURA TRADING, LLC, TRAFIGURA PTE LTD, TRAFIGURA GROUP PTE LTD, Defendants. (4:21-cv-00659; Texas Southern District).  Dismissed 3/15/22. 

34th Libertad Act Lawsuit Filed: Trafigura Of Singapore Sued For Using Two Ports (Including Mariel) And Other Mining Assets.  March 05, 2021

Despite Requesting Two Delays, DOJ Will File Brief To Court Of Appeals- Will DOJ Answer All Six Questions From Court? Answers Could Impact All Libertad Act Lawsuits.

MARIO DEL VALLE, ENRIQUE FALLA, MARIO ECHEVARRIA V. EXPEDIA, INC., HOTELS.COM L.P., HOTELS.COM GP, ORBITZ, LLC, BOOKING.COM B.V., BOOKING HOLDINGS INC.  Initial defendants were: TRIVAGO GMBH, BOOKING.COM B.V., GRUPO HOTELERO GRAN CARIBE, CORPORACION DE COMERCIO Y TURISMO INTERNACIONAL CUBANACAN S.A., GRUPO DE TURISMO GAVIOTA S.A., RAUL DOE I-5, AND MARIELA ROE 1-5, [1:19-cv-22619 Southern Florida District; 20-12407 11th Circuit Court of Appeals] 

Rivero Mestre LLP (plaintiff)
Manuel Vazquez, P.A. (plaintiff)
Baker & McKenzie, LLP (defendant)
Scott Douglass & McConnico (defendant)
Akerman (defendant)

Notice of Amicus Participation By The United States (3/22/22)
Link To Libertad Act Lawsuit Filing Statistics

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida .  BEFORE: JORDAN, NEWSOM, and BURKE,* District Judge.  ORDER: The Court invites the United States – through the Attorney General, the Solicitor General, and/or the Office of the Legal Adviser to the State Department –to file an amicus brief in Mario Del Valle, et al., v. Trivago GMBH, et al., No.20-12407 (argued Oct. 4, 2021), Javier Garcia-Bengochea v. Carnival Corporation, No. 20-12960 (argued Oct. 4, 2021), and Javier Garcia-Bengochea v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, LTD., No. 20-14251 (argued Oct. 4, 2021), pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 29(a)....The Court invites the United States to address the following questions concerning the Helms-Burton Act, 22 U.S.C. § 6082:...The court asks that the U.S. file its amicus brief by 2/25/22... AJ, KCN and LCB (See attached order for complete text) [20-12407, 20-12960, 20-14251] [Entered: 12/20/2021 04:48 PM].  The Court invites the United States to address the following questions concerning the Helms-Burton Act, 22 U.S.C. § 6082:

1. Does the term “United States national” in 22 U.S.C. §§ 6082(a)(4)(B) and 6082(a)(4)(C) refer to the plaintiff bringing the action, or the original claimant to the confiscated property, or both?

2. What does the word “acquire[ ]” in 22 U.S.C. § 6082(a)(4)(B) mean? Is inheritance encompassed in the term “acquire[ ]?” And if “acquire[ ]” does include inheritance, at what point is a claim “acquire[d]” by an heir within the meaning of the statute?

3. How, if at all, does the phrase “assignment for value” in 22 U.S.C. §6082(a)(4)(C) affect the pool of eligible claimants compared to the pool of eligible claimants under 22 U.S.C. §6082(a)(4)(B)?

4. What effect, if any, does the President’s ability to suspend Title III pursuant to 22 U.S.C. § 6085(b) have on defining the class of eligible claimants who can bring an action under 22 U.S.C. § 6082(a)(4)? Does the President’s ability to suspend Title III imply that the statute was drafted to allow the heirs of American citizens – whose property was unlawfully confiscated and “trafficked” by third parties – to bring claims under 22 U.S.C. § 6082(a)(4)?

5. What effect, if any, does the lawful travel exception, 22 U.S.C. §6023(13)(B)(iii), have on the plaintiffs’ claims? What effect, if any, does the possibility that the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) can change the permissible reasons for travel to Cuba have on the lawful travel exception?

6. What does the phrase “incident to lawful travel” in 22 U.S.C. §6023(13)(B)(iii) mean? Who or what defines “lawful travel” (e.g. OFAC)? What guidance should persons and entities look to in determining whether their activities are “incident to lawful travel?”

The Court asks that the United States file its amicus brief by February 25, 2022, at which time the parties in the cases will be permitted to respond. Should the United States elect not to file an amicus brief, it should so notify the Court by January 25, 2022.

U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL
UNITED STATES SOLICITOR GENERAL
OFFICE OF THE LEGAL ADVISER, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (Southern District Attorneys)

“ORDER: The motion filed by the United States for an extension of time, up to and including April 11, 2022, to file the amicus brief is GRANTED. The motion for an extension to March 11, 2022, to notify the Court that the United States elects not to file an amicus brief is GRANTED.” 

Links To Related Posts 

U.S. Department Of Justice Requests And Is Granted Until 11 March 2022 To Decide Whether To Submit Answers To Six Questions To Court Of Appeals.  February 01, 2022 

Court Of Appeals "Invites" Biden-Harris Administration To Answer Six Questions In Libertad Act Lawsuits That May Impact More Than Cuba Lawsuits. Will They Answer? Due By 25 January 2022.  December 31, 2021  

American Airlines Libertad Title III Lawsuit Becomes First To Seek Review By United States Supreme Court. Twenty-Nine Months From District Court To SCOTUS Is Fast.  December 20, 2021 

11th Circuit Court Of Appeals Hearing Recording For Del Valle Vs. Expedia, Hotels, Orbitz, Trivago, Etc. Libertad Act Lawsuit.  December 16, 2021 

Did U.S. Department Of Justice “Intervene” And Tip The Scale In A Libertad Act Title III Cuba Lawsuit On Behalf Of United Kingdom-Based Company? Defendants Hope So.  September 01, 2021 

Plaintiff Files Appeal Against Expedia In Libertad Act Lawsuit.  September 05, 2020

Crowley Maritime Corporation Mostly Loses On Motion To Dismiss In Libertad Act Lawsuit. Judge Says Libertad Act Definition Of Trafficking Is Constitional.

ODETTE BLANCO DE FERNANDEZ née BLANCO ROSELL, Plaintiff, v. CROWLEY MARITIME CORPORATION, Defendant. [3:20-cv-01426 Middle District Florida; Transferred To Florida Southern District 1:21-cv-20443]. 

Murphy & Anderson, P.A. (plaintiff)
Berliner Corcoran & Rowe LLP (plaintiff)
Fields PLLC (plaintiff)
Law Offices of John S. Gaebe P.A. (plaintiff)
Horr, Novak & Skipp P.A. (plaintiff)
Venable LLP (defendant)

Order (3/23/22)

Libertad Act Lawsuit Filing Statistics

Excerpts From Order

“The Supreme Court has explained that ‘[c]entral to assessing concreteness is whether the asserted harm has a “close relationship” to a harm traditionally recognized as providing a basis for a lawsuit in American courts—such as physical harm, monetary harm, or various intangible harms.’” Glen v. American Airlines, Inc., No. 20-10903, 2021 WL 3285307, at *2 (5th Cir. Aug. 2, 2021). Here, Plaintiffs allege that they were harmed when Defendants used the Confiscated Property “without consent from or paying adequate compensation to Plaintiffs.” [ECF No. 50 ¶ 144]. This harm “bears a close relationship to unjust enrichment, which has indisputable commonlaw roots.” Glen, 2021 WL 3285307, at *2. Indeed, Congress passed the Act, in part, because it found the remedies for “unjust enrichment from the use of wrongfully confiscated property . . . by private entities at the expense of the rightful owners of the property” to be ineffective. 22 U.S.C. § 6081(8). See Havana Docks, 484 F. Supp. 3d at 1192 (finding a concrete injury where the plaintiff “allege[d] that [defendant] profited from its use of the Subject Property at [plaintiff’s] expense.”). Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have alleged a concrete and particularized harm.  

B. Traceability To have standing, Plaintiffs must also show that their injuries are “fairly traceable” to Defendants’ use of the Confiscated Property. Spokeo, 136 S. Ct. at 1547. “To show traceability, a plaintiff must allege that his injury is ‘connect[ed] with the conduct about which he complains.’” Glen, 2021 WL 3285307 (quoting Trump v. Hawaii, 138 S. Ct. 2392, 2416 (2018)). The SAC alleges that Defendants profited from their use of the Confiscated Property without compensating Plaintiffs. See [ECF No. 1 ¶¶ 1, 7, 11]. Accordingly, like in the Glen and the Havana Docks cases, “there exists a causal link between a claimant’s injury from the Cuban Government’s expropriation of their property and a subsequent trafficker’s unjust enrichment from its use of that confiscated property.” Havana Docks, 484 F. Supp. 3d at 1230. Therefore, the Court finds Plaintiff has adequately alleged traceability.  

C. Redressability “The element of redressability requires that ‘it must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision.’” Hollywood Mobile Estates, Ltd. v. Seminole Tribe of Fla., 641 F.3d 1259, 1266 (11th Cir. 2011) (quoting Lujan, 504 U.S. at 561)). The parties do not dispute, and the Court agrees, that the element of redressability is properly alleged here. Accordingly, Plaintiffs have sufficiently established, at this stage of the litigation, that they have standing, and the Motion shall be denied on this ground. 

Defendants argue that the SAC must be dismissed because it fails to adequately allege that (1) Plaintiffs’ own a claim to the Container Terminal or the Concession; (2) Defendants’ alleged conduct constitutes “trafficking”; and (3) Defendants’ use of the Container Terminal is not “incident to lawful travel to Cuba.” [ECF No. 59]. The Court disagrees. 

Defendants focus much of their argument on the notion that Plaintiffs do not “own a claim” to the Container Terminal because ZEDM’s ports, docks, warehouses, and facilities did not exist until 2009, nearly fifty years after the Cuban government confiscated Plaintiffs’ property. Defendants’ argument is without merit. 

The Court finds that Plaintiffs sufficiently allege trafficking under the Act. First, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants use the Container Terminal, including storing their containers in the storage yard, and that using the Confiscated Property makes “[Defendants’] container business at the Port of Mariel possible and profitable.” [ECF No. 50 at ¶ 114]. This is enough to plausibly allege that Defendants “engage[d] in a commercial activity using or otherwise benefiting from confiscated property.” 22 U.S.C. § 6023(13)(A)(ii). In addition, Plaintiffs allege that ZEDM and AUSA all traffic in the Confiscated Property by developing and operating the Port of Mariel, and that Defendants profit from ZEDM and AUSA’s trafficking in the property. This is enough to plausibly allege that Defendants “profit[] from trafficking . . . by another person, or otherwise engage[] in trafficking . . . through another person.” 22 U.S.C. § 6023(13)(A)(iii). Accordingly, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged a violation of the Act. 

Defendants argue that Plaintiffs are required to plead around the lawful travel defense set forth in § 6023(13). The Court disagrees. “The lawful travel exception is an affirmative defense to trafficking that must be established by [Defendants], not negated by Plaintiff.” Garcia-Bengochea v. Carnival Corp, 407 F. Supp. 3d 1281, 1286 (S.D. Fla. 2019).11 Therefore, the burden is on Defendants to establish that their activity in the Port of Mariel and Container Terminals was incident to lawful travel to Cuba. Id. at 1287. As this defense is not apparent on the face of the SAC, it is inappropriate for consideration at this stage of the litigation. Id. 

Defendants argue that the Estates and Heirs do not have an actionable ownership interest in the Confiscated Property because they acquired their claims after March 12, 1996. On this point, the Court agrees. 

In addition, the Court does not find the term “trafficking” to be unconstitutionally vague. A civil statute “is not unconstitutionally vague if persons of reasonable intelligence can derive a core meaning from the statute.” Seniors Civil Lib. Ass’n, Inc. v. Kemp, 965 F.2d 1030, 1036 (11th Cir. 1992) (internal citations and quotations omitted). This Court, and the many other courts interpreting the Act, have not had difficulty in discerning the meaning of “trafficking.” Accordingly, the Motion on this ground is denied. 

Title III Does Not Violate the Due Process Clause.

In Belarus, Minsk Airport Duty Free Stores, Bacardi Outselling Havana Club

In Belarus, Minsk International Airport Duty Free retail stores have both Havana Club rum and Bacardi rum.  From the display sign, even though Belarus and the Republic of Cuba have a commercial, economic, and political relationship, travelers are preferring the Bermuda-based brand rather than the Havana-based brand. Republic of Cuba cigar brands are represented.

Related Post: At Vnukovo International Airport In Moscow, Havana Club Rum Has A Presence, But Bacardi Has More Real Estate In The Duty Free Shop. For Cigars, It's All About Cuba's Brands March 18, 2022

169-Page Ruling Against Four Largest Cruise Lines- They Engaged In Tourism In Cuba. Now A Binary Choice: Jury Trial In Miami, Florida, In May 2022 Or US$100+ Million Settlement? Is There Insurance?

With Judge Bloom’s ruling, the four cruise lines are nearing a binary choice- accept a jury trial or negotiate a settlement. As the plaintiffs seem to be seeking compensation (potentially US$100 million US$400 million) based upon what the Libertad Act permits, the four cruise lines will determine if a decision by a jury could be more costly than using the Libertad Act formulas to calculate what is owed to the plaintiffs. Key to remember- the jury will be residents of the Miami, Florida, area, and will certainly include individuals of Cuban descent.

HAVANA DOCKS CORPORATION V. NORWEGIAN CRUISE LINE HOLDINGS, LTD. [1:19-cv-23591; Southern Florida District]
Colson Hicks Eidson, P.A. (plaintiff)
Margol & Margol, P.A. (plaintiff)
Hogan Lovells US LLP (defendant)

HAVANA DOCKS CORPORATION VS. ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD. [1:19-cv-23590; Southern Florida District]
Colson Hicks Eidson, P.A. (plaintiff)
Margol & Margol, P.A. (plaintiff)
Holland & Knight (defendant)

HAVANA DOCKS CORPORATION V. MSC CRUISES SA CO, AND MSC CRUISES (USA) INC. [1:19-cv-23588; Southern Florida District]
Colson Hicks Eidson, P.A. (plaintiff)
Margol & Margol, P.A. (plaintiff)
Venable (defendant)

HAVANA DOCKS CORPORATION VS. CARNIVAL CORPORATION D/B/A/ CARNIVAL CRUISE LINES [1:19-cv-21724; Southern Florida District]
Colson Hicks Eidson, P.A. (plaintiff)
Margol & Margol, P.A. (plaintiff)
Jones Walker (defendant)
Boies Schiller Flexner LLP (defendant)
Akerman (defendant)

LINK To 169-Page Omnibus Order (3/21/22)
LINK To Libertad Act Lawsuit Filing Statistics

LINK To Previous Post
Federal Judge Rules Libertad Act Lawsuit Against Carnival, MSC, Norwegian, And Royal Caribbean Will Be Heard By Jury In May 2022. "Cuban-Americans" On Jury May Be Problematic For Defendants. February 23, 2022

MSME's In Cuba Continue To Be Created, Continue To Expand While Biden-Harris Administration Ignores Opportunities For U.S.-Sourced Investment And Financing... 414 Days

OnCuba News (Miami, Florida)- 17 March 2022

Cuba approaches 2500 MSMEs

On Thursday, the Ministry of Economy and Planning (MEP) announced the authorization of 115 new MSMEs, of which 113 were private and two state-owned, as well as three Non-Agricultural Cooperatives (CNA). The Cuban government authorized another hundred Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), bringing these new economic actors closer to 2500 since the approval of the first in September of last year. In total, of the 115 new MSMEs authorized, 113 are private and two are state-owned, as reported by the Ministry of Economy and Planning (MEP). They are also joined by three Non-Agricultural Cooperatives (CNA), the entity said on its Twitter account. In this way, there are already 2,478 new actors endorsed by the authorities, as part of the reforms promoted by them, which, however, maintain state enterprises as the main protagonists of the Cuban economy. 

To date, the country has 2388 private MSMEs, 51 state-owned MSMEs, and 39 ANCs. 57% of these actors are reconversions of pre-existing businesses, while 43% correspond to new ventures, according to the MEP, which sets more than 40,000 jobs generated by them. Of these actors, 99 are part of local development projects, 34 have previously carried out export operations and 11 were developed in the Science and Technology Park of Havana. These are figures that must continue to grow, as the government has said it will not put limits on their quantity.

At the beginning of this week the MEP expanded its call to create MSMEs dedicated to accommodation, beauty services and services to buildings and industrial facilities. Until now, its permits already included food production, computer science, the circular economy and recycling, manufacturing, logistics and transport activities, construction services and gastronomy, among other activities. MSMEs, approved as an economic actor in the middle of last year, can be state-, private or mixed property and are recognized as an economic unit with legal personality with its own characteristics. The law allows them to have one or more partners and be incorporated as commercial companies, although they cannot operate in areas recognized as "strategic" for the State such as health, telecommunications, defense and the press. 

Center For Democracy In The Americas (Washington DC)- 18 March 2022

Almost 2,500 micro, small, and medium size enterprises (SMEs or PYMES in Spanish) have been authorized to operate in Cuba since the long-awaited law regulating SMEs came into effect in September 2021, OnCuba News reports. Last week alone, 115 new SMEs were authorized, 113 of which are private enterprises and two of which are state-owned enterprises. According to a tweet from Oniel Diaz, co-founder of Cuban private business consulting firm AUGE, the number of SMEs has now surpassed the number of state-owned companies and commercial entities, with 2,276 private SMEs compared to 2,125 state-owned enterprises. The news of private SMEs outnumbering state-owned companies comes as Cuba’s Minister of the Economy, Alejandro Gil, announced that out of the 457 Cuban enterprises that reported a loss in the month of January, 446 were state enterprises. Most of the approved SMEs are focused on food production, with others focused on manufacturing, recycling, technology, and local development. Cuba’s government also announced last week that, in addition to the aforementioned business categories, SMEs could also be enterprises focused on accommodations, beauty services, and services to buildings and industrial facilities. Certain professionals such as accountants, lawyers, architects, and engineers, remain prohibited from forming companies, a regulation that has received pushback from economists. Learn more about the breakdown of SMEs by industry, province, and size, among other data, here.

SMEs only became operable in Cuba in September 2021 after Cuba’s Council of Ministers published the regulations that govern the creation and operation of SMEs in August 2021. Previously, without a framework for SMEs, those in Cuba’s private sector who wished to work as a company with multiple employees had to register as individuals and acquire a license as individual entrepreneurs, rather than registering as and/or licensing a business. Under the new legislation, SMEs can employ up to 100 workers and establish the equivalent of a private limited company with “members” and “employees.” The legalization of SMEs was a long-awaited move that economists advocated for as a way to boost the island’s economy. 

LINKS To Self-Employed, Micro, Small & Medium-Size Enterprise (MSME) Analyses  

Surprise Decision: Biden-Harris Administration Renews Trump-Pence Administration License To Export EVs To Embassies In Cuba. Company Offers To Donate EV Chargers To U.S. Embassy/Ambassador Residence  January 25, 2022 

Cuba Updates Status Of Micro, Small & Medium-Sized Enterprises  January 19, 2022 

Why Is National Security Council (NSC) In The White House Refusing To Permit U.S.-Based Investors/Financiers To Directly Support Women-Owned (Or Men-Owned) Businesses In Cuba? State Dept. Complicit?  January 06, 2022 

Embassy Of Italy: V International Workshop of Women Entrepreneurs In Cuba: "The Talent Of Women. Art, Crafts & Design"  January 06, 2022 

President Biden Rejects BIS License Application To Export Electric Vehicles/Chargers To Cuba's Self-Employed, MSME's. Reversal Of "General Policy Of Approval." President Trump Authorized EV Exports.  December 20, 2021 

Cuba Again Expanding MSME Authorizations To Include Accessing Foreign Capital, Foreign Bank Accounts, Local Development Projects Qualify.  December 02, 2021 

Why Won't Biden Administration Permit U.S. Entities To Invest/Finance MSMEs? In December, Cuba’s FIMELSA Begins Convertible Currency-Equivalent Loans At 6.5% For 120 Days; Lower For CUP.  November 25, 2021 

Update: More Than 700 Micro, Small And Medium-Sized Enterprises Approved In Cuba  November 25, 2021 

OFAC & BIS To 107 Tech Companies? Cuba. Yes, You Can Go There, But We Dare You. "Encourage & Enable" Not The Same As "Access & Use." Memo: Donilon, Klain, Ricchetti, Richmond, Sullivan.  November 23, 2021 

Will President Biden's Statement That His Is "a small business presidency” Extend To Supporting Small Businesses In Cuba?  November 22, 2021 

Update On Registration Of Micro, Small & Medium-Size Enterprises In Cuba. Now More Than 600.  November 21, 2021 

Cuba Continues To Report On Activity Of MSME's- The Numbers Increase.  November 06, 2021 

Joint Venture Between Banco de Sabadell Of Spain And Banco International de Comercio In Cuba Will Provide Financing In Foreign Currency To MSMEs & Non-Agricultural Cooperatives  November 05, 2021 

Beginning Today Residents Of Cuba May Purchase And Install Residential Solar Systems. Cost 55,000.00 Pesos (US$2,300.00). Call 7833-3333.  November 04, 2021  

Bormey srl Among The First 35 Newly-Constituted Medium-Sized Enterprises In Cuba, Exported 5,000 Peanut Bars To Italy. Is United States Next? U.S. Department Of State Regulations Would Approve.  October 26, 2021 

Cuba Approves First 35 MIPYME Applications- Confirms No Application Thus Far Denied. Many More Applications Expected. Result Beneficial For Biden Administration Goal To Support SME's.  September 30, 2021 

Cuba Suspends Tariffs And Fees For Non-Commercial (SME's Next?) Solar Systems. Another Opportunity For Biden-Harris Administration To Support U.S. Exporters And Florida Companies Should Benefit.  July 30, 2021 

ProLimp Cleaning In Cuba Precisely Type Of Entrepreneurship Biden Administration Should Support. Will Cuba Permit U.S. Venture Capitalists?  March 08, 2021 

Cuba To Unify Currencies; Result Could Present Opportunities For Biden Administration And U.S. Companies  December 11, 2020 

Florida Company Receives License To Export Electric Vehicles To Cuba; Charging Stations From New Jersey-Based Company.  January 25, 2017 

Restriction On Sale Of Premium Gasoline May Benefit Electric Vehicles & Solar Panels; Embassies Concerned.  April 07, 2017

At Vnukovo International Airport In Moscow, Havana Club Rum Has A Presence, But Bacardi Has More Real Estate In The Duty Free Shop. For Cigars, It's All About Cuba's Brands.

Although since 1959 governments of the Republic of Cuba have retained a special relationship with the then-U.S.S.R. and its primary political successor the Russian Federation, commercial relationships can be different than political relationships.  For example, in one of the duty free stores, Hamilton, Bermuda-based Bacardi rum products have a far more prominent display than does Havana, Republic of Cuba-based Havana Club rum products.

However, when the display is about cigars…. Behind these three humidors were all brands manufactured in the Republic of Cuba.       

However, when the display is about cigars…. Behind these three humidors were all brands manufactured in the Republic of Cuba.

Cubita Coffee From Cuba Available At GUM Department Store In Moscow

In a section of GUM department store which is located in the city of Moscow along Red Square across from the Kremlin, there are coffees from throughout the world.

And within that section are varieties and sizes of Cubita, the most well-known of coffee brands owned by Republic of Cuba government-operated companies.  On 17 March 2022, US$1.00=103.00 Rubles).

• Café En Grano 500 grams at 1,057.00 Rubles (US$10.26)

• Café En Grano 1000 grams at 1,990.00 Rubles (US$19.32)

• Café En Grano 250 grams at 578.00 Rubles (US$5.68)

• Café Torrefacto En Grano 1000 grams at 2,268.00 Rubles (US$22.01)

• Café de Cuba Caracolillo (Tradicional) 1000 grams at 2,150.00 Rubles (US$20.87)

Coffee from the Republic of Cuba is exported through Republic of Cuba government-opeated CUBAEXPORT under the auspice of the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Investment of the Republic of Cuba.

“CUBAEXPORT was created in 1965 by the Ministry of Foreign Trade to develop the export of food and various products in the international market. In 2013CUBAEXPORT integrates into the business group for foreign trade (GECOMEX). Its presence in the international market for over 50 years validates the strength and professionalism in business that it has developed in Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Guadeloupe and Martinique, the Middle East, Turkey and Greece among other countries. We provide technical and commercial assistance, systematically we monitor quality control for export and import, according to market requirements. The company has executive staff with several years of experience in the business and high professional level. CUBAEXPORT agencies have signed contracts with Global Commodities UK Ltd in London, England and GALAX Inc in Montreal, Canada to focus on European and Canadian markets respectively. Some other bee products are in promotion such as honey mixtures, propoleos and Bee wax; while among forest products the rosin gum, turpentine oil, hemp fibre and forest seeds.”

Geo.F. Trumper In London Releases "Havana" Deodorant, Adding To "Havana" Body Wash, Cologne

“Geo. F. Trumper is a British men's barber and perfumer in London, England, which sells its own brand of men's fragrances and personal grooming products. It was established in 1875 by George Francis William Trumper as a Gentlemen's Barber Shop. George Trumper was not only an excellent barber but also a master perfumer, and he soon gained a reputation as such among the gentlemen of London's elite.

Geo. F. Trumper operates two retail locations in London. The first one is in the original shop at 9 Curzon Street in Mayfair, and the second one is at 1 Duke of York Street in St James's. At the shop in Curzon Street, the interior retains the original mahogany cubicles and glass display cases that were installed in the 20th century. The firm's head office is located at 166 Fairbridge Road in north London.Evelyn Waugh refers to Geo. F. Trumper in his novel Brideshead Revisited, when he writes that Rex Mottram sends for a man from the establishment to shave Charles Ryder, Sebastian Flyte and Boy Mulcaster after they were held in jail on charges of driving while intoxicated.

In the James Bond novel On Her Majesty's Secret Service, Ian Fleming mentions a fragrance by Geo. F. Trumper, when Bond visits Marc-Ange Draco in Marseille and finds a bottle of Eucris in his bathroom.

In John le Carré's novel Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, George Smiley is intercepted by a disagreeable minor character who had just had his hair cut at Trumper's establishment in Curzon Street.

In the "How Does Your Garden Grow?" episode of Agatha Christie's Poirot (season 3, episode 1), Hercule Poirot is seen leaving Trumper's Curzon Street shop after buying a fragrance there.”

BIS "Returned Without Action" License Application To Donate EV Chargers To U.S. Embassy In Havana Because "Ultimate Consignee" Cancelled Transaction

Colombia, Maryland-based Premier Automotive Export, Ltd., which also has an office in Miami, Florida, offered to donate and install electric vehicle charging stations (including solar capture) at the United States Embassy in Havana, Republic of Cuba, and at the official residence of the ambassador in Havana. 

On 4 March 2022, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) of the United States Department of Commerce responded: 

“The reason printed below explains why the referenced Export License Application is (R)eturned (W)ithout (A)ction. When an application has been Returned Without Action and is being resubmitted, a new application form must be submitted. When a new form is submitted, it must reference the original application. The resubmission must be in accordance with the requirements existing at the time of the resubmission (See Section 748 of the Export Administration Regulations).” 

“REASON: This license application is returned without action (RWA) since the transaction was cancelled by the ultimate consigne. This application may not be used to export/reexport. The applicant is reminded that authorization is required to export or reexport to Cuba all items subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). Please be advised that all export and reexport transactions are subject to the General Prohibitions in Part 736 of the EAR. Also, you are advised to consult the Bureau of Industry and Security’s “Know Your Customer” and Red Flags Guidance in Supplement 3 to Part 732 of the EAR.” 

“The Ultimate Consignee was the Embassy of the United States, Calzada E/L & M Streets, Vedado, Havana, Republic of Cuba.” 

On 3 February 2022, the United States Department of State responded to correspondence of 24 January 2022 from Premier Automotive Export, Ltd., to The Honorable Brian Nichols, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs (WHA): 

“On behalf of Ambassador Nichols, I would like to extend our gratitude to you for your generous offer to donate and install four electric vehicle chargers for use at the United States Embassy in Cuba.  The Biden-Harris Administration has articulated the United States’ goal to accelerate and deploy electric vehicles and charging stations, and to enable a clean transportation future to combat climate change.  The United States Embassy in Cuba currently does not operate any electric vehicles at our Embassy compound or residences in Havana.  Due to impediments in the electrical infrastructure and a lack of trained mechanics on the island to service electric vehicles, it is unlikely that the United States Embassy will consider importing one or more electric vehicles for use in Cuba in the near future.  Given that your donation would largely remain unused at this time, we politely decline your kind offer.  Thank you again and best wishes on your continued efforts exporting green technologies throughout the Caribbean.” 

On 24 January 2022, Premier Automotive Export, Ltd. received a renewal of its license from the BIS to export gasoline-powered vehicles, electric-powered vehicles, and hybrid vehicles from the United States to the Republic of Cuba.  The authorized purchasers are diplomatic missions located in the Republic of Cuba, including the Embassy of the United States in the city of Havana, Republic of Cuba. 

On 3 December 2021, a spokesperson of the United States Department of State was quoted: “The Biden Administration has clearly articulated the United States’ goal to accelerate and deploy electric vehicles and charging stations, create good-paying, union jobs, and enable a clean transportation future to combat climate change. However, the United States Embassy in Cuba does not operate any electric vehicles nor has any solar power charging stations at our Embassy compound or residences in Havana. At this time, it would be unlikely that the United States Embassy consider importing one or more electric vehicles for use in Cuba in the near future due to impediments in the electrical infrastructure and lack of trained mechanics on the island to service electric vehicles.”   

Premier Automotive Export Ltd., submitted a license application to the BIS for authorization to donate to the United States Department of State four (4) electric vehicle (EV) chargers for use at the Embassy of the United States in Havana, Republic of Cuba, and for use at the Residence of the United States Ambassador in Havana, Republic of Cuba.  A letter relating to the donation was sent to the United States Department of State.  The company would also coordinate the installation of the electric vehicle chargers.  The selected electric vehicle chargers will service all vehicles currently available and those planned for production:   

2- Clipper Creek LCS-40 Level II 40 Amp Charger fitted with the J-1772 universal charging connector.  https://store.clippercreek.com/residential/hcs-40-hcs-40p-ev-charging-station  One Clipper Creek EV charger would be located at the United States Embassy and one Clipper Creek EV Charger would be located at the Residence of the United States Ambassador.  

2- Tesla Wallmount Connector Gen 3 (208/240V).  https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging  One Tesla EV charger would be located at the United States Embassy and one Tesla EV Charger would be located at the Residence of the United States Ambassador.  

The reason for the donation of electric vehicle chargers from different manufacturers is twofold.  First, unknown which manufacturer and model of electric vehicle(s) will the United States Department of State purchase for use in the Republic of Cuba.  Second, the Biden-Harris Administration continues to promote favorably manufacturers and models of electric vehicles from companies with union representation for their employees.  Austin, Texas-based Tesla, Inc., is non-union.  Detroit, Michigan-based General Motors Company; Dearborn, Michigan-based Ford Motor Company; and Amsterdam, The Netherlands-based Stallantis N.V. (Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, etc.) are union.  

Related Analysis Links 

U.S. Department Of State Appoints "Chief Sustainability Officer"- Mandate Text Includes Focus On "Electrifying Fleet" And "Host Partners" Does This Mean EVs For Cuba? President Biden Supports?  February 10, 2022 

While Promoting EV Use In The United States, Biden-Harris Administration Refuses To Permit Exports Of EVs To Cuba For Use By Re-Emerging Private Sector- And U.S. Embassy In Havana Does Not Want One.  February 08, 2022 

Surprise Decision: Biden-Harris Administration Renews Trump-Pence Administration License To Export EVs To Embassies In Cuba. Company Offers To Donate EV Chargers To U.S. Embassy/Ambassador Residence  January 25, 2022  

President Biden Rejects BIS License Application To Export Electric Vehicles/Chargers To Cuba's Self-Employed, MSME's. Reversal Of "General Policy Of Approval." President Trump Authorized EV Exports.  December 20, 2021  

Beginning Today Residents Of Cuba May Purchase And Install Residential Solar Systems. Cost 55,000.00 Pesos (US$2,300.00). Call 7833-3333.  November 04, 2021  

Cuba Has Nickel And Cobalt. Vehicle Electric Batteries Use Nickel And Cobalt. Cuba Should Benefit.  September 25, 2021   

Cuba Owes Partner Canada's Sherritt International Corporation Tens Of Millions Of US Dollars. But, Both Cuba & Patient Company (And Shareholders) Anticipate Profitable Role With Electric Vehicles.  July 03, 2021   

Restriction On Sale Of Premium Gasoline May Benefit Electric Vehicles & Solar Panels; Embassies Concerned.  April 07, 2017  

Florida Company Receives License To Export Electric Vehicles To Cuba; Charging Stations From New Jersey-Based Company.  January 25, 2017

Four Years Later, "The 2024 Process" For Venezuela May Have Renewed Interest Given Visit To Caracas By Biden-Harris Administration Officials This Weekend

The United States Congress may vote on legislation to prevent the oil and natural gas providers from sourcing product in the Russian Federation.  If there is a vote, it will likely have the two-thirds required in each chamber to override a veto by United States President Joseph Biden.  The Biden-Harris Administration (2021- ) has a problem in not wanting to take decisions that will exacerbate the price of oil and natural gas for United States consumers- particularly with the mid-term elections eight months from now, but also not wanting to veto legislation that seems so right at the moment.   

One beneficially may be Venezuela- which has the world’s largest oil reserves.  To date, United States companies remain permitted (from Obama-Biden Administration (2009-2017) through Trump-Pence Administration (2017-2021) through Biden-Harris Administration (2021- )) to engage with some assets in Venezuela by licenses issued by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the United States Department of the Treasury.   

The political question: From where is sourcing oil less foul- from the Russian Federation while it attacks Ukraine or from the Nicolas Maduro-Delcy Rodriguez Administration (2013- ) in Caracas? Bet with Venezuela cutting a deal because it believes the timing is right for a deal as attention by the United States lies elsewhere. There is the C-word that impacts everything Venezuela and that is the Republic of Cuba and Venezuela’s commercial, economic, and political support to the Miguel Diaz-Canel-Valdes Mesa Administration (2019- ).

That representatives of The White House and United States Department of State are in Caracas this weekend is a win for President Maduro. Don’t discount the prospect of a release on humanitarian grounds some or all of the United States nationals imprisoned in Venezuela as a quid pro quo.Other than the Russian Federation, a country with oil and/or natural gas, regardless of its relationship with the United States, has a meaningful moment to extract something of value from the United States.Check out “The 2024 Process” created in 2017 and presented in 2018.

The 2024 Process
(first published 2018; revised)

“2024” May Unlock A Solution For Venezuela
Need For Multilateral Quid Pro Quo
For Cuba- 25/25/25/25
Many Companies Have An Interest In Venezuela
Maduro Isn’t Likely Going Unless Assassinated Or Four Governments Agree
Guaido Fatally Contaminated By Connectivity With Trump Administration
What Is The Realistic “Mission Set”
Adhering To Aspirational & Desired Instead Of Doable
The Process Will Not Be A Moment, It Will Be A Series Of Moments

LINK TO ANALYSIS IN PDF FORMAT