DJI, the company behind the drones and gimbals filling countless camera bags, scored a modest legal victory on Friday in its long-running fight with the U.S. Pentagon. A U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit partially reversed a lower court’s ruling over DJI’s designation as a “Chinese Military Company,” sending the case back down for further review.
To recap: last year DJI lost its lawsuit against the Department of Defense over that label. It appealed, and this ruling is the result. As with any courtroom saga, the outcome is layered — the appeals court affirmed part of the earlier decision, reversed part of it, and remanded the case to the district court.
Here’s how the pieces fell:
- Upheld: the “Government Assistance” finding, which holds that DJI knowingly accepts Chinese government support. That rests on DJI’s formal recognition as a “National Enterprise Technology Center” (NETC) by China’s National Development and Reform Commission.
- Rejected: DJI’s claim that its constitutional due process was violated, plus its argument that the DoD was selectively enforcing its rules while other NETC-status firms — Nokia Bell, Volkswagen and Nissan are named — got a pass.
- Reversed: the “contribution” finding, meaning whether DJI “contributes to the Chinese defense industrial base.”
That last point is the interesting one for DJI. The court reversed it because the DoD redacted the entire section explaining its rationale from the unclassified record — leaving nothing public to justify the conclusion. The case now heads back to the lower court, which must decide whether the DoD’s classified reasoning actually supports the claim that DJI feeds China’s defense industry.
DJI, unsurprisingly, is pleased with the direction. “DJI welcomes today’s decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which partially reversed the lower court’s ruling and sent the case back for further consideration,” a company spokesperson said.
“The Court’s finding that the public record contained insufficient evidence is a significant step toward correcting an unjustified designation,” the statement continued. “The decision reinforces what DJI has consistently maintained: DJI is not a military company. We are a privately held company that has revolutionized the consumer and commercial drone markets, consistently condemned the use of our products in combat, and taken active steps to prevent it.”
The stakes here are bigger than a bureaucratic footnote. The military designation shapes how DJI is treated in the U.S. market, and any drone buyer who has followed the on-again, off-again talk of import restrictions knows the label carries real weight. A win on the “contribution” question won’t erase the “Government Assistance” finding, but it forces the government to show its work — and that’s a rare crack in an otherwise unfavorable ruling for the drone giant.
