Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
<b>Part Two of a Two-Part Article.</b> In our article that appeared in last month's issue, we discussed the special rule contained in Section 382(l)(5) with respect to the use of net operating losses by a company that has restructured under the protection of the bankruptcy court. Where the stock, debt and claims against a bankrupt company are traded, companies execute lock up agreements with their stockholders or request orders from the bankruptcy court to restrict trading in the stock, debt or claims so as to protect its net operating loss carry forwards. Often, out of an excess of caution, the orders requested have been overly broad and have disrupted trading in such debt and claims. On Nov. 22, 2004, The Bond Market Association and The Loan Syndications and Trading Association announced that in a joint effort they had developed a model NOL order to address these disruptions. Part Two discusses the results.
Features
In theory, a borrower's issuance of junior secured debt is a boon for its senior secured lender. The borrower obtains additional capital, and the claims of the junior lender against shared collateral, since "subordinated," don't diminish the senior lender's prospects for repayment. In practice, however, a senior secured lender should view proposed junior secured financing skeptically because the existence of such debt can become highly problematic for the senior lender. The key to protecting the senior lender lies in properly negotiating and documenting the intercreditor agreement with the junior lender to eliminate, or at least minimize the myriad of ways in which the junior lender's rights may, in practice, limit -- or even trump -- those of the senior lender.
Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
On Dec. 6, 2004, a New York federal jury determined that the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center involved two "occurrences" under policies issued to leaseholder Larry Silverstein. As a result, Silverstein could get up to $1.1 billion more than if the attacks had constituted a single occurrence.
Features
It continues to be a great pleasure for the media relations professionals at Jaffe Associates to contribute our viewpoints on the publicity issues and trends that all of you face each day. Since becoming regular columnists for <i>Marketing the Law Firm</i>, we have covered a number of topics that we hope have been educational and even inspirational. Here, we take a look back at these columns and tell you some of next year's topics.
Features
I have a confession to make: I am occasionally wrong. There. I've said it, and I can move on. I've heard that admitting you have a problem is the first step towards a cure, and so I'm well on the road to recovery. Now it's time for our industry to admit it has a problem and take a similar step towards wellness ' Advertising.
Features
The year 2004 has been my first full year as Editor-in-Chief of this publication. While there have been challenges, there have also been some rewards. So, sit back, relax and enjoy the first half of 2004 as I present to you selected highlights of <i>Marketing the Law Firm</i> for the months January through June.
Features
In previous articles we have imagined a dialogue between Treasury and IP professionals. The IP professionals have done most of the talking so far; from their point of view, this conversational flow makes perfect sense. The world of patents and trademarks is exotic, specialized and counterintuitive, having undergone substantial change in governing law and predominant management technique since 1990. In contrast, one would expect the management of mere cash flows to be a mature discipline. What can Treasury tell us about how to manage IP? "Buy-low and sell high"?
A picture is worth a thousand words — or perhaps more — when the concept being described is complicated, abstract or unfamiliar. By its very nature, the technology associated with a patent demands the use of visual and other aids in order to be understandable by a juror, judge, or other trier of fact. Not surprisingly then, demonstratives are essential tools in patent litigation to illustrate or contradict fact and expert witness testimony, as teaching aids in <i>Markman</i> hearings, and in opening and closing arguments. A number of legal and practical considerations should be kept in mind when preparing and using demonstrative aids.
Features
Researchers and technology managers may not deal with IP every day like IP professionals do, but they are still exposed to all sorts of patent strategy tools, especially when they are attempting to develop a patent strategy for a business. The advertisements for these tools typically imply that life would be so much simpler if only they used the vendor's latest and greatest tool. Many of these tools are very useful; however, most tools also have limitations. Having a framework from which to evaluate these tools is therefore helpful to researchers and managers.