DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,321

JPMORGAN CHASE AND COMPANY
MORTGAGE BANKING DIVISION
LEGACY SERVICES LITIGATION SUPPORT
FLORENCE, SOUTH CAROLINA

Notice of Negative Determination
After Statutory Reconsideration

As required by the Trade Adjustment Assistance Reauthorization
Act of 2015 (TAARA 2015), which was enacted as Title IV of the
Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, Public Law No. 114-27,
section 405(a)(1)(A), the investigation into this petition was
reopened for a reconsideration investigation to apply the
requirements for worker group eligibility under chapter 2 of title
II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended by the TAARA 2015, to the
facts of this petition (statutory reconsideration).
The initial investigation, initiated May 20, 2014, resulted in
a negative determination, issued on July 2, 2014, that was based on
the firm not producing an article. The determination was applicable
to workers and former workers of JPMorgan Chase and Company,
Mortgage Banking Division, Legacy Services Litigation Support,
Florence, South Carolina (herein referred to “JPMorgan Chase and
Company, Legacy Services Litigation Support”). The workers’ firm is
engaged in activities related to the supply of financial services.
Specifically, the workers supply legal and litigation support
services for the firm.
Based on information reviewed during the reconsideration
investigation, the Department of Labor determines that increase
imports of financial, legal and litigation services, shifts in
financial, legal and litigation services to a foreign country, or
acquisition of financial, legal and litigation services from a
foreign country was not a cause in the workers’ separations.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that imports of financial, legal and
litigation services have not increased from 2012 to 2013 and
comparing January through April 2014 compared to January through
April 2013. No imports, like or directly competitive to the
services supplied by the firm, were reported.
With respect to Section 222(a)(2)(B) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that the firm did not shift the supply of
financial, legal and litigation services or a like or directly
competitive service to a foreign country or acquire financial,
legal and litigation or like or directly competitive services
from a foreign country. Services of the specific group of workers
were moved to a JP Morgan Chase location in the United States.
With respect to Section 222(b)(2) of the Act, the
investigation revealed that JPMorgan Chase and Company, Legacy
Services Litigation Support is not a Supplier or acts as a
Downstream Producer to a firm that employed a group of workers who
received a certification of eligibility under Section 222(a) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a).
Finally, the group eligibility requirements under Section
222(e) of the Act, have not been satisfied either because Criterion
(1) has not been met since the workers’ firm has not been publicly
identified by name by the International Trade Commission as a
member of a domestic industry in an investigation resulting in an
affirmative finding of serious injury, market disruption, or
material injury, or threat thereof.
Conclusion
After careful review, I determine that the requirements of
Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272, have not been met and,
therefore, deny the petition for group eligibility of JPMorgan
Chase and Company, Mortgage Banking Division, Legacy Services
Litigation Support, Florence, South Carolina, who were engaged in
employment related to supply of financial services, specifically
legal and litigation support activities for the firm to apply
for adjustment assistance, in accordance with Section 223 of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2273.

Signed in Washington, D.C. this 25th day of February, 2016

/s/Hope D. Kinglock
______________________________
HOPE D. KINGLOCK
Certifying Officer, Office of





DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

TA-W-85,321

JP MORGAN CHASE AND COMPANY
MORTGAGE BANKING DIVISION
LEGACY SERVICES LITIGATION SUPPORT
FLORENCE, SOUTH CAROLINA

Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility
To Apply For Worker Adjustment Assistance
And Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance

In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as
amended ("Act"), 19 U.S.C. § 2273, the Department of Labor herein
presents the results of an investigation regarding certification of
eligibility to apply for worker adjustment assistance.
Workers of a firm may be eligible for worker adjustment
assistance if they satisfy the criteria of subsection (a) and (b)
of Section 222 of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a) and (b). For the
Department of Labor to issue a certification for workers under
Section 222(a) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), the following three
criteria must be met:
(1) The first criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(1) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a)(1)) requires that a significant
number or proportion of the workers in such workers' firm, or
an appropriate subdivision of the firm, have become totally or
partially separated, or are threatened to become totally or
partially separated
(2) The second criterion (set forth in Section 222(a)(2) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a)(2)) may be satisfied in one of two
ways:
(A) Increased Imports Path:
(i) sales or production, or both, at the workers' firm must
have decreased absolutely, AND
(ii) imports of articles like or directly competitive with
articles produced by such firm or subdivision have
increased; and
(iii) the increase described in clause (ii) contributed
importantly to such workers' separation or threat of
separation and to the decline in the sales or
production of such firm or subdivision.

(B) Shift in Production Path:
(i) there has been a shift in production by such workers'
firm or subdivision to a foreign country of articles like
or directly competitive with articles which are produced
by such firm or subdivision; and
(ii)(I) the country to which the workers' firm has
shifted production of the articles is a party to a free
trade agreement with the United States;
(II)the country to which the workers' firm has
shifted production of the articles is a beneficiary
country under the Andean Trade Preference Act, African
Growth and Opportunity Act, or the Caribbean Basin
Economic Recovery Act; or
(III)there has been or is likely to be an increase in
imports of articles that are like or directly
competitive with articles which are or were produced by
such firm or subdivision.

For the Department to issue a secondary worker certification
under Section 222(b) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(b), to workers of
a Supplier or a Downstream Producer, the following criteria must be
met:
(1) a significant number or proportion of the workers in the
workers' firm or an appropriate subdivision of the firm
have become totally or partially separated, or are
threatened to become totally or partially separated;

(2) the workers' firm is a Supplier or Downstream Producer to
a firm that employed a group of workers who received a
certification of eligibility under Section 222(a) of the
Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(a), and such supply or production
is related to the article that was the basis for such
certification; and

(3) either
(A) the workers' firm is a supplier and the component parts
it supplied to the firm described in paragraph (2)
accounted for at least 20 percent of the production or
sales of the workers' firm; or
(B) a loss of business by the workers' firm with the firm
described in paragraph (2) contributed importantly to the
workers' separation or threat of separation.


Section 222(c) of the Act, 19 U.S.C. § 2272(c), defines the
terms "Supplier" and "Downstream Producer."
The investigation was initiated in response to a petition
filed on May 20, 2014 on behalf of workers of JP Morgan Chase and
Company, Mortgage Banking Division, Legacy Services Litigation
Support, Florence, South Carolina. (JP Morgan Chase-Legacy
Services Litigation) The workers' firm is engaged in activities
related to the supply of financial services. Specifically, The
workers supply legal and litigation support activities for the
firm.
The petitioners alleged that, "Several Departments have been
eliminated because jobs have moved to India. Thus causing the
company to no longer keep the Florence site open which resulted in
our job loss."
During the course of the investigation, information was
collected from the workers' firm and the petitioners
The investigation revealed that JP Morgan Chase-Legacy
Services Litigation, does not produce an article within the
meaning of Section 222(a) or Section 222(b) of the Act. In order
to be considered eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under
Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, the worker group seeking
certification (or on whose behalf certification is being sought)
must work for a "firm" or appropriate subdivision that produces an
article. The definition of a firm includes an individual
proprietorship, partnership, joint venture, association,
corporation (including a development corporation), business trust,
cooperative, trustee in bankruptcy, and receiver under decree of
any court.
During the investigation, the Department of Labor obtained
information that revealed that the workers' firm did not produce an
article; rather, the workers' firm supplied services related to
legal and litigation support of financial services.
In order for the Department to issue a certification of
eligibility to apply for alternative trade adjustment assistance
(ATAA), the worker group must be certified eligible to apply for
trade adjustment assistance (TAA). Since the workers are denied
eligibility to apply for TAA, the workers cannot be certified
eligible for ATAA.

Conclusion
After careful review of the facts obtained in the
investigation, I determine that all workers of JP Morgan Chase and
Company, Mortgage Banking Division, Legacy Services Litigation
Support, Florence, South Carolina engaged in activities related
to the supply of financial services, specifically legal and
litigation support for financial services, are denied eligibility
to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade
Act of 1974, and are also denied eligibility to apply for
alternative trade adjustment assistance under Section 246 of the
Trade Act of 1974.

Signed in Washington, D.C., this 2nd day of July, 2014


/s/Michael W. Jaffe
______________________________
MICHAEL W. JAFFE
Certifying Officer, Office of
Trade Adjustment Assistance