Law Firm News

---

Law Firm News

Firm Name

News Title

News

News Date

25383 matches |  14526-14532 displayed

1  2076 2077 2078 2079 2080  3627

---

Hunton & Williams, LLP

Hunton & Williams’ Mark Menezes Sees Environment, Global Warming as Major Legislative Initiatives in New Congress
Hunton & Williams Partner Mark Menezes recently joined Darren Samuelsohn of E&ETV’s On Point to discuss how the House Energy and Commerce and Senate Environment and Public Works committees will shape the future success of climate change legislation. While Menezes sees ambitious goals for climate change legislation in the new Congress, he thinks the legislative road to enactment will be a difficult one.

Mark Menezes, former Chief Counsel, Energy and Environment, for the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce, played a key role in developing legislation to modernize the Clean Air Act. While Chief Counsel, Mr. Menezes served as chief negotiator and legislative architect for the House Majority in the enactment of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. He was responsible for hearings, oversight, and legislation involving the nation’s energy and clean air policies, including conducting hearings on climate change legislation. Other hearings conducted under his tenure addressed fossil fuels, nuclear and renewable energy resources, utility regulation, environmental protection, the Clean Air Act, and solid and hazardous waste laws. His agency responsibilities included oversight of FERC, DOE, NRC, and EPA.

The discussion initially focused on the approach Congressman Dingell would take once he resumes Chairmanship of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. When Dingell was Chairman of the committee, he also chaired the committee’s Oversight and nvestigations subcommittee. While joint chairmanship may not be the case this Congress given the committee’s current rules, Menezes pointed out that Chairman Dingell and his staff have successfully used investigative hearings to place evidence into the record supporting the substance of legislation and he would likely do so in the new Congress.

Any climate change legislation will include a broad range of policies all aimed at reducing carbon emissions. While most legislation is discussed in terms of carbon reduction targets, cap and trade programs, and the impact on the U.S. economy, other issues will include use of renewable energy, energy efficiency and fuel choices. Thus, any comprehensive approach to climate change legislation will likely be “extraordinarily broad.”

Menezes also noted that the upcoming presidential election in 2008 allows for one year of good faith efforts at considering legislation in the new Congress. The most critical legislative period will occur between January 2007 and March 2008, before the majority of presidential primaries are held. The “good graces of the American population” will probably have to be gained before “the onslaught of presidential politics.

11-21-2006

---

Kaye Scholer LLP

Onex Subsidiary, Spirit AeroSystems Holding, Inc., Completes IPO
Kaye Scholer client, Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: SPR), the largest Tier 1 aerostructures manufacturer in the world, and subsidiary of Onex Corporation, completed an initial public offering of 63.3 million shares of class A common stock at a price of $26 per share. The offering consists of approximately 10.4 million treasury shares offered by Spirit AeroSystems and 52.9 million shares offered by selling stockholders, including Onex. Spirit was created in 2005 when Onex bought Boeing's commercial aerostructures production facilities in Wichita and Oklahoma. Kaye Scholer also represented Onex in this transaction.

11-21-2006

---

Jorden Burt LLP

Financial Firms Feud Over Departing Employees
Relevant Practice Team:
Labor & Employment

Relevant Industry Group:
Securities

On November 10, 2006, The Wall Street Journal ran the story "The Breakup: When Brokerage Houses Attack, " chronicling the lawsuit filed by Milwaukee-based Robert W. Baird & Co. against three former employees who left to start their own rival firm.

If a departing employee is subject to a non-competition agreement, litigation will often result unless the departing employee/agent complies with the terms of that contract. Even absent a non-competition agreement, litigation may result where the employee/agent takes with him to a competitor trade secrets or other confidential or proprietary business information. In that case, the legal action will seek the return of the confidential business data and a court order barring any future misuse of that data. At times, an employee/agent has held such a unique position in a business that his departure to a competitor will inevitably lead to the disclosure of trade secrets or other confidential or proprietary business information. In that unique situation, a court might block the new employment even if a non-competition agreement does not exist. Also, any departing employee/agent who steals or destroys electronic data may be in violation of certain federal and state laws. See, for example, The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030, et seq., and The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2510, et seq.

11-21-2006

---

Howrey, LLP

CHUNGHWA PICTURE TUBES TAKES A BITE OUT OF LG PHILIPS LCD’S AGING PATENT PORTFOLIO
Over the past four years, LG Philips LCD Co., Ltd. (“LPL”) has filed suits against rival Taiwan-based LCD manufacturer Chunghwa Picture Tubes (“CPT”), as well as CPT’s customers, in an effort to keep CPT out of the LCD marketplace. Since August 2002, LPL has filed no less than six patent infringement suits against CPT and its customers in an effort to jump-start LPL’s lackluster patent licensing program.

Of the eight U.S. patents asserted against CPT in those six lawsuits, CPT has now successfully defeated five.

Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Honorable Consuelo Marshall dismissed four of the six patents asserted against CPT in California. Those four patents relate to side-mounting technology that can be used to affix LCD modules into notebook computers. CPT had argued to an arbitration panel late last year that LPL had contractually assigned to Digital Equipment Corporation ten years ago any rights LPL might have held in this side-mounting technology. Relying on the arbitrators’ Award, Judge Marshall found in October 2006 that LPL lacked standing to assert infringement of these “side-mount” patents because, in 1996, “[LG] Philips, pursuant to the contract, I think, as the arbitrators interpreted it, assigned or gave up its rights to the intellectual property” in the side-mount technology. Judge Marshall dismissed LPL’s four “side-mount” patents with prejudice the day before jury selection was set to begin for the California trial.

Last year, LPL sued CPT in Delaware district court on two other U.S. patents related to LCD manufacturing processes. After CPT uncovered compelling evidence that one of the two patents was invalid, LPL dropped that patent from the case and gave CPT a covenant not to sue. In July 2006, a Delaware jury rejected LPL’s claim that CPT’s products literally infringed the claims of the remaining patent. While the jury did find that CPT infringed the remaining patent based on the so-called “doctrine of equivalents,” CPT “fully expects either the district court or the court of appeals to overturn the Delaware verdict,” says Dr. Simon Tsai, CPT’s Vice President of its Legal and Intellectual Property General Division. In September 2006, the trial judge, Honorable Joseph Farnan, effectively denied LPL’s request to enter judgment on the jury’s verdict, allowing CPT an opportunity to have the Court hear CPT’s post-trial motions to overturn the jury’s verdict, based in part on a lack of evidence and LPL’s misconduct during the trial.

Today, a jury found CPT liable on two of LPL’s U.S. patents relating to LCD manufacturing in the amount of $50 million. For one of the patents – which has already expired – the jury found that CPT did not literally infringe but did infringe under the “doctrine of equivalents.” Similar to the Delaware verdict, CPT’s Dr. Tsai expressed confidence that either the district court or the court of appeals would overturn the California verdict. “LPL failed to make their case on every level. There simply was not any evidence to support LPL’s groundless accusations of infringement of these patents.” CPT also asserts that the expired patent is invalid based on the ground-breaking work performed at General Electric in 1983. Taking issue with LPL’s claim constructions, CPT believes that an earlier Xerox patent will invalidate the other LPL patent once the claim is correctly construed. “LPL presented claim interpretations for these two patents that directly contradict the patent disclosures, the prosecution histories, and well-established patent law. We believe either the trial court or the court of appeals will reject LPL’s arguments,” said Dr. Tsai.

“Although LPL has for years labeled itself a technology leader, LPL’s patent portfolio is based on old technology,” says Dr. Tsai. “This is reflected in the jury’s damage award, where they refused to give LPL what it was asking for. The truth is that LPL can no longer compete in the marketplace in terms of costs and quality. The rest of the industry is simply bypassing LPL’s technology.”

CPT is represented by Howrey LLP partners Robert Taylor (East Palo Alto), Teresa Corbin (San Francisco), Glenn Rhodes (San Francisco and Taipei) and Christopher Mathews (Los Angeles).

11-21-2006

---

Hogan & Hartson LLP

Financial Services and Corporate Governance Lawyer to Speak at KPMG Audit Committee Roundtable December 13
Hogan & Hartson LLP partner Stuart G. Stein will speak as a panelist at KPMG's Fall 2006 Audit Committee Roundtable, Audit Committee Communications and Coordination with the Board and Other Committees. This event will explore the leading practices used by audit committees and other board members to ensure proper alignment and coordination of their oversight activities. Panel discussion topics include:

* What are the information requirements of the audit committee?
* How do audit committees coordinate their oversight activities with other board committees in areas of overlap?
* What are the roles of the general counsel, the CFO, and auditors in facilitating communications and coordination among the audit committee, the board, and other board activities?

The roundtable will take place from 8:00 a.m. to noon on December 13, 2006 at The Ritz-Carlton in Miami, Fl.

11-21-2006

---

O'Melveny & Myers, LLP

Martin J. "Kelly" McTigue Adds Significant Depth to Firm's Environmental Capabilities
O'Melveny & Myers LLP announced today that Martin J. "Kelly" McTigue, has joined the firm as a partner in the firm's Los Angeles office. Mr. McTigue joins O'Melveny & Myers from the Los Angeles office of Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, where his practice focused on counseling clients on a wide range of environmental issues, including environmental and water resources issues, Superfund and hazardous waste law.

"Kelly is a very well-regarded environmental lawyer," said David Krinsky, Co-Chair of O'Melveny & Myers' Transactions Practice. "Having practiced extensively in all aspects of the industry, he will be an outstanding asset to many of the firm's clients, some of whom increasingly face myriad environmental issues."

Mr. McTigue's experience in the environmental arena includes water quality, water supply, air quality, reporting obligations, permitting issues, and all aspects of the regulation and remediation of hazardous substances. In addition, he has long-standing relationships with environmental regulatory agencies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the Army Corp of Engineers, Cal-EPA's Department of Toxic Substances Control, Department of Health Services, Air Resources Board and the various local air districts, State Water Resources Control Board, the California Energy Commission, and the California Coastal Commission.

"Kelly is one of the leading 'go-to' lawyers for clients who need environmental guidance," said Eric Rothenberg, a partner in the firm's transactions practice who joined O'Melveny & Myers in December 2005 and previously worked with Mr. McTigue at Morgan Lewis. "In addition to his work with environmental matters, his versatility includes experience with clients engaged in complex transactions. He has also shown himself to be an excellent private equity diligence attorney with a broad understanding of the universe of environmental risks."

Mr. McTigue received his B.S. from the University of Idaho and his J.D. from Southwestern University School of Law. He began his legal career at McCutchen Black, which later merged into Baker Hostetler. He then spent ten years at Weston Benshoof, becoming partner in 1997. Mr. McTigue joined Morgan Lewis & Bockius in 2002.

11-21-2006

---

Baker & McKenzie, L.L.P.

Baker & McKenzie LLP Advises Greenhill in its Capacity as Financial Advisor to Nasdaq on Nasdaq's £2.9 Billion Bid for LSE
Baker & McKenzie, London announced today that it advised Greenhill & Co. International LLP, the lead financial adviser to The Nasdaq Stock Market, Inc. in relation to Nasdaq's unilateral cash offer for London Stock Exchange Group Plc, which values LSE at approximately £2.9 billion.

Baker & McKenzie Corporate Partner, Helen Bradley, said, "We are pleased to have advised Greenhill on this significant matter. This takeover provides another example of Baker & McKenzie's growing involvement in significant UK public company takeovers, advising both institutions and corporates. Since 2004 we have acted on 13 UK public takeover bids with a combined value of approximately £9 billion."

The Baker & McKenzie team consisted of Corporate Partner Helen Bradley, senior associate Robert Adam and Banking and Finance Partner Nick Tostivin.

Nasdaq is advised by Skadden and Allen & Overy. Merrill Lynch is acting as financial adviser to LSE.

11-21-2006

---

25383 matches |  14526-14532 displayed

1  2076 2077 2078 2079 2080  3627