A Network of Interlocking Risks: Vladimir Galkin, Newegg Commerce, and JetBlue Airways

This report provides an analysis of the interconnected risks surrounding investor Vladimir Galkin, Newegg Commerce, Inc. (Newegg), JetBlue Airways (JetBlue), and their elite corporate advisors. It examines how recent activist investments have intersected with pre-existing national security and governance vulnerabilities.

Executive Summary: A Network of Interlocking Risks

This investigation reveals that activist investor Vladimir Galkin’s recent financial maneuvers in Newegg Commerce and JetBlue Airways have created a collision course. His high-risk tactics now intersect with severe, pre-existing national security and governance vulnerabilities at both companies. This convergence generates a network of interlocking risks. It also presents potential indicators of financial, governance, and strategic malfeasance.

This analysis identifies three primary risk vectors:

1. Imminent Foreign Control. Newegg, a U.S. e-commerce firm, faces a disclosed threat of a majority takeover. The state-owned Bank of China could acquire control via foreclosure. This event would place a U.S. public company under the direct control of a People’s Republic of China (PRC) entity.¹
2. A National Security Precedent. The U.S. government’s 2021 intervention in the Rockley Photonics case provides a clear analytical framework.² Regulators blocked technology transfer to a Chinese partner linked to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).³ A potential PRC takeover of Newegg’s strategic U.S. logistics and data apparatus represents a similar national security threat.
3. Critical Infrastructure Destabilization. Galkin’s activist campaign introduces significant governance instability into JetBlue.⁴ The airline is designated as critical U.S. infrastructure and has a documented history of data security lapses.⁵ This pressure creates vulnerabilities that could compromise operational integrity.

The engagement of elite advisory firms Sidley Austin and BGR Group is a key diagnostic indicator. Their involvement validates the assessment that these are not routine business challenges but matters of significant national and financial security.⁶,⁷ The findings are synthesized in a comprehensive Risk Dashboard, which provides a chronological and verifiable account of the events and indicators detailed in this report.

The Catalyst: An In-Depth Profile of Investor Vladimir Galkin

Vladimir Galkin is the central node in this network of risk. His rapid accumulation of major stakes in both Newegg and JetBlue served as the catalyst for this investigation. Galkin’s investment profile and activist posture introduce a volatile and unpredictable element into two highly sensitive sectors. To understand this risk, we must first examine the timeline and tactics of his investments.

Analysis of Investment Chronology and Strategy

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings reveal Galkin’s pattern of aggressive and concurrent share accumulation in both companies during 2024 and 2025.⁸ His strategy is characterized by its velocity and scale. He quickly established himself as a dominant shareholder with the explicit intent to influence corporate governance.

JetBlue Airways (JBLU)

Galkin’s investment in JetBlue escalated rapidly in mid-2024.

• July 17, 2024: Reported a 6.7% stake.⁸
• August 12, 2024: Increased holdings to 8.1%.⁸
• August 22, 2024: Reached 9.1% ownership.⁸
• September 3, 2024: Crossed the 10.0% threshold, totaling 34.6 million shares.⁸

This final move triggered a mandatory change in SEC reporting from a passive Schedule 13G to an activist Schedule 13D. This formally signaled his intent to influence the company’s strategic direction. The total capital outlay for this stake exceeded $200 million.⁴

Newegg Commerce, Inc. (NEGG)

Galkin’s accumulation of Newegg shares followed a similar trajectory.

• June 5, 2025: First crossed the 5% ownership threshold with a 5.2% stake.⁸
• July 10, 2025: More than doubled his stake to 11.4%.⁸
• August 21 – October 10, 2025: Aggressively purchased more shares, ultimately reaching a 19.0% stake (3,888,888 shares).⁸

Filings also document a structural change in how the shares were held. They moved from a trust holding to a joint account, cementing his direct control.⁸

The table below provides a consolidated timeline of these acquisitions. It illustrates the concurrent and aggressive nature of his investment campaigns.

Event Date	Issuer	Ticker	Document Type	Aggregate Shares	Percent of Class	Verifiable Source(s)
2024-07-17	JetBlue Airways	JBLU	SC 13G/A	22,919,988	6.7%	⁸
2024-08-12	JetBlue Airways	JBLU	SC 13G/A	28,093,230	8.1%	⁸
2024-08-22	JetBlue Airways	JBLU	SC 13G/A	31,561,530	9.1%	⁸
2024-09-03	JetBlue Airways	JBLU	SC 13D (Initial)	34,609,605	10.0%	⁸
2025-06-05	Newegg Commerce	NEGG	SC 13G (Initial)	1,009,400	5.2%	⁸
2025-07-10	Newegg Commerce	NEGG	SC 13D/A	2,222,222	11.4%	⁸
2025-08-21	Newegg Commerce	NEGG	SC 13D/A	3,520,000	17.2%	⁸
2025-09-29	Newegg Commerce	NEGG	SC 13D/A	3,736,766	18.2%	⁸
2025-10-10	Newegg Commerce	NEGG	SC 13D/A	3,888,888	19.0%	⁸

This timeline highlights the velocity and scale of Galkin’s campaigns. He established himself as a dominant shareholder in two regulated industries in a matter of months.

From Meme Stocks to Critical Sectors

Galkin’s investor profile misaligns with his current targets. He is an entrepreneur who profited substantially from the GameStop (GME) “meme stock” surge.⁹ His investment in JetBlue has been characterized as spending his “GameStop Riches”.⁹ He is now applying this background in high-volatility, speculative trading to companies in regulated and geopolitically sensitive sectors.

His activist intentions confirm this pivot. He has discussed a potential board seat with JetBlue’s CEO and CFO.¹⁰ He has also publicly threatened to sell his stake if the company’s performance does not improve.⁴ This is the behavior of an activist seeking to force strategic changes.

The fundamental risk arises from this misalignment. Tactics successful in meme stocks—like generating social media pressure and prioritizing short-term outcomes—could be dangerously destabilizing when applied to an airline under DHS oversight or a tech retailer with national security vulnerabilities. While Galkin’s stated intent is to improve performance, his background invites scrutiny of other motivations. These could include forcing a quick sale, stripping assets, or leveraging a manufactured crisis for personal benefit.

Case Analysis 1: Newegg Commerce – A Conduit for Foreign Influence

Newegg Commerce presents the most acute and immediate risk. The company’s ownership structure and its parent company’s financial distress create a direct pathway for a PRC state-owned enterprise to assume majority control. This transforms Newegg from an e-commerce company into a vector for foreign economic statecraft.

The Bank of China Foreclosure Risk

Newegg is majority-owned by Hangzhou Lianluo Information Technology Co., a publicly traded company in China.¹¹ This ownership structure is the source of a severe vulnerability.

Hangzhou Liaison Interactive Information Technology Co., Limited (“Hangzhou Lianluo”) beneficially owns 57.3% of the voting power of our issued and outstanding Common Shares as of June 30, 2025, substantially all of which are subject to foreclosure at any time by the Bank of China (“BOC”) to repay delinquent loans and BOC is a state-owned enterprise and ultimately controlled by the People’s Republic of China.¹

This is not a hypothetical threat. In June 2025, East West Bank foreclosed on 662,408 Newegg shares pledged by an affiliate of a then-director.¹² The bank sold these shares on the open market and stated its intent to foreclose on an additional 950,000 shares.¹²

This precedent is a direct proof-of-concept for the larger risk posed by the Bank of China. A foreclosure by BOC would instantly transfer a controlling interest in a U.S. public company to an arm of the PRC government. This would have devastating implications for Newegg’s operations, likely triggering an immediate delisting from Nasdaq, a loss of access to U.S. capital markets, and an exodus of customers and suppliers.

CFIUS and National Security Threats

The potential foreclosure places Newegg squarely in the crosshairs of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).¹³ CFIUS reviews transactions that could result in foreign control of a U.S. business to determine their effect on national security.¹³

A foreclosure by the Bank of China would constitute a PRC state-owned enterprise acquiring control over a U.S. business. This event would almost certainly trigger a CFIUS review.¹³ CFIUS can recommend that the President block a transaction or order the divestment of a completed acquisition.¹³ This power was used in 2025 to force the divestiture of Jupiter Systems by its Hong Kong-based owner due to national security risks.¹⁴

This high-stakes environment contextualizes Newegg’s legal representation. The company has been represented by Sidley Austin, a global law firm with a highly regarded CFIUS and National Security practice.⁶,¹⁵ Engaging a firm with this elite expertise is a strategic necessity for a company facing an existential crisis rooted in foreign ownership and national security.

Case Analysis 2: JetBlue Airways – Critical Infrastructure Under Pressure

The risks at JetBlue stem from its status as critical national infrastructure and its susceptibility to governance instability. Galkin’s activist campaign introduces a volatile element into a highly regulated environment. This creates the potential for his financial objectives to conflict with the airline’s public safety and national security obligations.

How Does Activism Impact a Regulated Environment?

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) formally designates the U.S. Transportation Systems Sector as critical infrastructure.¹⁶ Airlines like JetBlue are subject to stringent cybersecurity requirements from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).¹⁷

This regulatory framework creates a unique context for shareholder activism. An activist focused on maximizing financial returns could inadvertently undermine the airline’s security posture.

• Pressure to reduce operating expenses could lead to cuts in cybersecurity budgets or deferred maintenance.
• A contentious proxy fight could distract senior management from critical operational and security oversight.

JetBlue’s history demonstrates a pre-existing weakness in data security. In 2003, it was revealed that JetBlue had transferred millions of passenger records to a Department of Defense subcontractor.⁵ The transfer occurred after a written request from TSA personnel.⁵ This incident establishes that the company’s controls over sensitive passenger data have been breached in the past under pressure.

Lobbying as a Vector for Shareholder Influence

JetBlue has a documented history of using high-powered lobbying firms to influence policy in Washington, D.C. From late 2011 through early 2013, JetBlue retained BGR Group, a top-tier bipartisan lobbying firm.¹⁸ Filings show payments for lobbying the U.S. House, Senate, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on industry regulations.¹⁹

More recent disclosures show a continued focus on influencing policy before Congress, DOT, TSA, and DHS.²⁰ As a 10% owner, Galkin now has a vested interest in these same regulatory outcomes. The primary risk is that Galkin could leverage his ownership stake to influence JetBlue’s lobbying strategy to align with his personal financial objectives, potentially prioritizing short-term returns over long-term stability and safety.

Case Analysis 3: The Rockley Photonics Precedent – Dual-Use Technology

The case of Rockley Photonics provides a critical precedent for understanding the national security risks embedded in the Newegg situation. It demonstrates the U.S. government’s clear policy for preventing the transfer of sensitive technology to Chinese entities linked to military modernization.

The Hengtong Joint Venture: A Case Study in U.S. Intervention

In 2017, Rockley Photonics, a U.S. innovator in silicon photonics, entered a $42 million joint venture with Jiangsu Hengtong Optic-Electric, a leading Chinese manufacturer.²¹ The purpose was to commercialize advanced optical modules for high-speed data communications.²¹

The U.S. government abruptly scuttled this partnership. On December 17, 2021, the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) added Jiangsu Hengtong Optic-Electric to the Entity List.²,³

The reason was explicit and severe. The Federal Register states Hengtong was added for:

“…acquiring and attempting to acquire U.S.-origin items in support of military modernization for the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).” ³

This action determined that Hengtong was acting contrary to U.S. national security interests. As a result, Rockley was forced to call off the technical sale to the joint venture.² The designation imposes a license review policy of a “presumption of denial,” effectively cutting off Hengtong from U.S. technology.³

Applying the Rockley Precedent to Newegg

The Rockley case is a textbook example of the risks associated with “dual-use” technologies—items with both civilian and military applications.²² While Newegg is a retailer, not a technology developer, its operations provide strategic access to sensitive sectors of the U.S. economy.

If the Bank of China were to assume control of Newegg, the PRC government would gain command of a massive U.S. logistics, data, and supply chain apparatus. This control could be exploited in several ways:

• Supply Chain Intelligence: Analyzing sales data could provide the PRC with a real-time map of U.S. technology consumption.
• Technology Acquisition: The Newegg platform could be used as a channel to acquire sensitive U.S. hardware for diversion to military end-users.
• Data Exploitation: Control over customer data could be used for intelligence-gathering.

The Rockley precedent demonstrates that U.S. regulators will act preemptively to block the acquisition of U.S. companies that provide strategic access to the PLA’s modernization efforts. The potential foreclosure on Newegg constitutes a direct national security threat of the same type.

The Influence Brokers: Roles of Sidley Austin and BGR Group

The engagement of Sidley Austin and BGR Group is a critical diagnostic indicator. These are elite advisors whose specializations are tailored to managing the exact types of high-stakes crises identified in this analysis. Their presence signals that corporate leadership perceives the underlying risks as severe and existential.

Specialized Capabilities for High-Stakes Environments

Sidley Austin: Sidley is an elite global law firm renowned for crisis management and government investigations.²⁵ The firm maintains a robust CFIUS and National Security practice, advising companies on navigating the complex review process.⁶ Newegg’s representation by Sidley partner Amy Lally connects the company to this institutional capability.¹⁵ For a company facing a hostile change of control by a foreign state-owned entity, Sidley’s CFIUS practice is a core requirement for survival.

BGR Group: BGR is a top Washington, D.C. lobbying firm with a significant international practice, including an office in Beijing.⁷ BGR offers services highly relevant to these risks, including crisis communications and a dedicated “Intelligence, Investigations, and Security Unit” led by former senior officials from the FBI and CIA.²³ JetBlue’s prior engagement of BGR demonstrates the airline’s willingness to deploy such high-level influence.¹⁸

The selection of counsel specializing in existential national security reviews (Sidley) and geopolitical intelligence (BGR) explicitly validates the assessment that these are severe threats. Their engagement confirms the risks are considered serious enough to warrant retaining premier crisis advisors.

Synthesis and Fraud Indicator Risk Dashboard

The following dashboard synthesizes the key events, actors, and risk indicators from this investigation. Its purpose is to provide a chronological framework for understanding how these events converge to create a network of interlocking risks.

Timestamp (Event Date)	Entity / Actor	Event Description	Risk Category	Risk Level	Key Indicators & Analysis	Verifiable Source(s)
2012-01-20 to 2013-04-19	JetBlue / BGR Group	JetBlue retains BGR Group for lobbying on aviation regulations.	Governance	Medium	Establishes a historical precedent for using elite lobbying firms to influence regulation, a playbook an activist could co-opt.	¹⁸, ¹⁹
2017 (Established)	Rockley / Hengtong	Rockley enters a $42M joint venture with Chinese firm Hengtong to commercialize dual-use silicon photonics technology.	Scientific/Engineering, National Security	High	A U.S. tech firm partners with a Chinese entity, creating a vector for potential IP theft and technology transfer. This risk was later realized.	²¹
2021-12-17	Rockley / Hengtong / U.S. Gov’t	U.S. Dept. of Commerce adds Hengtong to the Entity List for supporting PLA military modernization, scuttling the JV.	Scientific/Engineering, National Security	Critical	U.S. government takes decisive action to block technology transfer. This provides a direct precedent for assessing the Newegg risk.	², ³
2024-09-03	Vladimir Galkin / JetBlue	Galkin files an activist SC 13D, crossing the 10% ownership threshold in a critical infrastructure entity.	Governance, Financial	High	Signals a shift to an aggressive activist campaign in a regulated company, creating potential for governance instability.	⁸
2025-06-16	Newegg / Tekhill USA / EWB	East West Bank forecloses on 662,408 Newegg shares pledged by a director’s affiliate.	Financial, Governance	High	Serves as a proof-of-concept that foreclosure on pledged Newegg shares is a tangible risk, validating the more severe Bank of China threat.	¹²
2025-07-15 (Approx. Filing Date)	Newegg / Hangzhou Lianluo / Bank of China	Newegg discloses in an SEC filing that its parent’s 57.3% controlling stake is subject to foreclosure by the state-owned Bank of China.	National Security, Financial, Governance	Critical	Creates a publicly disclosed pathway for PRC state control over a U.S. company via financial default, triggering severe CFIUS risk.	¹
2025-10-10	Vladimir Galkin / Newegg	Galkin’s stake in Newegg reaches 19.0%, making him the second-largest shareholder.	Governance, National Security	High	An activist investor with a high-risk profile gains significant influence over a company already in a precarious financial and regulatory position.	⁸
Ongoing	Newegg / Sidley Austin	Newegg is represented by Sidley Austin, a law firm with elite expertise in CFIUS reviews and national security law.	Governance, National Security	Medium	The engagement of “crisis counsel” with specific CFIUS expertise indicates management perceives the foreign ownership risk as severe.	⁶, ¹⁵

Potential Mitigation Strategies and Policy Recommendations

The interlocking risks identified are significant but not without potential remedies. The following strategies could mitigate immediate threats and provide a framework for addressing similar situations.

• For Newegg (CFIUS and Foreign Control Risk): A proactive review by CFIUS is the most direct mitigation. The board or minority shareholders could prompt this review, given the publicly disclosed foreclosure risk. Such a review could result in a mitigation agreement that forces the divestiture of the parent company’s controlling stake to a U.S.-approved entity. This would neutralize the threat of a Bank of China takeover.
• For JetBlue (Governance and Infrastructure Risk): The JetBlue board could establish a special committee for national security and infrastructure resilience. This committee would oversee and insulate critical operational and cybersecurity functions from pressures driven by short-term activist objectives. At a policy level, DHS and the TSA could consider enhanced oversight for any critical transportation company targeted by a formal activist campaign.
• For Regulators (Addressing Activist Tactics): The SEC could apply heightened scrutiny to the financing and disclosures of activist investors targeting companies in critical sectors. This would ensure that activism serves to improve corporate governance rather than create systemic risk.

Concluding Analysis and Areas for Further Investigation

The evidence shows that Vladimir Galkin’s activist investments are a significant accelerant. They are acting on latent, but critical, national security and financial vulnerabilities within Newegg Commerce and JetBlue Airways.

The primary potential fraud indicators identified are:

• Financial and Governance Fraud Risk (Newegg): The most significant risk is a sudden, hostile change of control at Newegg initiated by the Bank of China. This event could lead to a catastrophic loss of shareholder value and a complete overhaul of corporate governance under a PRC state-owned entity. Galkin’s rapid accumulation of a nearly 20% stake in a company facing this threat, without a clear public mitigation strategy, raises questions about his ultimate intent.
• Strategic Scientific and Engineering Fraud Risk (Newegg): The Rockley Photonics precedent establishes U.S. policy of preventing the acquisition of strategic assets by PRC entities linked to military modernization. A PRC state takeover of Newegg would facilitate the acquisition of a vast U.S. data and logistics apparatus. Exploiting this apparatus would constitute a form of systemic, strategic fraud against U.S. economic and national security interests.

Based on this analysis, the following areas warrant further investigation:

1. Galkin’s Capital Sources: Conduct enhanced due diligence on the ultimate source of Vladimir Galkin’s investment capital.
2. Communications Analysis: Monitor for any non-public communications between Galkin, Hangzhou Lianluo, the Bank of China, and the advisory firms.
3. CFIUS Posture: Initiate discreet inquiries with CFIUS member agencies to determine if a non-notified review of Newegg’s ownership structure is under consideration.
4. Newegg Supply Chain Mapping: Conduct a detailed analysis of Newegg’s key suppliers of dual-use technologies to identify assets most at risk.

Ultimately, the convergence of a high-risk activist, a U.S. company vulnerable to a PRC state takeover, and a critical infrastructure provider creates a uniquely unstable environment that demands immediate and continued scrutiny.

---

Works Cited

1. Newegg Commerce, Inc. “Prospectus Supplement (Form 424B5).” U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. July 15, 2025. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1474627/000121390025063944/ea0248827-424b5_newegg.htm
2. optics.org. “Rockley forced to call off Hengtong deal.” December 21, 2021. https://optics.org/news/12/12/32
3. Bureau of Industry and Security. “Addition of Certain Entities to the Entity List.” Federal Register. December 17, 2021. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-12-17/pdf/2021-27406.pdf
4. Reuters. “JetBlue’s second-largest investor will consider selling stake without changes.” investing.com. June 26, 2025. https://www.investing.com/etfs/us-global-jets
5. U.S. Department of Homeland Security Privacy Office. “Report to the Public on the JetBlue Data Transfer.” February 20, 2004. https://www.dhs.gov/archive/news/2021/12/02/dhs-announces-new-cybersecurity-requirements-surface-transportation-owners-and
6. Sidley Austin LLP. “International Trade.” https://www.sidley.com/en/us/sidley-pages/china-outbound-practices/international-trade/
7. BGR Group. “About BGR.” https://bgrdc.com/
8. Galkin, Vladimir, et al. SEC Filings (Schedule 13G/A, Schedule 13D/A). U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. July 2024 – October 2025. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1158463/000137647424000494/vg_sc13d.htm
9. Nasdaq. “JetBlue’s (NASDAQ:JBLU) Third-Largest Investor Vladimir Galkin Explores Board Role.” August 1, 2024. https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/jetblues-nasdaq-jblu-third-largest-investor-vladimir-galkin-explores-board-role
10. Backman, Melvin. “The meme stock maven has spoken with the airline about joining its board directors.” Quartz. September 9, 2024. https://qz.com/jetblue-board-seat-vladimir-galkin-gamestop-1851643366
11. Newegg Commerce, Inc. “Annual Report (Form 20-F).” U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. April 28, 2022. https://content.edgar-online.com/ExternalLink/EDGAR/0001213900-22-022346.html?hash=6f9b586d2e242347390332523bd0119fb9c87616d6ee0ed2d9f32cbd2fc739ae&dest=f20f2021_newegg_htm
12. Newegg Commerce, Inc. “Report of Foreign Private Issuer (Form 6-K).” U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. July 15, 2025. https://content.edgar-online.com/ExternalLink/EDGAR/0001213900-25-063935.html?hash=f2f8408ed6ae872e7e2ffc6a61f5d92ac60fe4ded8d9045deb97cb54f9d43d50&dest=ea0248828-6k_newegg_htm
13. Congressional Research Service. “The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).” congress.gov. Updated May 20, 2024. https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF10177
14. Debevoise & Plimpton. “President Trump Uses CFIUS to Unwind 2020 Chinese Acquisition of U.S. Tech Company.” July 10, 2025. https://www.debevoise.com/insights/publications/2025/07/president-trump-uses-cfius-to-unwind-2020-chinese
15. Los Angeles Business Journal. “Top Women Attorneys in Los Angeles: Amy Lally.” April 24, 2020. https://labusinessjournal.com/advertorials/top-women-attorneys-los-angeles-amy-lally/
16. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. “Transportation Systems Sector.” cisa.gov. https://www.cisa.gov/topics/critical-infrastructure-security-and-resilience/critical-infrastructure-sectors/transportation-systems-sector
17. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. “DHS Announces New Cybersecurity Requirements for Surface Transportation Owners and Operators to Protect National and Economic Security.” December 2, 2021. https://www.dhs.gov/archive/news/2021/12/02/dhs-announces-new-cybersecurity-requirements-surface-transportation-owners-and
18. BGR Group. “Lobbying Report (LD-2), JetBlue Airways.” U.S. Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act Database. January 20, 2012. https://lda.senate.gov/filings/public/filing/c9712254-73e8-4b6f-991a-436138fdd811/print/
19. BGR Group. “Lobbying Report (LD-2), JetBlue Airways.” U.S. Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act Database. April 20, 2012. https://lda.senate.gov/filings/public/filing/1d848709-0f69-4a05-84c2-cf5e4cc38a17/print/
20. JetBlue Airways Corporation. “Lobbying Report (LD-2).” U.S. Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act Database. February 25, 2022. https://lda.senate.gov/filings/public/filing/5bfa6d60-f442-4346-b621-2058a45cef33/print/
21. optics.org. “Rockley and Hengtong set up $42m joint venture.” January 9, 2018. https://optics.org/news/9/1/3
22. Bureau of Industry and Security. “Dual Use Export Licenses.” bis.doc.gov. https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/all-articles/2-uncategorized/91-dual-use-export-licenses
23. BGR Group. “BGR International Practice.” https://bgrdc.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/BGR-One-Pager_International_2021.pdf
24. ch-aviation. “Second-largest shareholder in US’s JetBlue mulls share exit.” June 27, 2025. https://www.ch-aviation.com/news/155449-second-largest-shareholder-in-uss-jetblue-mulls-share-exit
25. Sidley Austin LLP. “Who We Are.” https://www.sidley.com/en/us/ourstory/aboutsidley/
26. BGR Group. “BGR Group Named 2024 Standout Lobbying Firm.” bgrdc.com. September 4, 2025. https://bgrdc.com/bgr-named-2024-top-lobbying-firm/
27. American Civil Liberties Union. “Homeland Security Report on JetBlue Confirms TSA’s Involvement in Privacy Scandal, ACLU Says.” February 20, 2004. https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/homeland-security-report-jetblue-confirms-tsas-involvement-privacy-scandal-aclu-says
28. Sidley Austin LLP. “Amy P. Lally.” https://www.sidley.com/en/people/l/lally-amy-p