Call 855-808-4530 or email Gro[email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In In re Tempnology, the First Circuit held that the debtor’s rejection of a trademark license strips the nondebtor licensee of any right to continue to use the trademarks. In so doing, the court takes the same approach as the Fourth Circuit and rejects the approaches advocated by the Third and Seventh Circuits.
In In re Tempnology, LLC, 879 F.3d 389 (1st Cir. 2018), the First Circuit held (in a 2-1 decision) that the debtor’s rejection of a trademark license strips the nondebtor licensee of any right to continue to use the trademarks. In so doing, the court takes the same approach as the Fourth Circuit in its controversial Lubrizol decision and rejects the approaches advocated by Judge Ambro of the Third Circuit in his Exide concurrence and the Seventh Circuit in its Sunbeam decision. Tempnology thus deepens the circuit split between the Fourth and Seventh Circuits over this issue, and highlights the general confusion that still remains 40 years after enactment of the present Bankruptcy Code over the effect of rejection.
Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.
By Jeffery Lula
In today’s volatile economic climate, companies need to be more creative to find ways to mitigate risk. Litigation finance is one of those out-of-the-box solutions that can provide benefits.
By Michael L. Cook
The Second Circuit, on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, further remanded to the district court the key issue of whether the Chapter 11 debtor gave “adequate assurance of future performance of” a commercial real property shopping center lease “as required by [Bankruptcy Code] §365(b)(3)(A),” after the debtor’s assignment of its lease.
By Lawrence J. Kotler and Ryan Spengler
While this case does not fully open the courthouse doors to cannabis-related businesses and seemingly grants the bankruptcy courts a great deal of discretion when ruling on similar cases in the future, cannabis-related businesses may now have a roadmap to pursue reorganization.
By Francis J. Lawall and Brenden S. Dahrouge
In upholding the bankruptcy court’s determination that the payment of insurance proceeds could be such a transfer, the Fifth Circuit underscored the complex interplay between state law, bankruptcy law and the rights of creditors in bankruptcy proceedings.