Greg Sanderson to Present at Biomass Power Technical Seminar at Georgia Tech

Taylor English Duma attorney Greg Sanderson will be presenting to the International Applied Engineering Biomass Power Technical Seminar on March 11-13 on the campus of the Georgia Institute of Technology.

Mr. Sanderson’s presentation will focus on federal income tax credits and grants, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Biomass Crop Assistance Program (“BCAP”) and other subsidies and incentives intended to promote the development of alternative fuels and renewable energy technologies utilizing biomass.  Mr. Sanderson, as part of Taylor English Duma’s Renewable Energy Finance team regularly advises project developers, investors and others on renewable energy tax credits and financing structures that take advantage of these incentives.

Registration and other information is available from the seminar website.

Taylor English Forms Technology Group, Hires IP Attorney Jeff Kuester

Atlanta – Feb. 25, 2010 –Taylor English Duma LLP has formed a technology group to address the growing need for intellectual property expertise and plans on hiring patent attorneys, patent agents and technical advisors. The law firm has also brought on 17-year IP specialist Jeff Kuester to lead the technology group’s new patent preparation, prosecution and enforcement practice.

Taylor English has grown 50 percent over the past year through the addition of 25-plus attorneys. With the addition of Kuester and his IP management practice, said partner and technology group member Bob Goldberg, the firm is well-positioned to become the law firm of choice in Atlanta for technology companies.

“With our roster of senior attorneys with tech experience, it makes a strong case to form a technology group,” Goldberg said. “Attorneys in this group understand the technology business and the issues tech firms face.”

The technology group will have an increased focus on venture capital, patent applications, patent defense, IP management, privacy, software licensing and Internet law. Members consist of attorneys from several practice areas, including corporate & capital obtainment, commercial contracting & dispute resolution, employment & immigration, and tax.

Many members have served as general and senior in-house counsels and in other capacities for Fortune 500 and start-up technology companies:

• Jeff Kuester – IBM.
• Scott Duma – XcelleNet, Premiere Global Services, Per-Se Technologies and DCA.
• Jonathan Wilson – Interland, Web.com, EasyLink Services International.
• Bruce Richards – Equifax, Certegy
• Mike Sullivan – Sanmina/SCI
• Bob Goldberg – MCI Telecommunications, Harbor Payments Corp.

Kuester: ‘We’re Growing and Still Hiring’

Kuester, previously a founding partner at Thomas, Kayden, Horstemeyer & Risley LLP, has secured hundreds of patents over his career.

He has substantial experience in software, telecommunications and electronics. One particular case he brings to Taylor English is the heavily-watched Bilski v. Kappos. Kuester represents the co-inventors in this U.S. Supreme Court case, which involves business-method and software-patent rights.

“Jeff is one of the most respected attorneys in the country regarding intellectual property matters,” Goldberg said. “His commitment to helping clients maximize the value of their IP fits perfectly with our approach to practicing law.”

Kuester has spent most of his career in technology law. Earning his B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Georgia Tech, he currently teaches Intellectual Property Law at Georgia State University.

Other technology roles have included:

• Chair of the American Bar Association’s Patent Legislation Committee.
• Chair of the State Bar of Georgia’s Intellectual Property Law and Technology Law sections.
• Board of Editors for Internet Law & Strategy journal.

Kuester said the need for effective IP defense is at an all-time high due to increasing complexities—and rising costs—in patent litigation. On Feb. 1, for example, Boston Scientific Corp. said it would pay Johnson & Johnson $1.73 billion to end a patent dispute.

“It’s becoming harder to create strong patent rights,” Kuester said. “The law is evolving faster than it ever has. That’s why it’s important for technology firms of all sizes to have a technology-focused law firm on their side.”

Kuester said he came to Taylor English because the firm has several advantages over larger, more traditional firms. The firm, he said, passes cost savings to clients because of lower overhead. In addition, Taylor English is able to invest firm-wide in the newest of technologies—including an online system that will provide clients efficient and cost-saving access to patent files and deadlines.

Kuester said the right balance of legal expertise and cost effectiveness has uniquely positioned Taylor English for rapid growth.

“We’re growing and still hiring,” Kuester said. “We fully expect to be Atlanta’s premiere full-services law firm for technology companies.”

###

About Taylor English Duma LLP

Taylor English is a full-service business law firm that provides high quality legal services for optimal value. Areas of practice include Employment & Labor, Technology, Business Transactions, Corporate & Taxation, Litigation and Dispute Resolution and Real Estate, Development & Construction.  Taylor English represents all types of clients—from Fortune 500 companies and start-ups to individuals. The firm has grown from four attorneys in 2005 to over 75 attorneys today. For more information, visit www.taylorenglish.com.

Daily Report Feature: Taylor English adds patent capabilities

In The Trenches:

By Meredith Hobbs, Staff Reporter

Jeffrey R. Kuester has left intellectual property boutique Thomas, Kayden, Horstemeyer & Risley to develop a patent prosecution practice for Taylor English Duma.

Kuester is the firm’s first patent prosecutor, specializing in electronics, software and telecommunications patent applications.

Kuester, a founding member of Thomas Kayden in 1996, said Taylor English also gives him the opportunity to develop his patent litigation skills. “I’ve done some patent litigation and would like to do more,” he said.

He added that it is more difficult to expand into patent litigation in a firm such as Thomas Kayden where there are already plenty of patent prosecutors who are also established litigators.

He added that Taylor English plans to hire patent agents to support the patent prosecution work.

Daniel R. McClure, Thomas Kayden’s managing partner, was out of town and not available for comment.
Kuester said he became interested in the Taylor English model after talking to firm partner Gregory G. Schultz, whom he knew personally, and Perry McGuire, whom he knew from McGuire’s tenure in-house at Chick-fil-A before McGuire joined Taylor English.

“Patent prosecution has become more cost-pressured over the years,” said Kuester. “Taylor English is well-positioned with regard to its low overhead and rate structure to address those changes.”

Taylor English is comprised almost entirely of partners, with few associates, and occupies suburban office space to keep overhead lower than at big Midtown firms. Two high-profile clients for Kuester are Bernard Bilski and Rand Warsaw, whose case over a patent application was argued at the U.S. Supreme Court in November. Bilski v. Kappos is being closely watched because it is expected to set parameters for what can be patented as a business method.

Kuester is representing Bilski and Warsaw, who have an interest in the prospective patent but are not its owners. Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner is representing EQT IP Ventures, the putative patent holder in the litigation.

Bilski and Warsaw applied for a patent in 1997 for what they say is a mathematical process that makes energy costs more predictable for utilities, by factoring in weather fluctuations and the effect on supply and demand in advance, so utilities can bill customers at a fixed monthly rate. The two started WeatherWise to offer this service to utilities. Bilski left the company in 2003, but Warsaw still runs the consultancy.

The business method patent was turned down by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and then the federal appeals court.

“That decision was the first in a long time that put the brakes on business method patents,” said Kuester.

The two inventors appealed to the Supreme Court, and sixty-seven amicus briefs were filed in the case.

A ruling that Bilski and Warsaw’s process is not a patentable business method would put a freeze on the burgeoning field of business-method patents, said Kuester, who believes allowing such patents fosters innovation. “If it’s not patentable, people will keep it a trade secret and proprietary,” he said. “That’s been my professional life. I’m looking out for the inventors.”

Source (Subscription Required)

409A Correction Relief-IRS Notice 2010-6

This notice provides methods for taxpayers to voluntarily correct many types of
failures to comply with the document requirements applicable under § 409A of the
Internal Revenue Code (Code) to nonqualified deferred compensation plans and
thereby avoid or reduce the current income inclusion and additional taxes under § 409A.
This document correction program is intended to encourage taxpayers to review
nonqualified deferred compensation plans to identify provisions that fail to comply with
the requirements of § 409A and § 1.409A-1(c) of the Income Tax Regulations (a
document failure), and to correct those plan provisions promptly, while also not
providing an advantage to taxpayers participating in plans that initially fail to comply with
§ 409A over taxpayers participating in plans drafted in compliance with § 409A.
Accordingly, this notice provides:

• Clarification that certain language commonly included in plan documents will not
  cause a document failure.
• Relief permitting correction of certain document failures without current income
  inclusion or additional taxes under § 409A, provided, in certain circumstances,
  that the corrected plan provision does not affect the operation of the plan within
  one year following the date of correction.
• Relief limiting the amount currently includible in income and the additional taxes
  under § 409A for certain document failures if correction of the failure affects the
  operation of the plan within one year following the date of correction.
• Relief permitting correction of certain document failures without current income
  inclusion or additional taxes under § 409A, if the plan is the service recipient’s
  first plan of that type (disregarding any plans not subject to § 409A or any plans
  under which all deferred amounts have previously been paid or forfeited) and the
  failure is corrected within a limited period following adoption of the plan.
• Transition relief permitting corrections of certain document failures without
  current income inclusion or additional taxes under § 409A, if the document failure
  is corrected by December 31, 2010, and any operational failures resulting from
  the document failure are also corrected in accordance with Notice 2008-113,
  2008-51 IRB 1305, by December 31, 2010.

This notice also clarifies certain aspects of Notice 2008-113, which addresses
certain failures of nonqualified deferred compensation plans to comply with § 409A in
operation (operational failures), including clarification of:

• The application of the subsequent year correction method to late payments of
  amounts deferred.
• The calculation of the amount that must be paid to the service provider as a
  correction of a late payment of an amount deferred under a plan if the payment
  would have been made in property, such as shares of stock.
• The calculation of the amount that must be repaid by the service provider as a
  correction of an early payment of an amount deferred under a plan if the early
  payment was made in property, such as shares of stock.

For more information contact Aaron Kowan at 678-336-7194.

Click here to read the IRS Notice.

Shawntel R. Hebert

Shawntel R. Hebert

Shawntel Hebert is a member of Taylor English’s Employment, Labor & Immigration practice group. Her practice includes a variety of employment law litigation, including representing Employment Practices Liability Insurance (“EPLI”) carriers on a local and regional level. Ms. Hebert has experience representing clients in both state and federal courts as well as in various alternative dispute resolution forums.

In the area of employment, Ms. Hebert litigates in defense of companies against claims relating to race, sex, age, national origin, religious and disability discrimination as well as harassment, retaliation and wrongful discharge. Ms. Hebert also counsels and assists clients who are investigating allegations of harassment and discrimination, and she advises clients in all aspects of the employment relationship. In addition, she provides day-to-day counseling services to clients on general employment-related matters, including risk management and preventative practices. Finally, Ms. Hebert has an interest in preparing Affirmative Action Plans and yearly updates for clients.

Ms. Hebert is a 2007 graduate of Emory University School of Law and graduated summa cum laude from her undergraduate alma mater, Howard University, in 2004.