On construction projects, owners and developers often are familiar with standard contract language and provisions, but the industry is continually evolving, according to a paper published by Zetlin & De Chiara LLP.

The paper discusses 10 key contract provisions and tips to help parties avoid pitfalls.

Those areas include scope of work, compliance with schedule, meeting the owner’s target for the budget, contingency, changes in the work, indemnification, insurance, dispute resolution, general conditions, and subcontract issues.

Read the article.

A post on the Morgan Lewis Tech & Sourcing blog reviews issues related to the defense and indemnification aspects inn contracts impacting intellectual property ownership.

Authors Peter M. Watt-Morse and Michael R. Pfeuffer write that “an IP indemnity clause typically includes the obligation to defend against third party IP claims. However, the potential costs and risks associated with this obligation can be impacted by the language of the provision.”

“Like any indemnitee, the user will want indemnification for IP infringement to be as broad as possible, including any losses, costs, damages or expenses whatsoever sustained by virtue of the third-party claim,” the explain.

Read the article.

Law firms have made massive investments in content, mostly aimed at deepening their engagement with in-house counsel. But, for the most part, their efforts are falling short, according to a recent survey by strategic communications firm Greentarget and consulting firm Zeughauser Group.

Only about half of in-house attorneys consider law-firm content “good to excellent,” the same as in 2017, and up only slightly since 2015, according to the 2018 State of Digital & Content Marketing Survey, released by Greentarget and Zeughauser Group.

But the survey also provides clear guidance on how firms can make inroads with their most important readers. For our seventh annual survey we asked in-house counsel not only about their content consumption habits, but also what content they value most, where they get it, and how often they go there. The survey found that:

• In-house counsel want content that helps them do their jobs. More than three-quarters of our respondents say they most value utility in the content they consume – ahead of timeliness (58 percent), reliable sources (56 percent) and compelling headlines (51 percent).
• And they want it in the form of articles, alerts and newsletters, respectively. Those are respondents’ most preferred content vehicles.
• Email works – when it’s good. Forty percent of in-house counsel say they get information from email notifications every day – but only 25 percent say they find them valuable. That’s a huge opportunity to reach clients and prospects, and to stand out from the noise, by creating email alerts that deliver on the qualities in-house lawyers are looking for.
• Traditional media most trusted. Fifty-four percent of respondents go to traditional media (e.g., The Wall Street Journal) on a daily basis for legal, business and industry news and information, and 45 percent find such sources very valuable – far above any other source.
• Brevity matters. Nearly a third of in-house counsel value shorter content, while only 5 percent value longer pieces. They also want email alerts to be brief. And they only rank in-depth as a key attribute for a single content category – research reports.
• Podcasts show promise. More than a quarter of respondents put podcasts among their preferred content vehicles – ahead of video and perhaps surprising for a relatively new medium. Audio content gives consumers hands- and eyes-free information for their commutes or during workouts. And podcasts are the only medium where respondents say they consider entertainment value – an opportunity to rise above the noise for firms that are willing to break from the industry’s staid conventions.
• On social media, more noise than signal. About a third of in-house counsel look at social media every day, but only 11 percent find anything of value there. By contrast, less than a quarter view industry association publications and websites every day, but 43 percent find those valuable.

“This is the age of information overload,” said John Corey, founding partner of Greentarget. “In-house counsel want content that’s useful, timely, well-sourced and provides lively engagement starting from the subject line. If they want to elevate the conversation, firms have to quickly and efficiently tell in-house counsel what they have to say, why it matters and what law departments should do about it.”

The 2018 report went further than in past years, identifying which content types were most preferred by in-house counsel – and what attributes are most valued regarding those content types. Respondents’ top three content types are articles, alerts and newsletters – and in each case, they want that content to be relevant and timely. For articles and newsletters, respondents want content to be educational – and they prefer that alerts be brief.

“Drilling down to this level of detail about what is and isn’t working when it comes to law firm-generated content is important – and consequential,” said Mary K. Young, a partner with Zeughauser Group. “Firms can take this information and the related guidance and find ways to stand out and build their brands with in-house counsel, who are, of course, key decision makers within their organizations.”

In a blog post, Amy Boardman Hunt of Muse Communications explains some of the main concepts of content marketing and how it can be a potent tool for solos and small law firms with limited marketing budgets.

“The essence of content marketing is that you’re promoting your subject matter expertise (whether it’s labor law, family law, or any other practice area) by providing consistent, relevant content of interest to your clients and prospective clients,” she explains.

For law firms, content marketing is primarily about two things:

• Building a reputation as a source of genuine value in your practice area; and
• Staying top-of-mind among your clients, prospective clients and referral sources.

Read the article.

FisherBroyles, LLP has added Gregory R. Lunt, John K. Shimmick and Mark A. Thomas as partners in the firm’s Intellectual Property Practice Group. Lunt, Shimmick and Thomas are based in the firm’s Salt Lake City; Palo Alto, Calif; and Washington, D.C., offices, respectively.

“We are pleased to have Greg, John and Mark join our team of experienced intellectual property attorneys who make up one of the top IP law groups in the nation,” said T.J. DoVale, managing partner of the FisherBroyles Intellectual Property Practice Group. “Greg, John and Mark bring to FisherBroyles extensive experience in patent preparation and prosecution, as well as engineering backgrounds that will greatly benefit our clients.”

Lunt, Shimmick and Thomas are the latest additions to the firm’s growing IP practice, which recently added five other partners to the firm’s offices in Atlanta, Denver, Los Angeles and Washington.

“I am excited to join FisherBroyles and its deep bench of IP partners who thrive serving clients through the firm’s innovative distributed partnership model,” Lunt said.

Shimmick said, “It is a privilege to join the robust team of partners and IP attorneys at FisherBroyles, and I am excited to collaborate with the firm’s many IP professional with many years of experience.”

Thomas added, “I believe my patent prosecution background is a great match for FisherBroyles’ forward-thinking approach to delivering high-level service and value to clients in diverse industries.”

Lunt focuses on patent preparation and prosecution, specifically in the fields of software, computing, and electrical devices. He has more than a decade of experience assisting clients in strategic patent planning, IP portfolio valuation, infringement opinions, licensing and appeals. Also a member of the FisherBroyles Technology Practice Group, Lunt helps organizations strategically grow and develop their national and international patent portfolios. Specifically, he has served as an IP consultant with a New York City-based startup incubator.

Most recently, Lunt was a shareholder and patent attorney at Workman Nydegger in Salt Lake City. Previously, he worked as a software engineer at Novell, Inc., developing and testing software for application provisioning and database management.

Lunt received his J.D. from Creighton School of Law and his Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering Technology from Brigham Young University.

Shimmick focuses his practice on patent prosecution and counseling. In addition to protecting intellectual property rights, he has experience with investor due diligence and financing. As a patent attorney, Shimmick has worked extensively in the medical device sector as well as other technical fields, including software, optical systems, mechanical devices, laser ablation systems, telemetry, semiconductor manufacturing, and test equipment. Shimmick most recently was a patent attorney at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. Previously, he also practiced as a solo attorney and with the firms Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP and Townsend, Townsend & Crew, LLP.

Before entering the legal profession, Shimmick worked for more than a decade in the medical device industry, holding positions in engineering and management, and is the named inventor on over 30 medical device patents.

Shimmick received his J.D. from Santa Clara University School of Law. He also holds a Master of Science from the University of Texas at Austin and a Bachelor of Science from the University of California, Davis.

Thomas is a member of the FisherBroyles Fintech and Blockchain, Internet & eCommerce, and Technology practice groups, in addition to Intellectual Property. He has more than 20 years of experience in patent application preparation and prosecution, licensing and litigation support. His experience spans a wide array of technologies within the software, digital device, telecommunications, semiconductor device fabrication, electro-mechanical and medical device arts. He has prepared and prosecuted numerous patent applications for AT&T Wireless, SAP SE, Hewlett-Packard, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp.

Recently, Thomas was assistant general counsel for Intellectual Property and Transactions for TeleTech Holdings, Inc. where he was responsible for the $1.5 billion public company’s intellectual property matters. Previously, he was a patent attorney for US West, Inc., managing patent prosecution and the full range of IP activities for its divisions including Advanced Technologies, Wireless and Information Technologies. He also formerly worked as a senior hardware engineer responsible for the design and integration of key architectural components in multiple mainframe-class computers.

Thomas received his J.D. (cum laude) from The John Marshall Law School and his Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from Carnegie Mellon University.

Quarles & Brady LLP announced that Samantha C. Skenandore has joined the firm’s Real Estate Practice Group, as ofcCounsel, Tribal Law in its Madison office.

In a release, the firm said Skenandore focuses her practice on both federal Indian law and tribal law, advising tribal and corporate clients in tribal governance, governmental affairs, corporate transactions, real estate, labor issues and litigation. Her multijurisdictional experience with tribal law includes representation of corporate entities, both tribal and nontribal, in matters involving financing, minority or women-owned certification, labor relations, complex commercial real estate matters and government relations. Her experience extends to successfully representing clients before members of Congress, congressional committees and agencies through federal lobbying services. Skenandore, also a member of the Arizona Bar, will split her time between the Madison and Tucson offices.

“Samantha’s extensive knowledge and experience will be a real asset for Quarles & Brady and the clients we serve,” said Kevin Delorey, national chair of the Real Estate Practice Group. “She is a great addition to our practice and we are excited to have her join our team.”

A member of the Ho-Chunk Nation, Skenandore previously served as a Tribal Attorney for the Ho-Chunk Nation Department of Justice, where she presided more than 150 employment grievances as chair of the administrative grievance review board, secured tribal land acquisitions and fee to trust conversions. Additionally, she clerked for the United States Department of Justice, Indian Resources Section and for the State of Colorado Division of Administrative Hearings in Denver, Colorado.

Skenandore earned her law degree from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law and her bachelor’s degree from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Bloomberg Law reports that O’Melveny & Myers has won the “best law firm to work for” in Vault’s 2019 annual quality of life rankings.

Vault polled about 20,000 associates to rate peer firms and their own experiences, writes Bloomberg reporter Elizabeth Olson. They were asked about satisfaction and firm culture, as well as compensation, hours and informal training and mentoring.

Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson held onto its No. 2 ranking in the poll.

Associates described O’Melveny as having a “laid back culture” and “super interesting work,” according to comments.

Read the Bloomberg article.

The Port of Seattle will pay half-a-million dollars to its longtime chief lawyer to leave the agency after investigating a workplace complaint lodged against him, according to The Seattle Times.

Craig Watson had been with the Port for 28 years, serving as general counsel for the past 13 years.

The Port commission voted unanimously to fire him and give him $500,000 as part of a settlement agreement to avoid a potential legal battle over his employment status, reports Mike Rosenberg.

The Port’s executive director wrote in a memo to commissioners that an investigation had been launched after “a recent internal workplace complaint about Craig Watson.” The findings showed “the incident was insufficient to support” the firing, but the executive director and the commissioners “have lost trust and confidence” in Watson’s ability carry out his duties and responsibilities, the director wrote.

Read the Seattle Times article.

Vinson & Elkins partner Douglas E. McWilliams could face a felony charge after a boat he was operating on Lake Travis ran aground, injuring two colleagues who were taken to a hospital by helicopter.

The Austin American-Statesman reports that an investigator has accused McWilliams, a partner in the firm’s Houston office, of leaving the scene of the crash. The investigator said in an arrest affidavit that interviews led him to believe that McWilliams had been drinking prior to the crash.

McWilliams’ lawyer, however, countered with affidavits from fellow lawyers, including the firm’s chairman, saying that he was not drunk at any point that night, according to reporter Tony Plohetski.

Read the American-Statesman article.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy announced his plans to retire this summer after serving 30 years on the nation’s highest court. Widely known for his swing vote on a range of issues, Justice Kennedy will leave at the end of July.

Attorneys like Larry Vincent of Dallas-based Burns Charest, who once clerked for Justice Kennedy, provide their reactions in a post on the website of Androvett Legal Media & Marketing.

“It’s disappointing that he chose to retire at this time. I’ve always been proud of his opinions regarding individual liberty grounded in the Fifth and 14th amendments. Given what we know about the list of potential replacements already circulated by this administration, I think his legacy in those areas will be eradicated. I hope he doesn’t look back in a few years and regret his decision to leave the court at this juncture.

“I’ve spent much of my legal career, including my time here at Burns Charest, working to help people and companies recover for losses caused by negligence or the breach of a legal duty. Given the ideological shift at the court to restrict the ability of parties to use the courts to recover the amount they are due for the harm done to them, the loss of a compassionate conservative like Justice Kennedy is particularly frustrating.”

Philip Hilder, founder of Houston’s Hilder & Associates, P.C.: “Retirement of the swing justice will energize voters from all political stripes to come out this mid-term. Voters now realize the significance that a Supreme Court Justice has over their daily lives. Any nominee will need Senate confirmation and those elections this fall will be red hot battlegrounds unlike any in recent memory.”

Lara Hollingsworth, appellate lawyer and Of Counsel at Houston’s Rusty Hardin & Associates, LLP: “The court will never be the same. The era of moderate appointments has passed never to be seen again. The Merrick Garlands of the world don’t stand a chance. It’s a sad day for justice and our country.”

Chip Babcock of Jackson Walker: “Justice Kennedy will be recorded by history as one of the great justices of the United States Supreme Court. It was regular practice in close cases for entire briefs and oral arguments to be tailored just for him. He was that important. That cannot be said of many, if any, other members of the court in its history.”

A post on the Faegre Baker Daniels website asks the question: What does a contractor do when the owner stops making progress payments?

The contractor has two options: it can either continue to perform the work or cease the work, neither of which is a perfect solution.

“The owner’s failure to pay progress payments that are ‘clearly due and owing’ generally entitles the contractor to stop work until the progress payment is made. While this rule seems clear, it is not that simple,” according to the post.

The contractor should look to its contract with the owner to find answers to two questions: Does the contract require the contractor to take a certain action? And, is payment”clearly due and owning?”

Read the article.

Sidley Austin LLP announced that Jared Jensen has joined the firm as a partner in its global Private Equity practice. He will be based in the San Francisco office. Jensen was formerly a partner with Goodwin Procter LLP.

In a release, the firm said Jensen has experience advising private equity and venture capital firms, their sponsored companies, and other clients on public and private M&A, tender and exchange offers, recapitalizations, management buyouts, going-private transactions, carve-out transactions and minority growth investments. He represents clients in industries including software, information technology, financial services, life sciences, consumer products, education and business services. Jensen also provides guidance on public company acquisitions.

The firm said Jensen is the fifth partner addition to Sidley’s private equity group globally in the last 12 months and follows on the heels of expansions of the private equity practice in California in Sidley’s Palo Alto and Los Angeles offices, and globally in its London and Munich offices.

“In recent years, Sidley has made a concerted effort to respond to client demand and robust market activity in the private equity arena, both regionally and globally,” said Sharon Flanagan, managing partner of the San Francisco office. “Jared’s addition demonstrates our commitment to delivering our clients premier service and well-connected counsel, particularly in the Bay Area’s booming tech sector.”

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP announced that partners Robert R. Marcus, C. Bailey King Jr., and J. Douglas Grimes, and associates Timothy P. Lendino and Bridget V. Warren have joined the firm’s Charlotte office.

All five attorneys join Bradley from Smith Moore Leatherwood LLP, where Marcus was the partner in charge of that firm’s Charlotte office and King led the office’s litigation practice.

“We are excited to have these five accomplished litigators join Bradley’s Charlotte office,” said Bradley Charlotte Office Managing Partner Christopher C. Lam. “This team of attorneys has extensive experience and a track record of success handling diverse and complex litigation cases in state and federal courts in North Carolina and other jurisdictions, including specifically the North Carolina Business Court. They have also demonstrated leadership in the profession and community and exemplify the best of what our firm values.”

“We welcome this skilled group of attorneys and know they will be an asset to Bradley’s nationally recognized litigation team. We are pleased that our Charlotte office continues to grow as part of the firm’s strategic expansion plan,” said Brian O’Dell, Bradley’s Litigation Practice Group leader.

In a release, the firm said Marcus has more than two decades of trial experience involving high-stakes, complex business disputes in state and federal courts in North Carolina and in the North Carolina Business Court. His cases have involved intellectual property, securities and financial disputes, insurance coverage matters, contract enforcement, and class actions and personal injury claims. Formerly the partner in charge of Smith Moore Leatherwood’s Charlotte office and chairman of the firm’s Management Committee, Marcus also frequently speaks and writes about business litigation issues.

Marcus received his J.D. with honors from Duke University School of Law and his Bachelor of Arts (cum laude) from Hamilton College.

Formerly the leader of Smith Moore Leatherwood’s Charlotte litigation practice, King represents businesses in matters that include trade secret misappropriation and intellectual property infringement disputes, securities and investment fraud claims, and other contractual and commercial disputes. He has litigated and tried complex bet-the-company cases and other matters in state and federal courts in North Carolina and other states. He also has handled significant matters in the North Carolina Business Court. King is the immediate past chair of the North Carolina Bar Association’s Antitrust and Complex Business Disputes Section.

King received his J.D. from the University of North Carolina School of Law and his Bachelor of Arts (summa cum laude) from Wofford College.

Grimes has 14 years of experience trying and litigating complex civil disputes. He focuses his litigation practice on intellectual property matters involving trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets. He also litigates commercial matters, business torts and a variety of other civil disputes, including products liability, construction and personal injury claims. Grimes has tried bet-the-company and other high-stakes lawsuits in federal and state courts, including the North Carolina Business Court.

Grimes received his J.D. from Campbell University School of Law and his Bachelor of Science from the University of North Carolina at Wilmington.

Lendino represents clients in disputes involving contracts, business torts, LLCs and partnerships, unfair competition, securities, trade secrets, and class actions. He also represents life insurers and financial institutions in a wide array of matters, and has significant experience litigating before the North Carolina Business Court. He previously served as a clerk for the Honorable John R. Jolly, Jr. in the North Carolina Business Court.

Lendino received his J.D. (cum laude) from Campbell University School of Law, where he was an Editorial Board member of the Campbell Law Review, and his Bachelor of Arts from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Warren concentrates on commercial litigation in areas that include intellectual property, commercial contracts, securities, and employment. She practices primarily in federal courts and the North Carolina Business Court. She also is active in pro bono activities, which include her volunteer work for Lawyer on the Line and the Council for Children’s Rights.

Warren received her J.D. with honors from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and her Bachelor of Arts from Emory University.

The U.S. Supreme Court handed a victory to President Trump after the high court upheld the third version of his travel ban in a 5-4 vote, barring almost all travelers from five Muslim countries, North Korea and government officials from Venezuela.

“This is a big win for President Trump,” says Dallas appellate attorney David Coale in a post on the website of Androvett Legal Media & Marketing. “The decision signals that so long as the president is acting in an area of traditional executive power, in a facially neutral way with regards to religion, he has a lot of power. This signals how things may go in later immigration litigation about border policy.”

Coale adds that the latest ruling is different from another immigration hot button involving asylum.

“This dispute turned on the force of a law about visas. The current immigration dispute involves asylum requests, which is a different set of statutes. So this case does not apply directly, but it does provide a road map for future litigation by making analogies to these laws.

“Both the majority and Justice Stephen Breyer’s dissent note the system of waivers and exemptions built into the president’s order. The majority says it shows that the order was drafted carefully; the dissent says that if the waivers and exemptions are not actually used, that can justify a challenge to the statute. So that may be the next round of litigation about these matters – whether the waivers and exemptions are in fact being applied as written.

“Also,” he noted, “the majority signals that it isn’t particularly interested in presidential ‘tweets.’ It mentioned them, but basically said they were not relevant to the legal issue at hand.”

A recent California case may force companies doing business with foreign entities to reconsider—and maybe rewrite—their contracts, points out Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton in its Corporate & Securities Law Blog.

In Rockefeller Tech. Invs. (Asia) VII v. Changzhou Sinotype Tech. Co., No. B272170, the California Court of Appeal held that parties may not contract around the formal service requirements of the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents, commonly referred to as the Hague Service Convention.

Authors Hwan Kim and Neil Popovic write that the decision could have profound implications for international business.

“The Rockefeller decision arguably makes it impossible to require foreign companies from some of the largest economies including China, Japan, Germany, U.K., India, Korea, Russia and Mexico, to show up in a California court based on notice provided by mail, courier (FedEx), or email even if the parties agreed to such forms of notice in their contract,” the authors warn. “This will have profound consequences for companies with global supply chains such as Apple and GM, for investment funds with foreign investors, for engineering and construction companies that procure materials and handle projects around the world, such as AECOM, and potentially for any company that imports or exports goods to or from the United States.”

Read the article.

Conservatives on the Supreme Court said Wednesday that it was unconstitutional to allow public employee unions to require collective bargaining fees from workers who choose not to join the union, a major blow for the U.S. labor movement, reports The Washington Post.

Reporter Robert Barnes writes that the 5-to-4 decision overturned a 40-year-old precedent and said that compelling such fees was a violation of workers’ free speech rights. The old rule could force the workers to give financial support to public policy positions they oppose, the court said.

“States and public-sector unions may no longer extract agency fees from nonconsenting employees,” Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote for the majority. “This procedure violates the First Amendment and cannot continue.”

Read the Post article.

Holland & Hart announced the addition of patent and trademark partner Loren R. Hulse to the firm’s Salt Lake City office in the firm’s Intellectual Property practice.

“Utah’s life sciences industry is one of the fastest growing markets in the U.S., with highly-successful innovations in genomics, pharmaceuticals, and medical device manufacturing by local technology companies,” said James Barnett, administrative partner of the firm’s Salt Lake City office. “Loren brings knowledge instrumental to assist companies in Utah and beyond with strategic IP advice essential to drive positive impacts to the state’s economy.”

Hulse has experience as former in-house intellectual property counsel for NPS Pharmaceuticals and as patent counsel for Ceramatec, Inc., the firm said.

“Loren is a strong addition to our highly-skilled, innovative patent team,” said Dan Glivar, the firm’s Intellectual Property practice group leader. “His experience in the life sciences industries and strength in chemical patents aligns with our firm’s goals to continue expanding service offerings in these rapidly-evolving areas.”

Prior to joining Holland & Hart, Hulse was a partner at Stoel Rives, where he served as the co-leader of the firm’s Life Sciences industry group.

Bloomberg Law reports on a survey of mostly female lawyers that sexual harassment, including unwelcome texts, physical contact and bullying, exists at big and small law firms.

The Women’s Bar Association of Massachusetts and the Rikleen Institute for Strategic Leadership conducted the study.

“Nearly 38 percent of respondents said they’d been the recipient of an unwanted sexual email, text or instant message at work. Approximately 21 percent said they’d experienced or witnessed unwelcome physical contact at work,” reported Stephanie Russell-Kraft. “More than two-thirds of those who said they had experienced or witnessed unwelcome physical contact said they didn’t report it.”

Read the Bloomberg article.

Law firm Hogan Lovells has entered into an association with Riyadh, Saudi Arabia-based ZS&R Law Firm. The firms will work together to provide legal advice to their national and international clients, the firms said in a release.

Riyadh-based ZS&R Law Firm was founded in 2017 by Dr. Najem Alzaid, Saad Alrashed and Turki Alsheikh. The three founding partners have backgrounds with international legal experience, multilingual capabilities, and are experienced in advising on national and cross-border transactions. ZS&R works in practice areas including projects, dispute resolution, banking and finance, capital markets and corporate and M&A.

Under the terms of the agreement, ZS&R Law Firm will operate in association with Hogan Lovells, and the two firms will work together on client matters while remaining separate legal entities.

“Saudi Arabia is a strategic market for our clients,” explained Miguel Zaldivar, incoming Regional Chief Executive for the Asia Pacific Middle East region. “Partnering with ZS&R Law Firm is part of our commitment to providing clients with a full service solution to their commercial and legal needs. We have had a relationship with the three founding partners of ZS&R Law Firm for some time, and we have viewed what they have achieved professionally with reverence. Together, they have created a truly outstanding legal practice in Riyadh, with a service offering which strongly aligns to the needs our clients.”

Alzaid, one of the founding partners of ZS&R Law Firm said, “This is an exciting time to be in Saudi Arabia. We will witness the public offering of Saudi Aramco and other privatisations, the fruition of key strategic plans such as Saudi Vision 2030 and the National Transformation Program, and we expect a new wave of foreign investment. We are pleased to work alongside Hogan Lovells supporting clients investing in the Kingdom as well as help our Saudi clients achieve their international ambitions.”

Steve Immelt, CEO of Hogan Lovells, added: “The association with ZS&R Law Firm is an important milestone which allows us to expands our ability to help clients in an important jurisdiction. Together with ZS&R we can provide clients with deep sector experience and knowledge in the Kingdom and across the wider Middle East. Most importantly, ZS&R’s client service ethos, and the principles by which they conduct business, align with our approach to the market.”

Christopher J. Townsend has joined Freeborn & Peters LLP’s Chicago office as a partner and co-leader of the firm’s Environment and Energy Practice Group.

“This is the exact right time for Chris to be joining the firm,” said Philip L. Comella, a Freeborn Partner and Co-Leader of the Environment and Energy Practice Group. “Environmental and Energy law and policy continue to converge at an increasing pace, with clients looking for creative but practical ways to address emerging technologies, shifting energy markets, and constantly evolving laws and regulations. I look forward to collaborating with Chris to lead our team helping a wide variety of clients address environmental and energy issues. Chris is a nationally-ranked leader in Energy law, and our clients will greatly benefit from his insights and experience in developing innovative solutions, particularly related to complex infrastructure projects and multi-faceted administrative proceedings.”

In a release, the firm said Townsend has more than two decades of experience representing forward-thinking energy market participants, both individually and in coalitions, develop, defend and improve the structures for effective and efficient competition in the energy markets. He regularly provides energy advice to entities other than the local utilities, including large industrial, institutional and commercial energy users; municipalities; and other governmental entities. He also assists alternative electricity and natural gas suppliers in developing the structures for energy markets. In addition, he represents energy project developers on complicated and cutting-edge projects and assists other large-scale energy industry participants.

“We are thrilled to welcome Chris to the firm,” said Freeborn Co-Managing Partner Michael J. Kelly. “His award-winning commitment to client service and continuous focus on positioning clients for the next wave of changes in the energy world is a great fit with our firm’s culture.”

The firm said Townsend has been involved in a wide variety of regulatory proceedings before the Illinois Commerce Commission and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, as well as in numerous legislative efforts before the Illinois General Assembly, with an emphasis on matters related to bringing additional efficiencies to the energy industries. He also has served as counsel to several consortia composed of large industrial, institutional, governmental and commercial electricity consumers; retail energy suppliers; a public water district; and a small privately owned water company. Globally, he has worked with the U.S. State Department and counseled the government of Iraq on multi-billion-dollar energy and infrastructure projects.

Townsend previously was a partner at DLA Piper and most recently was a member of the Environment, Energy & Natural Resources Practice Group at Clark Hill PLC in Chicago. He has been consistently ranked by Chambers, receiving its top rank in the area of Illinois Energy & Natural Resources law earlier this year. He also is a three-time winner of the exclusive Lexology Client Choice Award for Energy & Natural Resources in Illinois.

Townsend received his J.D. from the University of Iowa College of Law (with honors) and his Bachelor of Arts (cum laude) from Augustana College.