Features

In a welcome relief to many in the leasing industry, the results contained in the Equipment Leasing Association's Quarterly Performance Indicators Report (PIR) for the second quarter of 2004 show some very favorable numbers. Specifically, there has been a net gain in two of the most important indicators: Total Net Portfolio and Total New Business. In addition, on time payments are up from a year ago while delinquencies are down. Charge-offs are down while employment in the industry and credit approvals are up when compared with the figures from the second quarter of 2003. This is very good news indeed.

This is the second article of a two-part series about managing the risks of doing business in Latin America. Last month's installment described Latin America as a region blessed with impressive worker productivity and natural resources, but also troubled by pockets of political and economic unrest. The article concluded that Latin America represents a fertile business frontier for equipment leasing and finance companies that are willing to manage risks proactively. It covered potential market entry risks and suggested strategies for reducing exposure. This month's article explores operational and exit-strategy risks to consider before expanding into Latin America. Risks are summarized in the Risk Map for Doing Business in Latin America (Table 1), published last month, which I developed based on experiences in the region. The map is intended as a checklist that outlines typical risks and management strategies. However, as every business is unique, companies should also attempt to identify additional risks and/or their own approaches.

Features

Highlights of the latest insurance cases from around the country.

Features

Asbestos-related litigation has forced at least 70 companies into bankruptcy, with more than 30 filing since 2000 alone. RAND Institute for Civil Justice, <i>Asbestos Litigation Costs and Compensation: An Interim Report</i> (2002); The Asbestos Alliance, <i>Asbestos by the Numbers</i> (2004). Meanwhile, the outlook remains uncertain for a federal legislative solution. In the bankruptcy courts, companies, insurers, claimants and judges will be forced to grapple with a variety of issues regarding the appropriate use of Section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code. Central to these disputes is the extent to which insurers have standing to raise issues regarding the debtors' bankruptcy filings and the provisions of their reorganization plans. In this article, we discuss recent rulings addressing insurers' standing in three asbestos-related bankruptcies: <i>In re Mid-Valley, Inc., In re Congoleum Corporation,</i> and <i>In re Western Asbestos Company.</i>

Traditionally, arbitration panels in the reinsurance industry have been tripartite panels with each party choosing its own arbitrator and the party-appointed arbitrators choosing a neutral umpire. Courts have recognized that party-appointed arbitrators may be advocates for the appointing party. <i>Sphere Drake Ltd. v. All Am. Life Ins. Co.,</i> 307 F.3d 617, 620 (7th Cir. 2002). ("In the main party appointed arbitrators are supposed to be advocates.") While the industry has become accustomed to the system of advocate arbitrators and there are those who champion this system, there has been a growing consensus that neutral panels may be preferable to advocate arbitrators.

Features

Highlights of the latest intellectual property news and cases from around the country.

Features

When a dispute arises between parties regarding the use and registrability of a trademark, counsel often must weigh the facts and circumstances to advise a client whether it would be best to commence an action in the PTO's Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ("TTAB") or file suit in federal court. In some cases however, counsel will find a client in the midst of a TTAB proceeding ' or worse ' after an unfavorable decision has been rendered against the client in an opposition or cancellation proceeding. In such situations, counsel must assess what preclusive effect, if any, the prior administrative decision may have in a subsequent trademark infringement action in federal district court.

The U.S. patent system grants patentees the right to exclude others from practicing a patented invention, which is defined by a patent's claims. As such, the patent statute requires that patent claims be clear and definite. The policy underlying this requirement is to ensure that competitors are provided with fair notice as to the scope of the claimed invention.