Cooley LLP

Cooley LLP Blogs

Blog Authors

Latest from Cooley LLP

Almost every year amendments are made to the rules that govern how bankruptcy cases are managed — the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. The amendments address issues identified by an Advisory Committee made up of federal judges, bankruptcy attorneys, and others. The rule amendments are ultimately adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court and technically subject to Congressional disapproval. Key Rule Amendments Have A Certain Appeal. This year almost all of the rule amendments are to…
The twists and turns of the In re Tempnology LLC bankruptcy case have been a frequent subject on this blog for good reason. The case addresses whether a trademark licensee, whose licensor files bankruptcy and rejects the license agreement, retains any rights to use the trademark — or instead is out of luck. A Wild Ride. The licensee in that case, Mission Product Holdings, Inc. (“Mission”), has been on something of a roller coaster ride…
The Tempnology Trademark Saga. When it comes to decisions on bankruptcy and trademark licenses, the In re Tempnology LLC bankruptcy case is the gift that keeps on giving. The Original. It all started in November 2015. Following Tempnology’s rejection of an agreement containing a trademark licensee, the New Hampshire Bankruptcy Court ruled that the licensee could no longer use the licensed trademarks. The Bankruptcy Court followed the Fourth Circuit’s 1985 decision in Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond
Just about every year amendments are made to the rules that govern how bankruptcy cases are managed — the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. The amendments address issues identified by an Advisory Committee made up of federal judges, bankruptcy attorneys, and others. As the photo above reminds us, the rule amendments are ultimately adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court (and technically subject to Congressional disapproval). Key Rule Amendments For Business Bankruptcy Cases. This year, the…
Just about every year changes are made to the rules that govern how bankruptcy cases are managed — the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. The revisions address issues identified by an Advisory Committee made up of federal judges, bankruptcy attorneys, and others. Key Rule Amendments. This year the rule amendments address the continuing impact of the Stern v. Marshall case on bankruptcy proceedings, the effect of electronic service on response deadlines, and certain Chapter 15…
The In re Tempnology LLC bankruptcy case in New Hampshire has produced yet another important decision involving trademarks and Section 365(n) of the Bankruptcy Code. This time the decision is from the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the First Circuit (“BAP”). Although the BAP’s Section 365(n) discussion is interesting, even more significant is its holding on the impact of rejection of a trademark license. The decision is also further evidence of the continuing trend
As discussed in an earlier post called “Going Up: Bankruptcy Code Dollar Amounts Will Increase On April 1, 2016,” various dollar amounts in the Bankruptcy Code and related statutory provisions were increased for cases filed on or after today, April 1, 2016. This information sheet has a list of all the dollar amount changes now in effect. The official bankruptcy forms have also been revised to reflect these new dollar amounts. The updated forms include…
An official notice from the Judicial Conference of the United States was just published announcing that certain dollar amounts in the Bankruptcy Code will be increased ever so slightly — only about 3% this time — for new cases filed on or after April 1, 2016. Follow this link for the Federal Register page with a chart listing all of the updated dollar amounts.  Among the most meaningful increases for Chapter 11 and other…
Many start-up companies backed by venture capital financing, especially those still in the development phase or which otherwise are not cash flow breakeven, at some point may face the prospect of running out of cash. Although many will timely close another round of financing, others may not. This post focuses on options available to companies when investors have decided not to fund and the company needs to consider a wind down. Fiduciary Duties And Maximizing…
A decision last month by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Hampshire serves as a good reminder that, although helpful, Bankruptcy Code Section 365(n)’s protection for intellectual property licensees definitely has its limits. That’s especially true for a commercial agreement whose central purpose is something other than as a technology license. Since we don’t get many Section 365(n) cases, let’s examine this one more closely. Distribution And License Rights. In In re Tempnology,