Asset Sales

The First Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology LLC held that the absence of trademarks from the definition of intellection property in § 101(35A) of the Bankruptcy Code means that, unlike other types of intellectual property, a licensor’s rejection of a trademark license deprives its licensee of any right to continued use of the mark. The Supreme Court has accepted certiorari in the case and is expected to issue a decision late this Spring on the question of whether, under Bankruptcy Code § 365, a debtor-licensor’s rejection of a license terminates rights of the licensee that would survive the licensor’s breach under nonbankruptcy law. This panel will analyze the reach of the question presented, examine the arguments briefed, interpret the scope and breadth of the Court’s decision (assuming it is rendered before the term concludes), and consider the implications for commercial licensing and bankruptcy administration.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology LLC held that the absence of trademarks from the definition of intellection property in § 101(35A) of the Bankruptcy Code means that, unlike other types of intellectual property, a licensor’s rejection of a trademark license deprives its licensee of any right to continued use of the mark. The Supreme Court has accepted certiorari in the case and is expected to issue a decision late this Spring on the question of whether, under Bankruptcy Code § 365, a debtor-licensor’s rejection of a license terminates rights of the licensee that would survive the licensor’s breach under nonbankruptcy law. This panel will analyze the reach of the question presented, examine the arguments briefed, interpret the scope and breadth of the Court’s decision (assuming it is rendered before the term concludes), and consider the implications for commercial licensing and bankruptcy administration.

Hosted by the Asset Sales Committee This webinar will discuss the benefits and disadvantages of conducting a sale of assets pursuant to section 363 of the Bankruptcy Court compared to an out of court sale. The webinar will provide a general introduction to these issues as well as provide experienced practitioners with a nuanced high level discussion regarding applicable case law, hot button issues, pitfalls to avoid and war stories from the trenches. Speakers: Dawn M. Cica Mushkin Cica Coppedge; Bruce I. Goldstein Amherst Partners; Matthew J. LoCascio Equity Partners HG View Materials

Dive into § 363 sales issues, including whether there are limits to “free and clear”; the GM conflict between §§ 365(h) and 363(f) (“lease-stripping”); sales free and clear of leasehold interests, restrictive covenants and override royalties; being free and clear of successorships in CBAs; selling free and clear of environmental liabilities (La Paloma, Exide); and loan-to-own strategies.

Dive into § 363 sales issues, including whether there are limits to “free and clear”; the GM conflict between §§ 365(h) and 363(f) (“lease-stripping”); sales free and clear of leasehold interests, restrictive covenants and override royalties; being free and clear of successorships in CBAs; selling free and clear of environmental liabilities (La Paloma, Exide); and loan-to-own strategies.

ABCs aren’t just for kids anymore! Come join some of the nation’s leading experts as they identify the important building blocks of this tool to liquidate insolvent companies.

This panel focuses on the most important adequate-protection issues, including current cash payments in the form of legal fees for “secured” creditors, how diminution in value claims for different types of assets are determined, how intercreditor agreements may limit junior secured creditors’ rights to demand and receive adequate protection, and the valuation of assets.

The panel explores the challenges with foreign asset discovery in chapter 15 proceedings. Most foreign discovery is obtained either pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2004 or through the application of the Hague Convention. But how effective are these methods given the cumbersome and often complicated process of obtaining discovery? Are there more effective and efficient methods toward obtaining these results? Do other foreign jurisdictions have less cumbersome and more expedited processes to propound this type of discovery? The discussion includes commonly faced issues in obtaining discovery when locating and seizing assets, how to obtain records to determine the financial condition of the parties, and how foreign law may work to limit discovery.

This panel uses hypotheticals to discuss the ethical problems facing counsel and their clients in § 363 sales including collusion, abuses during due diligence, and successor liability.