The term “Peak oil” is the theory that oil production has maxed out and that decline is therefore inevitable, writes Mona Dajani in a white paper published by Baker & McKenzie. “The oil market is in a state of confusion, though several developments may serve to halt the momentum depending on their respective outcomes,” she writes.

“The race between new technologies and new resources is a major challenge; it is getting harder to access and extract oil and we are becoming more reliant on technological advances to meet this challenge. It should be noted, however, that if U.S. oil production declines significantly this year and prices remain relatively low, there is a chance that the world has seen the all time high of oil production,” she writes.

Read the white paper.

Kane Russell Coleman & Logan has posted an article by Karin Zaner on its blog, The Doctor’s Advocate, discussing 10 tips for physician employment contracts.

The article discusses the importance of reading and understanding the agreement before signing, leverage in terms of employment negotiation, non-compete obligations, non-solicitation and non-ownership obligations, HIPAA, privacy and trade secret confidentiality, income guarantees, logistics, finding a good match, recognizing red flags, and resisting the urge to resign.

Read the article.

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP will present a complimentary webinar, “Kimble v. Marvel: Practical Tips for Extending Licensing Agreements Beyond Patent Expiration,” presented by Christine A. Pompa. The webinar will take place on Wednesday, August 26, 2015, at 9 a.m. PDT / 10 a.m.MDT / 11 a.m. CDT / 12 noon EDT.

On June 22, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, upholding the long-standing rule that prohibits a patent holder from charging royalties for the use of an invention after the underlying patent has expired. As a result, patent holders may want to consider ways to negotiate competitive, mutually beneficial, and enforceable license agreements that exist beyond the term of the underlying patent.

Some of the webinar topics will be:
• The case law leading up to the opinion in Kimble v. Marvel
• A summary of the opinion
• Tips and strategies for drafting licensing agreements that extend royalty fee payments beyond the life of a patent

The speaker will be Fitch Even partner Christine A. Pompa, who has extensive litigation and trial experience in patent, trademark, trade secret, and copyright cases. She also provides clients with legal opinions on non-infringement and invalidity, as well as IP- and technology-related agreements, including licensing agreements, product terms and conditions, service agreements, and privacy policies.

CLE credit has been approved for California and Illinois and is pending in Nebraska. Other states may also award CLE credit upon attendee request. There is no fee to attend, but registration is required.

Register for the webinar.

Stradley Ronon announced that commercial litigation and insurance attorney Mark D. Villanueva has joined the firm as a partner in its Philadelphia office. He was most recently a partner with McCarter & English.

Villanueva represents clients in commercial litigation matters, having amassed extensive litigation experience at the trial and appellate levels in state and federal courts and in arbitration proceedings. He also counsels clients in the negotiation and drafting of commercial contracts and sponsorship agreements. Villanueva has worked with companies in numerous industries, including insurance, energy, oil and gas, financial services, pharmaceutical and health care.

Villanueva brings with him to Stradley Ronon significant litigation, transactional and intellectual property matters, the firm said in a release.

“Mark is widely regarded as one of the region’s top young attorneys, and we are thrilled to have him join Stradley Ronon,” said firm Chairman William R. Sasso. “His commercial litigation and insurance experience complements our existing practice areas and further advances our mission of providing clients with skilled attorneys committed to providing value-driven results.”

“Joining Stradley Ronon gives me a large, sophisticated and highly visible platform from which to serve my clients,” said Villanueva. “While I was familiar with the firm’s deep roster of legal talent in areas such as litigation, insurance, intellectual property and corporate law, I was just as impressed with its commitment to responsive, efficient, comprehensive client service, which is particularly attractive to my contacts.”

Stradley Ronon’s nationally recognized insurance practice group counsels leading insurers, reinsurers and producers, and, when necessary, litigates on their behalf. The firm helps insurers resolve disputes regarding the full spectrum of commercial and individual coverage lines, including transactional and regulatory matters and complex claims and litigation. In addition, Stradley Ronon’s complex commercial litigation practice represents public and private companies in a wide range of industries on litigation issues including securities fraud allegations, director and office liability, merger and acquisition disputes, shareholder disputes, intellectual property claims, business torts, contract claims and lender liability matters. The firm’s litigation practice group was recognized by The Legal Intelligencer as one of the top litigation departments in Pennsylvania.

“Mark’s unique combination of business savvy and courtroom experience strengthens the capabilities of our growing corporate and litigation teams,” said Stradley Ronon Insurance Practice Group Chair Steven B. Davis “His passion for the law and commitment to client service will instantly resonate with our client base.”

Prior to joining McCarter & English, Villanueva clerked for the Honorable Paul S. Diamond of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. He began his legal career as an associate at Drinker Biddle. Villanueva was honored as one of The Legal Intelligencer’s “Lawyers on the Fast Track.”

He received his J.D. magna cum laude from The Catholic University Columbus School of Law, where he was notes and comments editor of The Catholic University Law Review, and his B.A. from Bucknell University.

About Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young

Counseling clients since 1926, Stradley Ronon has helped private and public companies – from small businesses to Fortune 500 corporations – achieve their goals by providing pragmatic, value-driven legal counsel, the release said. The firm has seven offices throughout the mid-Atlantic region.

Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP has relocated the firm’s Houston office. Although the firm will remain in Wells Fargo Plaza in downtown Houston, the office, spanning nearly 75,000 square feet, will be relocated to floors 20-22, effective immediately.

“We are thrilled to begin operation out of our new and innovative office,” says Gardere Vice Chair Eric A. Blumrosen. “The space is designed to accommodate modern law firm operations, particularly the use of technology. Our new office will enable us to implement multiple efficiencies for our clients, lawyers and staff for years to come.”

In a release, the firm said the fully redesigned interior office space will allow Gardere to incorporate state-of-the-art technology and workspace amenities for its employees. In addition, the modernized configuration will accommodate future growth and further embodies the firm’s brand and culture. The relocation emphasizes Gardere’s commitment to client service, responsiveness and overall quality of work – fundamental to the success of the firm and its clients.

Gardere’s leadership team felt it was in the firm’s best interest to remain at Wells Fargo Plaza based on its first-rate facilities and easily accessible location, the release said. The firm has been a Wells Fargo Plaza tenant for the past 16 years.

The property is the largest multi-tenant building in the southwestern United States with more than 1.7 million square feet of rentable office space. The building occupies an entire city block, surrounded by Louisiana, Lamar, Smith and McKinney Streets in downtown Houston. CBRE manages and leases the building.

The new Houston office address is 2000 Wells Fargo Plaza, 1000 Louisiana Street, Houston, TX 77002.

China-based employers are required to have written employment contracts with all full-time employees, and if those contracts are not in place, the employer could be on the hook for double wages, reports Dan Harris on Above the Law.

“It is important to note that the above rules apply to foreign employees working in China and that some Chinese labor arbitration commissions and courts do not recognize anything other than Chinese language agreements as a valid written employment contract.” he writes.

He wrote that any business employing anyone in China without an up-to-date written contract in Chinese is at risk for a substantial penalty.

Read the article.

In many software development agreements, the customer has to accept the software before the contract is complete, Scott & Scott reports on its Software & Copyright Law Blog.

“If the product is not acceptable, the parties have a contractually described way to address issues before final payment is due,” writes Scott & Scott IP lawyer Brian Kirkpatrick. “However, in software-as-a-service (SaaS) transactions, SaaS providers often argue that the SaaS is available upon execution of an agreement and software delivery and acceptance is not required.”

He adds that, although physical delivery of software is not necessary for SaaS, delivery is still an important issue to address.

Read the article.

Dykema, a leading national law firm, announced the addition of Jennifer Fraser to its Intellectual Property Practice Group as a Member in the firm’s Washington, D.C., office. Prior to joining Dykema, she served as Co-Chair of Novak Druce Connolly Bove + Quigg LLP’s national trademark and copyright practice, working out of its Washington, D.C., office.

In a release, the firm said Fraser represents clients in matters involving trademark procurement and protection as well as trademark and copyright litigation. Her practice focuses on the selection, use and enforcement of trademarks, including managing global brand portfolios, litigating rights before courts and administrative tribunals such as Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, and resolving domain name and Internet-related IP disputes.

Fraser represents clients in many industries, including construction, machinery, pharmaceuticals, food and beverage, information technology, agriculture, consumer products, industrial chemicals defense and cybersecurity. She has significant trial experience and has prosecuted thousands of trademark applications. Fraser also counsels clients and renders corporate-related due diligence and licensing services.

She is a former Examining Attorney with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, has been recognized as a leading trademark practitioner in Washington, D.C., by World Trademark Review and has also been recognized as a Super Lawyer.

“We’re extremely pleased to add someone of Jennifer’s caliber and reputation to our Washington, D.C., office,” said Eric Fingerhut, Leader of Dykema’s Trademark Practice. “I’ve known Jennifer and admired her work for many years and I am thrilled she is joining our team. Her vast trademark experience and deep understanding of the businesses she serve fits right into Dykema’s model of outstanding client service. I have no doubt Jennifer will be an extremely valuable resource to the firm and its clients.”

Fraser received a J.D. from the Howard University School of Law, and a B.A., in History, as well as a minor in Justice Studies, from the University of New Hampshire.

About Dykema
Dykema serves business entities worldwide on a wide range of complex legal issues. Dykema lawyers and other professionals in 15 U.S. offices work in close partnership with clients – from start-ups to Fortune 100 companies – to deliver outstanding results, unparalleled service and exceptional value in every engagement.

The national law firm of Quarles & Brady LLP announced its recognition in “Raising the Bar” 2015 by Equality Illinois, a yearly recognition of top Illinois LGBT-friendly law firms.

Quarles & Brady was one of 42 firms recognized for protecting the rights of Illinois lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender employees, providing a safe, fair, and integrated work environment, and participating in related community outreach programs, the firm said in a release. These law firms are also featured in the 2015 Raising the Bar report.

“When you enter any office of Quarles & Brady, you are greeted with a sign that reads, ‘This Law Firm Serves Everyone’,” said George Marek, co-chair of the firm’s Diversity & Inclusion Committee. “It serves as a visible reminder of our commitment to diversity and inclusion.”

As part of its diversity initiatives, Quarles & Brady provides domestic partner benefits, and an LGBT liaison attorney is assigned to each new LGBT attorney as part of its mentoring program. The firm also interviews and recruits LGBT law students and sponsors numerous events in the LGBT community.

About Equality Illinois
Equality Illinois was founded in 1991 to secure, protect and defend the basic civil rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Illinoisans, and is the state’s oldest and largest LGBT advocacy organization.

About Quarles & Brady LLP
Quarles & Brady is a full-service AmLaw 200 law firm with more than 475 attorneys offering an array of legal services to corporate and individual clients that range from small entrepreneurial businesses to Fortune 100 companies, with practice focuses in health care and life sciences, business law, data privacy and security, and complex litigation. The firm has offices in Chicago; Indianapolis; Madison; Milwaukee; Naples, Florida; Phoenix; Scottsdale; Tampa; Tucson; and Washington, D.C. Additional information can be found online at quarles.com, as well as on Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook.

A complimentary webinar presented by Davis Wright Tremaine will discuss the negotiation of Health Information Technology (HIT) contracts, identifying tips and traps based on real world experience with contract successes and failures.

The webinar will be Tuesday, August 11, at 10 a.m. Pacific time.

“Frequently the legal contract is the last hurdle to beginning a new HIT project, and, for many health care organizations, the process can be a source of frustration in acquiring new technologies,” the firm says on its website. “This session will focus on best practices for maximizing the effectiveness of contract negotiations for HIT projects. We will examine key legal issues and practical implications arising from the process and the substantive contract terms.”

Register for the webinar.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently found that a party licensing or selling its patent rights cannot receive royalties after a patent expires, regardless of whether or not the contract allows for the payment of such royalties. But an article published by Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice says that contract drafters can still achieve payment deferral and risk allocation without a long-term royalty distribution using creative and strategic provisions.

“Expiration of a patent also terminates the rights to collect royalties on that patent – even if a license contract says otherwise,” Theodore Claypoole writes in the article. “All businesses are reminded to check the termination date of any patent licensed to the business for use of underlying technology. While the license may remain valid, the licensor’s right to collect royalties may be invalid. While it is only natural for patent holders to want to profit from their patents as long as possible, according to the Supreme Court patent holders can only earn royalties for sales made before their patents expire. Royalty-bearing licenses like the one in Kimble should be careful in how payments are allocated, or risk partial or total invalidation.”

Read the article.

Compliancy Group will present a complimentary webinar designed to help participants and their clients be compliant with healthcare regulations. The event will be Tuesday, August 18, at 2 p.m. Eastern time.

“According to HHS, 70 percent of the market is not HIPAA compliant, while CMS states that 79 percent of Meaningful Use Audits result in failure.” Compliancy Group says on its website. “The two biggest factors: incomplete risk assessments and the lack of understanding between the difference of HIPAA and HITECH compliance. With massive breaches, like Anthem, and mandatory 5% Meaningful Use Audits, Covered Entities are looking to their MSPs to provide a solution.”

The webinar will cover:

• Be confident about compliance
• Increase profits
• Retain clients
• Acquire new clients

Register for the webinar.

Kat Gallagher, partner in Beck Redden’s Houston office, has been invited to become a Fellow of the International Academy of Trial Lawyers (IATL).

“With more than 25 years practicing law, Kat has distinguished herself as an elite trial lawyer with outstanding instincts for how to best tell her client’s story in the most persuasive and compelling manner,” the firm said in a release. “Her invitation to become an IATL Fellow is well deserved.”

The news release continues:

“I am truly honored and grateful to become an IATL Fellow” said Kat. “I am humbled to have received this recognition from the judges before whom I have appeared and from my peers.”

Kat will officially be inducted as an IATL Fellow during a ceremony to be held on July 25, 2015.

Membership in the Academy is limited to only 500 Fellows in the U.S. under the age of 70.  Standards for admission are high and the process is extremely thorough. Imperative qualities for every nominee include outstanding skills and extensive experience as a trial lawyer, unimpeachable personal and professional character, and integrity and honesty, among others.

The purposes of the IATL are to promote the rule of law, promote reforms in the law, facilitate the administration of justice, and elevate the standards of integrity, honor, and courtesy in the legal profession globally.

The National Association of Corporate Directors is offering a complimentary consultation to discuss a customized program for your board designed to help your organization’s board collaborate with management in setting the company’s cyber-risk strategy.

The program concludes with directors and executives agreeing on a clear set of cyber-risk priorities — along with milestones and responsibilities for making them happen.

The program is designed to help:

• provide the board with context around cyber risk
• lead constructive discussions with management
• produce a concrete roadmap for allocating resources to cyber-risk initiatives

Board and C-Suite Cyber-Risk Alignment is an in-boardroom customized program led by active directors with experience in the appropriate industry. It covers such topics as

• identifying vulnerabilities and ranking their importance
• determining which assets must be protected
• challenging flaws in the enterprise risk map
• understanding materiality and liability related to cyber risk
• defining appropriate cyber-risk and ERM indicators for your dashboard

Prospective participants may call 202-572-2081 or email Steve_Walker@NACDonline.org.

A young woman who was allegedly sexually assaulted in 2011 by the owner of a pizza restaurant in Addison, Texas, has been awarded $21.43 million following a four-day bench trial heard in the 193rd District Court in Dallas.

Judge Carl Ginsberg issued the award after hearing evidence that Ajredin “Danny” Deari, owner of co-defendant Pastazios Pizza in Addison, served the then-18-year-old victim multiple rounds of beer and whiskey at the restaurant under the pretext of a job interview.

According to a release issued by the plaintiff’s law firm, the victim eventually passed out and awoke in a nearby hotel room while she was being sexually assaulted by Mr. Deari, who then fled the scene. Subsequent physical examinations determined that Deari had infected her with herpes during the assault.

The woman, who is identified as “Jane Doe” due to the nature of the assault and her age at that time, was in Judge Ginsberg’s courtroom throughout the trial.

“The judge called this the most offensive set of facts he had ever seen during his time on the bench,” says Dallas attorney Trey Crawford of Gruber Hurst Elrod Johansen Hail Shank, who represented the woman at trial with co-counsel Royce West of Dallas’ West & Associates L.L.P. and Gruber Hurst Elrod co-founder Michael Gruber.

Deari pleaded no contest to criminal charges and the next day filed for personal and business bankruptcy protection. Pastazios continues to operate under Chapter 11 status.

“This is certainly one of the largest bench trial judgments in Dallas County in recent memory,” says Mr. West. “This young woman has been waiting for justice for four long years, and she’s fought very hard to make sure that every business owner is aware of the consequences of their actions.”

Gruber Hurst Elrod attorney Brian Mason also represented the woman at trial.

The case is Jane Doe v. Pastazios Pizza, Inc.; and Ajredin “Danny” Deari, No. 13-04564.

The 8th Annual Law Department Operations (LDO) Survey, now known as the ILDE-Blickstein Group Annual Law Department Operations Survey, in cooperation with Huron Legal, is specifically designed for professionals who manage complex legal department operations for their companies.

The LDO survey was created in 2008 to give legal departments a consistent platform to benchmark themselves and shed light on the emerging profession of law department management. In addition to being the original of its kind, the LDO survey has proven it’s the most respected in the industry over the last eight years.

A survey spokesman said the survey will take less than 20 minutes to fill out and is the only way to get insight into industry trends and a copy of the valuable proprietary results.

The survey covers such topics as:

• Cyber Security
• Metrics and Analytics
• Offshore Legal Process Outsourcing

Last year’s survey supplement is available, with an analysis of results, here.

Take the 2015 survey.

Exigis LLC, a minority-owned company, is suing the city of Dallas in federal court for violating its own policy about awarding points for involving minority-owned businesses seeking city contracts, reports The Dallas Morning News.

The issue is whether businesses like Exigis, which lost out to a white-owned company, should get credit just for being owned by minorities and women.

“The Exigis lawsuit could settle the differences of opinion as to whether it’s legal for local governments to consider race in awarding contracts,” The News report says.

Read the article.

When you first enter a business deal, no one ever expects things to go poorly, writes Joe Covelli of Covelli Law Offices in Pittsburgh.

But many of these types of situations often go awry, and contract disputes are becoming a more common concern for businesses throughout the country.

“While each party enters a contract agreement after carefully reviewing a contract and determining its pros and cons, no contract is perfect,” he writes. “Some business deals even require the intervention of an experienced contract attorney to help guide the proceedings.”

The article discusses potential issues, performance under a contract, and the litigation process.

Read the article.

In recent years, many software publishers began using software audits as a means to increase revenue by penalizing customers for perceived compliance issues, writes Keli Johnson Swan, an associate at Scott & Scott.

The text of her post on the firm’s Software Audit Blog follows:

Software publishers often conduct direct audits, or audit through companies such as the BSA| The Software Alliance (“BSA”), or the Software & Information Industry Association (“SIIA”). Although many software users take advice about their audits from software vendors, authorized resellers, or other purported experts, the practice is not always recommended. Unfortunately, often these “certified partners” offer poor advice, costing businesses precious time and money. A growing number of businesses have learned the hard way to trust only an expert specializing in software copyright infringement to assist with software licensing and resolve software audits.

The following is a list of some of the worst advice we have heard for a company facing a software audit.

1. Immediately purchase all of the software necessary to remediate any compliance gaps, as it will be a sign of good faith.

Except for very particular circumstances, this might be the worst advice to a company facing an audit. The auditing entity typically sends the company a letter placing the company on notice that it must preserve all evidence of potential copyright infringement claims should litigation ensue and make no changes to its network. Purchasing the software can jeopardize a company’s ability to resolve the matter.

2. Uninstall all unlicensed software and ignore the audit.

Auditing publishers and third parties argue that failure to preserve all the evidence could constitute spoliation and entitle the publisher to damages for destruction of the evidence. Furthermore, it is rare for a company to be able to resolve an audit without a response. Once an audit is initiated, an auditor typically will not disengage absent a valid pre-existing release or overriding audit provision.

3. Purchase retail licenses for software that will ultimately be used for commercial hosting.

License agreements for software products vary widely, but typically retail license agreements specifically prohibit commercial hosting, which requires a specific type of license. Depending on the commercial hosting setup, the potential copyright infringement damages for purchasing the wrong license could be in excess of several hundred thousand dollars. Saving money on the front end by purchasing a cheaper license is not worth the potential copyright infringement penalties resulting from an audit.

4. Install all of the software you need and true up at the end of the year when you do not have an Enterprise Agreement.

Some software publishers offer license agreements that outline specific rights and obligations, including the right to audit, and an obligation to true up at the end of a specified period, such as a quarter or a year. However, these Agreements do not always cover all of the products a customer may have installed. The software products that are covered by the agreement are specifically listed as part of the agreement and any addenda. The Agreement outlines the terms by which a customer may true up and pay the difference between the number of users last reported and the number of new users on a pro-rated basis at an agreed rate. If it is not explicitly stated in a license agreement, end users do not have the right to true up.

Some software vendors have mistakenly led companies to believe that they had true up rights where none existed. Based on this erroneous advice, companies downloaded the necessary software as staff continued to grow, with the assumption that they could pay the difference during the true up period. Instead, the companies were faced with an audit, a significant compliance gap, and costly copyright infringement penalties.

Despite receiving such poor advice, a company may be held liable for copyright infringement pursuant to The Copyright Act regardless of whether management was aware of the infringement. It is critical to seek advice from a legal expert with experience in software licensing in order understand all of the risks involved with various strategies when faced with a software audit.

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman has posted an article about the American Arbitration Association’s revised Construction Industry Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures which became effective July 1, 2015.

George Haley, John Heisse, Clark Thiel and Robert Thum write that, although some changes are relatively modest, others expand the powers of the arbitrator and may alter traditional assumptions underlying the selection of arbitration as a dispute resolution process for construction projects.

“For example, the Rules now provide a procedure for emergency relief that may result in more mid-project disputes being taken to arbitration or court, as the new Rule R-39 provides a party can seek emergency relief from either the AAA or a court, without violating the agreement to arbitrate,” they write.

Read the article.