Lillian Shaker is a Founding Partner of Shaked & Co. Law Offices where she specializes in corporate and commercial law, representing all development stages of Israeli, US and European high-tech companies. Lillian also works with some of Israel’s most prominent venture capital funds and their portfolio companies, and advises on business, financial, tax and intellectual property issues involved in establishing and growing businesses.
Her counsel includes day-to-day management; private and venture capital financing; strategic alliances and joint ventures; technology and commercial transactions including OEM, distribution, reseller and VAR agreements; and M&A transactions in Israel and abroad. Lillian has extensive experience in the patent monetization field, where she regularly advises patent buyers, sellers and licensors on the intricacies of monetizing their IP rights. Lillian’s expertise in this field encompasses the full monetization life-cycle, from financing and sourcing of patents, through the patent acquisition process, and culminating with licensing and settlement arrangements. Lillian works with several of the world’s leading public and private patent licensing businesses.
Prior to founding Shaked & Co., Lillian was a partner in the high-tech department of GKH, a large and well-known law firm in Tel Aviv. Before joining GKH, she was a partner in a large law firm in Ramat Gan. Lillian was raised in Ottawa, Canada.
Lenders and investors like Gerchen Keller and Fortress, among others, have provided capital to or are partnering with private and public NPEs. These business are well suited to assessing market conditions, especially value, and calculating risk for given rights in a specific industry. That they are still willing to fund activities and co-invest in this climate is a testament to the durability of good patents. Also, there is some expectation that we are at or near bottom, and that there are more opportunities now.
Covenant Not to Challenge clauses are common in patent licenses, including licenses that are part of post-litigation settlements. clause is seen as a benefit bargained for under a license agreement and constitutes part of the consideration obtained by the licensor for the license. The intended effect of such a clause is to allow the licensor to make an estoppel argument in the event that licensee does challenge the patent, in spite of its agreement not to do so. However, the PTAB thus concluded that without an express grant from Congress, it did not have the authority to recognize contractual estoppel as a bar to an inter partes review.