Featured Stories
Van-Type Trailers and Subassemblies From China Injure U.S. Industry, Says USITC
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 (TNSrep) -- The U.S. International Trade Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
Van-Type Trailers and Subassemblies from China Injure U.S. Industry, Says USITC
September 25, 2026
The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of van-type trailers and subassemblies from China that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined are sold in the United States at less than fair value and subsidized by the government of China.
Chairman Brett W. Doyle and Commissioners Jason
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 (TNSrep) -- The U.S. International Trade Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
Van-Type Trailers and Subassemblies from China Injure U.S. Industry, Says USITC
September 25, 2026
The U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of van-type trailers and subassemblies from China that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined are sold in the United States at less than fair value and subsidized by the government of China.
Chairman Brett W. Doyle and Commissioners JasonE. Kearns, Peter-Anthony Pappas, and David Foley Jr. voted in the affirmative. Commissioners Bart Thanhauser and Samuel T. Negatu did not participate in the vote.
As a result of the USITC's affirmative determinations, Commerce will issue an antidumping order and a countervailing duty order on imports of these products from China.
The USITC's public report, Van-Type Trailers and Subassemblies from China (Inv. Nos. 701-TA-781 and 731-TA-1768 (Final), USITC Publication 5797, October 2026), will contain the views of the USITC and information developed during the investigations.
The report will be available on the USITC website (https://www.usitc.gov/commission_publications_library) by November 5, 2026.
Status of proceedings, links to relevant documents, and more information about the investigations can be found at the USITC's Investigations Database System (IDS).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.usitc.gov/press_room/news_release/2026/er0925_69280.htm
SEC Files Settled Action Against Trucking Companies and Founder Who Operated Alleged $127 Million Ponzi Scheme
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release:
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Kristopher A. Lunsford, et al., No. 8:26 cv 02923 (M.D. Fla. filed Sept. 24, 2026)
On September 24, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed settled charges against Kristopher A. Lunsford and his companies AKL Transport LLC ("AKL") and Southern Truck Leasing LLC ("Southern Truck Leasing"), for raising at least $127 million from approximately 765 investors nationwide, including many in the Tampa, Florida area, through an alleged fraudulent
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 26 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release:
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Kristopher A. Lunsford, et al., No. 8:26 cv 02923 (M.D. Fla. filed Sept. 24, 2026)
On September 24, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed settled charges against Kristopher A. Lunsford and his companies AKL Transport LLC ("AKL") and Southern Truck Leasing LLC ("Southern Truck Leasing"), for raising at least $127 million from approximately 765 investors nationwide, including many in the Tampa, Florida area, through an alleged fraudulenttruck-leasing investment contract scheme in which Lunsford misappropriated approximately $33 million of investor funds for personal use.
According to the SEC's complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, from at least May 2023 through May 2025, the Defendants and their sales agents represented to investors that they would use their funds to purchase commercial semi-trucks at a discount and operate all aspects of the commercial trucking business, such as finding drivers, sourcing cargo loads for transport, and insuring and maintaining the trucks. Defendants also allegedly represented that they owned and operated approximately 2,000 trucks. In exchange for their investment, the complaint alleges that the Defendants promised investors a net weekly return of $1,250 per truck assigned to them for a five-year investment term - or about 260% annually - and they led investors to believe that the returns came from transport fees charged to carriers for transporting their loads.
In reality, the SEC's complaint alleges that new investor money rather than legitimate business revenue fueled investors' returns wherein Defendants diverted approximately $52 million - about 40% of investor deposits - to pay earlier investors in Ponzi fashion. Moreover, Lunsford allegedly misappropriated approximately $33 million - about 25% of investor funds - for personal use, including nearly $10 million in cash withdrawals, approximately $6.2 million for travel, bars, and nightclubs, and at least $1.9 million in casino-related expenses. The complaint further alleges that Defendants' claim of operating approximately 2,000 trucks was materially overstated.
In a parallel action, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Florida announced criminal charges against Lunsford on September 25, 2026, involving alleged violations of mail and wire fraud statutes.
Without admitting the allegations in the SEC's complaint, Lunsford, AKL Transport, and Southern Truck Leasing consented to the entry of bifurcated judgments, subject to court approval, that would enjoin them from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and would permanently enjoin Lunsford from violating the charged provisions of the federal securities laws, and from participating in the issuance, purchase, offer, or sale of any security except for certain transactions in his personal accounts. The bifurcated judgments also would provide that the court shall determine, upon motion by the Commission, whether to order disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, prejudgment interest, and/or a civil penalty.
The SEC's continuing investigation is being conducted by Senior Counsel Ernesto Palacios and Andre J. Zamorano, with the assistance of Senior Accountant Karaz S. Zaki, and supervised by Assistant Directors Jason R. Berkowitz and Fernando Torres, and Associate Director Stephanie N. Moot of the SEC's Miami Regional Office. The SEC's litigation will be led by Trial Counsel Michael Mikulic and supervised by Acting Supervisory Trial Counsel Russell Koonin.
The SEC appreciates the assistance of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Florida, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Tampa Field Office.
* * *
Resources
* SEC Complaint (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2026/comp26648.pdf)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26648
FDIC Publishes August Enforcement Actions
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 -- The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation issued the following news release:
* * *
FDIC Publishes August Enforcement Actions
*
WASHINGTON - The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) today published a list of orders of administrative enforcement actions taken against banks and individuals in August 2026. There are no administrative hearings scheduled for October 2026.
The FDIC issued nine orders in August 2026. The administrative enforcement actions in those orders consisted of two consent orders, one amended consent order, one order terminating consent order,
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 -- The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation issued the following news release:
* * *
FDIC Publishes August Enforcement Actions
*
WASHINGTON - The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) today published a list of orders of administrative enforcement actions taken against banks and individuals in August 2026. There are no administrative hearings scheduled for October 2026.
The FDIC issued nine orders in August 2026. The administrative enforcement actions in those orders consisted of two consent orders, one amended consent order, one order terminating consent order,four orders of prohibition, and one supervisory prompt corrective action directive.
To view orders, adjudicated decisions and notices and the administrative hearing details online, please visit the FDIC's web page by clicking the link below.
***
Original text here: https://www.fdic.gov/news/press-releases/2026/fdic-publishes-august-enforcement-actions
FCC Wireline Competition Bureau Issues Public Notice: OMB Approval of E-Rate Competitive Bidding Portal, Program Modernization Rules
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 21-455; CC Docket No. 02-6):
* * *
By this Public Notice, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) announces that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the new information collection requirements associated with sections 54.503(c)(4)-(6)/1 and 54.504(d)(1)(iv)/2 of the Commission's rules adopted in the Promoting Fair and Open Competitive Bidding in the E-Rate Program Report and Order./3 Those requirements are now effective./4
In the Promoting
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 -- The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau issued the following public notice (WC Docket No. 21-455; CC Docket No. 02-6):
* * *
By this Public Notice, the Wireline Competition Bureau (Bureau) announces that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has approved the new information collection requirements associated with sections 54.503(c)(4)-(6)/1 and 54.504(d)(1)(iv)/2 of the Commission's rules adopted in the Promoting Fair and Open Competitive Bidding in the E-Rate Program Report and Order./3 Those requirements are now effective./4
In the PromotingFair and Open Competitive Bidding in the E-Rate Program Report and Order, the Commission adopted new rules establishing a competitive bidding portal for use during the E-Rate procurement process and streamlining E-Rate program processes. These rules include (1) section 54.503(b), (c)(4)-(6)/5 that explains the E-Rate competitive bidding process and requires applicants and service providers to use the USAC managed competitive bidding portal and (2) section 54.504(d)(1)(iv)/6 that requires applicants seeking additional bandwidth during a funding year to make certifications regarding their requests. The Commission stated that sections 54.503(b), (c)(4)-(6) and 54.504(d)(1)(iv) are rules requiring approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), which would become effective after publication of a notice in the Federal Register announcing OMB approval and establishing the relevant effective date./7 The information collection was submitted to OMB for review under the PRA and was approved by OMB on July 7, 2026./8 On September 14, 2026, the Federal Register published a notice announcing OMB's approval and establishing an effective date of September 14, 2026. Accordingly, 47 CFR Sec.Sec. 54.503(c)(4)-(6) and 54.504(d)(1)(iv) are now effective.
We note that the rules adopted in the Promoting Fair and Open Competitive Bidding in the ERate Program Report and Order that did not require OMB approval became effective June 18, 2026, 30 days after publication of the Promoting Fair and Open Competitive Bidding in the E-Rate Program Report and Order in the Federal Register.
* * *
Footnotes:
1/ 47 CFR Sec. 54.503(b), (c)(4)-(6).
2/ 47 CFR Sec. 54.504(d)(1)(iv).
3/ In the Matter of Promoting Fair and Open Competitive Bidding in the E-Rate Program Schools and Libraries Universal Service Support Mechanism, WC Docket No. 21-455, CC Docket No. 02-6, Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration, FCC 26-30, 2026 WL 1284773 (May 1, 2026) (Promoting Fair and Open Competitive Bidding Report and Order).
4/ 47 CFR Sec. 54.504 (g)(1)(i)-(iii) are also now effective regarding the transition of services during a funding year.
5/ 47 CFR Sec. 54.503(b), (c)(4)-(6).
6/ 47 CFR Sec. 54.504(d)(1)(iv).
7/ Promoting Fair and Open Competitive Bidding Report and Order at *31, para. 80.
8/ See Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Notice of Action, https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=202606-3060-016 (last visited Sept. 9, 2026) (approving without change OMB Control No. 3060-0806).
* * *
Original text here: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1030A1.pdf
CPSC Issues Recall Alert Involving Emerspring Mattresses
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 -- The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall alert:
* * *
Name of Product: Emerspring Mattresses
Hazard: The recalled mattresses violate the mandatory flammability standard for mattresses, posing a risk of serious injury or death from fire.
Remedy: Repair
Recall Date: September 24, 2026
Units: About 263
Consumer Contact: Style Homeware email at EmerspringMattressRecall@outlook.com.
Recall Details
Description: This recall involves Emerspring Mattresses. The mattresses are 12 inches thick and sold in queen size. They have a white top and white
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 -- The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall alert:
* * *
Name of Product: Emerspring Mattresses
Hazard: The recalled mattresses violate the mandatory flammability standard for mattresses, posing a risk of serious injury or death from fire.
Remedy: Repair
Recall Date: September 24, 2026
Units: About 263
Consumer Contact: Style Homeware email at EmerspringMattressRecall@outlook.com.
Recall Details
Description: This recall involves Emerspring Mattresses. The mattresses are 12 inches thick and sold in queen size. They have a white top and whitesides with a green trim. They were sold compressed in a box. "Prototype ID: " and the manufacture date "6/2025" are printed on a sewn-in white label located on one side of the mattress.
Remedy: Consumers should stop using the recalled mattresses immediately and contact Style Homeware to receive a free fitted cover to put over their mattress, which will bring the mattress into compliance with mandatory flammability standards.
Incidents/Injuries: None reported
Sold Online At: Amazon.com from January 2026 through May 2026 for $226.
Retailer: Style Homeware, Inc., of Monrovia, California
Manufactured In: Indonesia
Recall number: 26-796
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2026/Style-Homeware-Recalls-Emerspring-Mattresses-Due-to-Risk-of-Serious-Injury-or-Death-from-Fire-Hazard-Violate-Mandatory-Standard-for-Mattress-Flammability
CPSC Issues Recall Alert Involving Blue Cactus 2500 MAh Battery Packs for Reclining Chairs
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 -- The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall alert:
* * *
Name of Product: The Blue Cactus Company 2500 mAh Battery Packs for Reclining Chairs
Hazard: The lithium-ion battery in the recalled battery packs can overheat, posing fire and burn hazards to consumers.
Remedy: Replace
Recall Date: September 24, 2026
Units: About 51,000
Consumer Contact: The Blue Cactus Company by email at recall@thebluecactuscompany.com or online at https://www.thebluecactuscompany.com/ and click on "Important Recall Information" to learn more.
Recall Details
Description:
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 -- The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall alert:
* * *
Name of Product: The Blue Cactus Company 2500 mAh Battery Packs for Reclining Chairs
Hazard: The lithium-ion battery in the recalled battery packs can overheat, posing fire and burn hazards to consumers.
Remedy: Replace
Recall Date: September 24, 2026
Units: About 51,000
Consumer Contact: The Blue Cactus Company by email at recall@thebluecactuscompany.com or online at https://www.thebluecactuscompany.com/ and click on "Important Recall Information" to learn more.
Recall Details
Description:This recall involves The Blue Cactus Company Reclining Chair 2500 mAh battery packs with model number RWX-RBP02. The battery packs are black with the brand logo and brand name of "The Blue Cactus Company" imprinted on the front. The recalled battery packs can be identified by the model number RWX-RBP02 printed on the rear of the product and were designed to be used with various brands of reclining chairs.
Note: Do not throw this recalled lithium-ion battery or device in the trash, the general recycling stream (e.g., street-level or curbside recycling bins), or in used battery recycling boxes found at various retail and home improvement stores. Recalled lithium-ion batteries must be disposed of differently than other batteries, because they present a greater risk of fire. Your municipal household hazardous waste (HHW) collection center may accept this recalled lithium-ion battery or device for disposal. Before taking your battery or device to a HHW collection center, contact it ahead of time and ask whether it accepts recalled lithium-ion batteries. If it does not, contact your municipality for further guidance.
Remedy: Consumers should stop using the recalled battery packs immediately and contact The Blue Cactus Company for a replacement battery pack.
Incidents/Injuries: CPSC is aware of four reports of the batteries overheating, smoking, or igniting.
Sold Online At: Amazon.com from May 2023 through July 2026 for about $105.
Importer(s): Go North Rocket 28 AB, of Sweden
Recall number: 26-791
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2026/The-Blue-Cactus-Company-Reclining-Chair-Battery-Packs-Recalled-Due-to-Fire-and-Burn-Hazards-Sold-on-Amazon
Blue Eagle Contracting to Pay $60,000 in EEOC Religious Discrimination Suit
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 -- The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
Blue Eagle Contracting to Pay $60,000 in EEOC Religious Discrimination Suit
*
Trucking company settles federal lawsuit alleging it refused to accommodate Christian driver's attendance at Sunday services
RENO, Nev. -Blue Eagle Contracting, Inc., a Grass Valley, California-based bulk mail delivery contractor for the U.S. Postal Service, will pay $60,000 and implement other reforms to settle a religious accommodation lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC),
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Sept. 25 -- The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued the following news release:
* * *
Blue Eagle Contracting to Pay $60,000 in EEOC Religious Discrimination Suit
*
Trucking company settles federal lawsuit alleging it refused to accommodate Christian driver's attendance at Sunday services
RENO, Nev. -Blue Eagle Contracting, Inc., a Grass Valley, California-based bulk mail delivery contractor for the U.S. Postal Service, will pay $60,000 and implement other reforms to settle a religious accommodation lawsuit filed by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC),the federal agency announced today.
According to the EEOC's lawsuit filed earlier this year, Blue Eagle failed to accommodate a Christian driver's religious practice of attending church services on Sunday mornings by failing to return him to his regular weekday delivery shift between Reno and Tonopah, Nevada after he volunteered on an emergency basis to drive on Sunday mornings due to a coworker's sudden resignation.
The driver reminded at least two supervisors that he needed to attend church on Sunday mornings and was only working on Sunday mornings until the company could hire a replacement driver. However, Blue Eagle required the truck driver to continue working on Sunday mornings even after it hired a replacement driver, which compelled the Christian driver to resign, the suit said.
"Religious accommodations under federal law can take many forms, including accommodations related to scheduling that allow the employee to attend religious services or other religious observances," said Christopher Green, director of the EEOC's San Francisco District. "Employers must take religious accommodation requests seriously and grant them unless doing so would impose an undue hardship."
Conduct such as that charged in the EEOC's lawsuit violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits religious discrimination and requires employers to accommodate the sincerely held religious beliefs and practices of employees, absent undue hardship, and prohibits religious discrimination. The EEOC filed suit (EEOC v. Blue Eagle Contracting, Inc., Case No. 3:26-cv-00226) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement through its administrative conciliation process.
Mariko Ashley, acting assistant regional attorney for the EEOC San Francisco District, said, "This case reflects the importance of engaging in a good-faith, interactive process when an employee requests a religious accommodation."
Under the two-and-a-half-year consent decree which settles the lawsuit, Blue Eagle will pay $60,000 in back pay and compensatory damages to the former driver, as well as review and revise its religious accommodation policies and practices, provide training to managers and employees on religious accommodation, and submit periodic reports to the EEOC.
For more information on religious discrimination, please visit https://www.eeoc.gov/religious-discrimination.
The EEOC's San Francisco District Office has jurisdiction over Northern California, Northern Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Alaska, Idaho, and Montana.
The EEOC is the sole federal agency authorized to investigate and litigate against businesses and other private sector employers for violations of federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. For public sector employers, the EEOC shares jurisdiction with the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division. The EEOC also is responsible for coordinating the federal government's employment antidiscrimination effort. More information about the EEOC is available at www.eeoc.gov.
***
Original text here: https://www.eeoc.gov/newsroom/blue-eagle-contracting-pay-60000-eeoc-religious-discrimination-suit
