Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, Case No. 17-1657, cert. granted (Oct. 26, 2018).

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case addressing the effect a trademark owner’s bankruptcy may have on a licensee’s right to continue to use a mark licensed before the bankruptcy was filed. The case presents an issue that has divided many courts, and may have far-reaching consequences for both trademark owners and trademark licensees.

Egalet Corporation (OCTQX: EGLT), along with two of its affiliates and subsidiaries, has filed a petition for relief under chapter 11 in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Lead Case No. 18-12439). Egalet, based in Wayne, Pennsylvania, is a specialty pharmaceutical company that develop and manufactures pain-relief medications.

The purpose of bankruptcy is twofold: (1) to provide the party filing for bankruptcy—the “debtor”—with a fresh start, and (2) to fairly distribute the debtor’s non-exempt assets to creditors in accordance with the priority scheme set forth in the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. This may sound relatively simple, but accomplishing these dual objectives can be difficult. One of the challenges in all bankruptcy cases is determining the scope and extent of assets that constitute “property of the estate” which are available for distribution to creditors.

In the spirit of the season, we’re (re)visited by Doron Kenter, a member of the Weil Bankruptcy Blog’s O.G. Editorial Board (and, as far as we can tell, still holder of the dubious distinction of having published the most posts for us).

Section 108(c) applies to extend a judgment lien pending termination of the automatic stay. State law grants a judgment creditor a lien on all the judgment debtor’s personal property when the creditor obtains from the court and serves on the judgment debtor an order for appearance and examination (ORAP) to discover assets. The lien, which is not publicly recorded, lasts for one year.

On October 26, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a petition for a writ of certiorari in the case of Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, to decide the issue of whether a debtor-licensor’s rejection of a trademark license agreement under section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code terminates the rights of the licensee to use the applicable trademarks. No. 17-1657, 2018 WL 2939184 (U.S. Oct. 26, 2018). The appeal arises from a decision by the U.S.

Dixie Electric, LLC, along with twelve affiliates and subsidiaries, has filed a petition for relief under chapter 11 in the Bankruptcy Code for the District of Delaware (Lead Case No. 18-12477). Dixie Electric, based in Houston, Texas, is a provider of electrical infrastructure materials and services to the upstream and midstream oil industries.

A June 2018 Bankruptcy Court decision in the Southern District of New York (SDNY) held that foreign companies with no presence in the U.S. were subject to default judgments.

On August 20, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of Illinois in In re I80 Equipment, LLC, No.17-81749, 2018 WL 4006294 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. Aug. 20, 2018) held that a secured party failed to perfect its security interest due to an insufficient description of the collateral listed in its UCC-1 financing statement. The financing statement failed to sufficiently describe the collateral because it referenced the definition of “collateral” in the underlying security agreement without attaching the security agreement to the financing statement.

Mission Product Holdings Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, No. 17-1657

Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a bankruptcy trustee may “assume or reject any executory contract” of the debtor and that “the rejection of an executory contract … constitutes a breach of such contract.” The Supreme Court today granted certiorari to decide whether the decision of a bankruptcy trustee to terminate a debtor’s agreement to license intellectual property thereby terminates the rights of the licensee to use the intellectual property.