Bankruptcy Law Blog

There are a number of articles that discuss Lubrizol and its progeny.  In this and subsequent posts, we will provide you with some of the more notable articles on this topic.  In this article from Jones Day, the issues are further discussed and how different courts have handled the issue is analyzed. www.JackRoseLaw.com  Posts in this blog contain discussions of general principles of law and cases. No post, comment or discussion constitutes or should be taken as legal advice. To obtain legal advice you should retain counsel. Legal advice requires a review of the specific facts and circumstances of your case.

Trademarks are the other IP. Under Section 101(35A) of the Bankruptcy Code, you won't find the word "trademark".  In 1985, the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit entered its decision in Lubrizol Enterp. v Richmond Metal Finishers .   In that case, the Court allowed a debtor to reject an executory contract which contained a grant of certain rights to intellectual property. In response to Lubrizol , Congress enacted Section 365(n) of the Bankruptcy Code.  But, trademarks aren't included in the definition of "intellectual property" under Section 101 of the Bankruptcy Code.  And, it is this definition of "intellectual property" upon which Section 365(n) relies. So you say, then trademarks aren't intellectual property under the Bankruptcy Code.  Well -- that may depend on where you are.  More on this in future posts. www.JackRoseLaw.com  Posts in this blog contain discussions of general principles of law and cases. No post, comment or...