Latest News - Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP

Rogers to Speak at Executive Briefing on Healthcare Conference

Jen Mixson — Fri, 24 May 2013 13:25:13 -0500

On June 4, Taft partner Gregory Parker Rogers will speak at an Executive Briefing on Healthcare conference at the CINTAS Center. The conference is designed to give C-suite attendees the information they need to properly assess their company’s future strategy on healthcare as an employee benefit. Rogers' presentation is titled "ACA Compliant Insurance Offerings and Perverse Incentives Attractive to Employers and Other Thorny ERISA Anti-Retaliation Issues."

Rogers is co-chair of Taft's Labor & Employment group. He represents private and public employers in all aspects of labor and employment law, and he has substantial experience in labor, employment and benefits litigation issues.

Taft’s Ohio Labor & Employment Practice and Seven Taft Attorneys “Top Ranked” by Chambers USA 2013

Maria Porter — Fri, 24 May 2013 10:49:34 -0500

In the recently released 2013 edition of Chambers USA, Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP is once again “Top Ranked” in its Ohio Labor & Employment practice, as are seven attorneys firmwide.

Top ranked Taft attorneys in Ohio include:

Kim K. Burke (Natural Resources & Environment)
G. Jack Donson, Jr. (Litigation: Antitrust)
Timothy J. Hurley (Bankruptcy/Restructuring)
Timothy P. Reilly (Labor & Employment)

Top ranked Taft attorneys in Indiana include:

Frank J. Deveau (Environment)
Robert J. Hicks (Corporate/M&A)
James A. Strain (Corporate/M&A)

In total, Taft is recognized as a leading firm in 11 practice areas: Banking & Finance; Bankruptcy/Restructuring; Construction; Corporate/M&A; Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation; Healthcare; Intellectual Property; Labor & Employment (“Top Ranked” in Ohio); Litigation: General Commercial; Natural Resources & Environment; and Real Estate.

In addition, thirty-five Taft attorneys were recognized as “Leaders in their Field.” Following is the list of attorneys, including the seven “Top Ranked” mentioned above:

In Ohio:

Kim K. Burke, Natural Resources & Environment
Doreen Canton, Labor & Employment
Edward D. Diller, Real Estate
G. Jack Donson, Litigation: Antitrust
Scott M. Doran, Natural Resources & Environment
W. Stuart Dornette, Litigation: General Commercial
Catherine T. Dunlay, Healthcare
Stephen C. Fitch, Litigation: General Commercial
Gerald S. Greenberg, Corporate/M&A
Stephen M. Griffith, Jr., Real Estate
Kerry P. Hastings, Labor & Employment
Timothy J. Hurley, Bankruptcy/Restructuring
Ralph W. Kohnen, Litigation: White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations
Michael A. Laing, Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation
Margaret A. Lawson, Intellectual Property
W. Timothy Miller, Bankruptcy/Restructuring
Craig B. Paynter, Construction
William M. Phillips, Real Estate
Timothy P. Reilly, Labor & Employment
Gregory Parker Rogers, Labor & Employment
Charles R. "Rocky" Saxbe, Litigation: General Commercial
Russell S. Sayre, Litigation: General Commercial
Jeffrey S. Schloemer, Banking & Finance
Mark J. Stepaniak, Labor & Employment
Thomas T. Terp, Natural Resources & Environment
David H. Wallace, Litigation: General Commercial

In Indiana:

Jackie M. Bennett, Jr. , Litigation: General Commercial
Ralph A. Caruso, II, Corporate/M&A
Donald K. Densborn, Corporate/M&A
Frank J. Deveau, Environment
Robert J. Hicks, Corporate/M&A
Jonathan G. Polak, Litigation: General Commercial
Erick D. Ponader, Real Estate
James A. Strain, Corporate/M&A
Michael C. Terrell, Labor & Employment

About Chambers

Chambers & Partners, based in London, began as general book publishers in 1969. In 1990, Chambers published the Chambers Directory of the UK's leading law firms; the company then began specializing in legal publishing. Chambers' staff of more than 140 full-time researchers now prepares several renowned directories worldwide, which rank leading lawyers based upon their reputation among peers and clients. The Chambers Guides list the top lawyers in 175 countries, providing independent rankings and editorial commentary. Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business published its first edition in 2003. For more information, visit www.chambersandpartners.com.

Makee a Guest Speaker at the 2013 CUPA Conference

Jen Mixson — Thu, 23 May 2013 10:14:13 -0500

Taft partner Joel A. Makee was a guest speaker at the 2013 College and University Professional Association (“CUPA”) Midwest Conference, which took place May 19-21 at the Hilton Columbus Downtown. The conference focused on the critical issues that higher education HR professionals face every day, and Makee addressed the Ohio Chapter CUPA members on the topics of “The Current Status of Tenure” and “Counting the Hours of Adjunct Faculty under the Affordable Care Act.” CUPA's mission it to foster cooperation between institutions of higher education personnel and human resource administration.

Makee chairs Taft's Education Law practice. For over 30 years, he served as the chief legal officer for Case Western Reserve University as University Attorney. Makee’s law practice focuses on labor and employment and college and university law, as well as other forms of litigation.

Dayton Business Journal Quotes Duncombe and Publishes Article

Jen Mixson — Tue, 21 May 2013 12:59:39 -0500

Taft attorney Barbara A. Duncombe was quoted in the Dayton Business Journal (DBJ) on May 17 regarding her presentation to over 200 attendees at the DBJ’s Spring Defense Forum. In addition to being quoted, the special Defense Forum Section of the DBJ ran Duncombe’s article titled “Teaming Agreements - District Court Puts the ‘I’ Back in TEAM.”

To read the entire DBJ article, please click here.
To read Duncombe’s teaming agreements article, please click here.

Russia & the WTO: New Opportunities for U.S. Companies

Kelly Sharpe — Tue, 21 May 2013 09:40:19 -0500

HIPAA: The Final Rule – Two Areas for Health Care Providers to Address Now

Maria Porter — Thu, 16 May 2013 14:52:33 -0500

On January 17, 2013, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") released the much-anticipated and long-awaited omnibus final rule modifying the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPAA") privacy, security, enforcement and breach notification rules (the "Final Rule"). This bulletin is intended to cover two key concepts that will impact health care providers: Notices of Privacy Practices and Business Associate Agreements. Summer is the time to get in gear — don’t let September 23 sneak up on you!

Notices of Privacy Practices

Updates that health care providers are required to make to their Notices of Privacy Practices under the Final Rule include:

A statement that the covered entity must obtain an authorization for the use and disclosure of psychotherapy notes, marketing and the sale of protected health information (covered entities that do not record or maintain psychotherapy notes are not required to include a statement about the authorization requirements for uses and disclosures of psychotherapy notes).
A statement informing individuals of their right to opt out of receiving a covered entity’s communications to raise funds for the covered entity (if the covered entity intends to contact individuals to raise funds for the covered entity).
A statement informing individuals of their right to restrict disclosures of protected health information to a health plan where the individual pays out of pocket in full for the health care item or service.
A statement of the right of affected individuals to be notified following a breach of unsecured protected health information (the specifics regarding the covered entity’s procedures regarding breach notification do not have to be specified in the Notices of Privacy Practices).

HHS indicated that the changes to the Notices of Privacy Practices are material. Therefore, health care providers must revise their Notices of Privacy Practices by September 23, 2013.

Business Associate Agreements

Provisions that must be contained in business associate agreements between health care providers and their business associates under the Final Rule include:

The business associate will comply with the security standards for the protection of electronic protected health information.
The business associate will report to the covered entity breaches of unsecured protected health information in accordance with the breach notification rules.
The Final Rule modified the definition of a "breach" requiring notification. Therefore, existing business associate agreements will need to be examined in order to determine whether the definition of "breach" needs to be updated.
To the extent the business associate is delegated to carry out a covered entity’s obligation(s) under subpart E of 45 C.F.R. Part 164, the business associate will comply with the requirements of subpart E of 45 C.F.R. Part 164 that apply to the covered entity in the performance of such obligation(s). Subpart E of 45 C.F.R. Part 164 contains multiple obligations of a covered entity regarding the uses and disclosures of protected health information including a covered entity’s obligations as they relate to an individual’s right of access, amendments to protected health information, and accounting of disclosures of protected health information.
The business associate will ensure that the business associate’s "subcontractor" agrees to the same restrictions and conditions that apply to the business associate with respect to such information through a written contract or other written agreement or arrangement.
- The definition of business associate was expanded under the Final Rule and includes the concept of a "subcontractor" that "creates, receives, maintains or transmits protected health information on behalf of the business associate."

Who is a Business Associate Now?

Prior to the Final Rule, service providers who were "conduits" of protected health information were excluded from being classified as business associates. HHS has now clarified that the "conduit" exception previously articulated is now limited such that only those service providers who are providing transmission services, whether digital or hard copy and including any temporary storage of the transmitted data incident to such transmissions, are excluded from being classified as business associates. It is the persistence of custody of protected health information, rather than the degree of access, that is the indicator of a business associate relationship. What this means for covered entities and business associates alike is that service providers who maintain protected health information (e.g., data or document storage companies) are now considered business associates (or subcontractors of a business associate, as applicable) regardless of whether the service provider actually views the information it holds. Therefore, covered entities and business associates should review their existing relationships with vendors to determine whether a business associate agreement is required.

Next Steps and Important Dates

Health care providers should take inventory of their existing business associate agreements and evaluate areas that require revisions under the Final Rule. The Final Rule became effective March 26, 2013, but in general covered entities and business associates will have until September 23, 2013, to come into compliance. However, for those business associate agreements that were in place before January 25, 2013, and were not renewed or modified after March 26, 2013, these arrangements are in compliance until September 22, 2014.

Additional Information

For more information, please contact any of the Health & Life Sciences attorneys listed in this e-bulletin. A paper on the Final Rule that was prepared for a recent seminar is also available here.

Repeal of Indiana Inheritance Tax

Maria Porter — Fri, 17 May 2013 13:32:36 -0500

For decedents dying after December 31, 2012, their estates will no longer be required to pay the Indiana Inheritance Tax that was previously imposed in Indiana on transfers of wealth at death.

As part of a tax relief package signed into law on May 8, 2013, by Governor Mike Pence, the Indiana Inheritance Tax has been repealed with a retroactive effective date of January 1, 2013. Consequently, there are no longer any Indiana state death taxes imposed on decedents who were either residents of Indiana at the time of their death or who had property located in the state.

The Indiana Inheritance Tax was a fairly robust tax with rates ranging from 1% to 20% of the net taxable value transferred, depending on a beneficiary’s relationship to the decedent.

Aside from the significant tax savings that may result for a decedent's estate, the administration of a decedent's property in Indiana should now become more streamlined as there is no longer a need to prepare an Indiana Inheritance Tax Return, which was a fairly significant part of many estate administrations. As a result, in addition to the savings of the Indiana Inheritance Tax, the substantial reduction in cost of an estate's administration could result in even more savings for a decedent’s beneficiaries.

Bottom line: For many estates, more assets will be available to an individual's chosen beneficiaries. This result, coupled with the increase in the federal estate tax exemption (currently $5,250,000.00, subject to inflation adjustments), should provide many Hoosiers with substantial savings from the imposition of any death taxes and reduce the timeline and cost of administration of their estates.

Mullins and Smith Published in the Spring Issue of Dayton Area Chamber FOCUS

Maria Porter — Thu, 16 May 2013 14:43:53 -0500

An article written by Taft attorneys Jeffrey A. Mullins and Ryan T. Smith was published in the spring edition of FOCUS, a Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce publication. The article, "The Affordable Care Act - Surviving Implementation," indicates that companies should develop a proactive strategy for dealing with the ACA and suggests three steps companies should take when developing such a strategy.

The full article is available here.

Brey Quoted in Columbus Dispatch Article

Jen Mixson — Thu, 16 May 2013 14:18:09 -0500

Taft partner Donald C. Brey was quoted in an article titled "Morality clauses attract attention after Watterson firing," which appeared in the May 13 issue of the Columbus Dispatch. The article discusses the legal status of morality clauses in private and religious school teacher contracts. Click here to read the article.

Miller Selected as Deputy Commander for 6th Legal Operations Detachment of the U.S. Army Reserve Legal Command

Kathy Major — Wed, 15 May 2013 14:30:59 -0500

Taft partner and Army Reserve JAG Officer Adam C. Miller has been selected as Deputy Commander for the 6th Legal Operations Detachment of the U.S. Army Reserve Legal Command. His tour started May 15, 2013. The 6th LOD provides trained Judge Advocates in support of U.S. Army operations worldwide. The LOD also has responsibility for Rule of Law and Soldier’s Medical Evaluation/Physical Evaluation Board missions.

A JAG Officer since 1996, Lieutenant Colonel Miller focuses his legal practice on representing public governmental entities, including local, city and exempted village school districts, single and multi-county educational service centers, joint vocational school districts and statewide educational associations.

He serves as vice chair of the Ohio State Bar Association Military and Veterans' Affairs Committee and served with the 10th Mountain Division during his deployment to Afghanistan in 2004. He is also an honor graduate of the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center School, Civil Affairs Officer Advanced Course.

In addition to managing a growing legal career over the last 18 years, Miller is a former public school teacher, head coach, superintendent of schools and current school board member. He resides in Grandview Heights, Ohio.

SBA Issues Interim Final Rule Removing Cap on Contract Value for Women-Owned Small Business Set-Asides

Maria Porter — Wed, 08 May 2013 11:40:13 -0500

On May 7, 2013, in response to recent statutory changes to the Small Business Act, the Small Business Administration ("SBA") issued a final interim rule, effective immediately, that removes the dollar value limitations on Women-Owned Small Business (“WOSB”) and Economically Disadvantaged Women-Owned Small Business (“EDWOSB”) set-asides. Contracting officers may now set aside any contract for competition among WOSBs or EDWOSBs for federal contracts within the enumerated industries when: (1) there is a reasonable expectation that two or more WOSBs (in the case of industries in which WOSBs are underrepresented) or EDWOSBs (in the case of industries where WOSBs are substantially underrepresented) will submit offers; and (2) the contracting officer anticipates that the contract can be awarded at a fair and reasonable price.

Under the original statutory scheme that created WOSB/EDWOSB set-asides, contracts being set aside under this program could not exceed $5 million for manufacturing contracts or $3 million for all other contracts. Although the SBA adjusted these statutory amounts for inflation, raising the thresholds to $6.5 for manufacturing contracts and $4 million for all other contracts, it was still found that the ceilings had the unintended effect of severely reducing the number of potential WOSB set-asides. This, in turn, prevented the government from satisfying its 5% contracting goal for WOSBs.

While WOSB/EDWOSB set-asides are still restricted because they are limited to contracts under a specific listing of NAICS codes applicable to industries in which WOSBs have been either underrepresented or substantially underrepresented, there is no doubt that lifting the dollar threshold restriction removed a large hurdle to meeting the 5% goal for WOSB contract awards. Qualifying WOSBs/EDWOSBs should be sure to respond to RFIs and communicate with contracting officials whenever possible to make them aware of the WOSB’s/EDWOSB’s ability to fulfill the contract at a fair and reasonable price—regardless of the value of the contract.

Court Strikes Down NLRB's Notice Posting Requirement

Kelly Sharpe — Wed, 08 May 2013 09:48:29 -0500

On May 7, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit struck down the National Labor Relations Board’s rule requiring employers to post a notice created by the NLRB that purported to “inform” employees about their rights under the National Labor Relations Act (“Act”). The rule contained three enforcement provisions, making non-compliance: (1) an independent unfair labor practice; (2) evidence of union animus that could support other unfair labor practice findings (such as an unlawful discharge); and (3) toll the six-month statute of limitations established by the Act.

The court found that all three of these enforcement provisions violated the law. The first two enforcement provisions violated Section 8(c) of the Act, which prevents the NLRB from finding an employer’s speech that does not contain threats or promises of benefits unlawful or evidence of an unfair labor practice. The court said the NLRB’s rule punished employers for refusing to speak, which violated Section 8(c). According to the court, the third enforcement provision impermissibly changed the Act’s statute of limitations, which the NLRB lacked the power to do.

Because all three enforcement provisions violated the law, the court also struck down the rule’s requirement that employers post the notice. Based on the preamble to the NLRB’s final rule, the court stated that the NLRB “would not have issued a posting rule that depended solely on voluntary compliance.”

In a concurring opinion, two of the three judges would also have found that the rule exceeded the NLRB’s statutory authority to make rules under Section 6 of the Act.

Because employers can always appeal unfair labor practice cases to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, this court decision is particularly important. The NLRB’s options in response to this latest legal setback include: (1) seeking to have the D.C. Circuit rehear this case; (2) appealing to the United States Supreme Court; (3) trying to have other federal appeals courts uphold the rule; or (4) creating a new rule. Another case challenging this rule is currently pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; the lower court in that case struck down the rule.

Should you have additional questions regarding this decision, please contact any member of Taft’s Labor and Employment group.

Taft Announces Law Exploratory and Career Readiness Program at IPS Ralph Waldo Emerson School 58

Kelly Sharpe — Mon, 06 May 2013 07:34:34 -0500

INDIANAPOLIS, IN - Taft Law is pleased to announce a new program for sixth-grade students at IPS Ralph Waldo Emerson School 58.

In partnership with the United Way of Central Indiana, Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department, IPS Police Department, and Reach for Youth, Taft has created a law exploratory and career readiness program. Students will learn about various career opportunities in law and safety and will take a field trip to the federal courthouse.

“We are very excited about this new program,” said Robert J. Hicks, partner-in-charge of Taft’s Indianapolis office. “As part of our partnership with IPS 58, one of our goals is to help bring resources to the school to enhance the learning experience and educate students about career opportunities.”

“This is a unique collaboration between these organizations, and we are grateful for this opportunity for our students,” said Vicky Kelley, School 58 principal. “Each organization offers a different perspective about the various careers in law and safety, opening our students’ eyes to the many opportunities.”

During the month of May, representatives of the four organizations will visit the classroom for a career day presentation. Each representative will discuss their position, job responsibilities and career path. In addition, Reach for Youth will conduct an interactive explanation of Teen Court and will discuss law concepts and terms for every day use.

The program will feature a field trip to the federal courthouse on May 16. The visit will include orientation, a tour, an educational activity and a visit with a judge. Afterward, students will enjoy lunch at Taft’s downtown office.

Taft adopted IPS 58 in 2011 and has since pledged more than $450,000 to the school. In partnership with the United Way, Taft has developed a program with the school that supports areas of need and improvement. The main areas of focus are building and expanding after school programming and increasing academic achievement of the Indiana English/Language Arts and Math Standards. In addition to financial support, Taft employees volunteer their time and talents and get involved with the students through tutoring and mentoring.

To learn more about Taft's partnership with IPS 58, please click here.

Labor & Employment Law Breakfast Briefing - Indianapolis

Kelly Sharpe — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 08:01:33 -0500

Corporate Governance – The Heightened Focus On Tax Risk

Maria Porter — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 09:51:35 -0500

Evolving business models, governmental policies and capital markets affect tax risk and increase the importance of having tax leadership present in strategic or transformational planning. Appropriate corporate governance should include thoughtful approaches to tax risk policy and to communicating and resolving risks at the C-suite or board level.

Recently, Padric Kelly O’Brien provided insight on proposals from the U.S. Treasury Department that are designed for tax professionals who practice before the Internal Revenue Service. The proposals were developed in an effort to give clarity on written communications and provide additional requirements for competence and management oversight. You can read the assessment here.

Managing tax risk by return filers is explicitly or implicitly at the core of each of the three proposals. Members of the tax bar, whether in private practice or as corporate counsel, have noted in speeches by or comments attributed to senior IRS management the heightened appreciation the agency has for promoting effective management techniques by taxpayers and their advisers. For example, when noting that taxes are one of the biggest expenses of a corporation, retired Commissioner Shulman said that boards of directors should play an important role in overseeing tax risk and tax strategies of corporations. That comment was an attention-grabbing statement from the IRS. But, in truth, satisfying tax administrators is only one of the many reasons an entity should consider implementing formal tax risk management policies. The chief tax officer or tax counsel can and should have a role to play in that process.

There is an increased focus on corporate governance in general, as well as tax risk management. This focus has resulted in greater demands for transparency and disclosure. The passage of Sarbanes-Oxley legislation, adoption of FIN 48 in the accounting area, and heightened media attention on the complexity of taxes and significant impact they can have on a corporation’s reputation and value all combine to emphasize the need for a corporation to focus on managing tax risk.

Managing tax risk includes developing a workable definition of that element of enterprise risk. In addition, tax leadership needs to identify where the risks arise. Finally, as an internal control or process matter, an enterprise should implement a plan to integrate the tax risk management policy with the entity’s enterprise risk management policy.

Broadly speaking, tax risk encompasses all sources of risk that may create an unexpected outcome from a tax position. Tax practitioners are fully aware that the potential for tax risk is embedded in all aspects of the business. Risks may arise in operations, transactions, compliance, financial accounting and controversy management.

Analysis of the scope of the risk requires a more granular examination of the sources of risk within each of those categories. For example, transactional risk includes the risk associated with the application of the tax laws, regulations and interpretations to specific transactions. The following areas of concern can be identified when assessing the scope of tax risk in relation to transactions: a challenge to the technical basis for the tax treatment of the transaction, a change in law that affects the transaction, a change in facts or circumstances, insufficient tax planning, or failure to implement the planning. A similar list can be prepared for each of the other categories of tax department responsibilities.

The nature of these risks will vary by enterprise, but a baseline understanding for every enterprise is that tax risk is substantially more than getting the numbers wrong in a filing. Just as important is the acceptance of the view that the areas in which tax risks can arise are not limited to the tax department alone. The challenge is to create an internal awareness among affected constituencies that will not only aid in risk identification but will also foster creation of a framework for monitoring risk treatment or resolution. This significant undertaking will involve the active collaboration of the tax department, the finance department, the “C Suite” and the responsible committees of the board.

The benefits of this in-depth analysis are many. It is not just addressing what the tax administrators have by regulatory fiat established as their base comfort level for tax departments and tax advisors. Hopefully, such an analysis can result in increased confidence that 1) the tax function is operating in a manner consistent with the organization’s overall business goals; 2) there is control from the organization’s center; and 3) there is clarity on the roles, responsibilities and accountability for each element of the plan.

Please direct comments or questions on these thoughts to pobrien@taftlaw.com.

The Top Three Changes in Commercial Real Estate Environmental Due Diligence in 2013

Kelly Sharpe — Wed, 13 Mar 2013 10:31:04 -0500

Taft E-Discovery Professional Awarded CEDS Certification

Kathy Major — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 08:05:28 -0500

Elizabeth A. Conaway, manager of litigation support at Taft, has earned the right to use the prestigious designation CEDS - Certified E-Discovery Specialist. She is among the select maiden group of e-Discovery professionals to pass the rigorous four hour certification examination that provides a tough and objective measure of mastery of the challenging field of e-Discovery. The test is administered by the Association of Certified e-Discovery Specialists (ACEDS), the premier membership organization of e-Discovery professionals in the field worldwide, and Kryterion, a psychometric firm.

The exam was assembled over eight months by a team of 40 leading e-Discovery professionals under the guidance of ACEDS and Kryterion management to ensure that the exam was technically sound and legally defensible. The computer-based examination has 145 items. The certification exam is offered at 560 secure ACEDS-Kryterion Testing Centers worldwide, including 320 in the United States and 30 in Canada.

For more information on CEDS certification, please visit: www.ACEDS.org.

Ask the Experts: The Future of Health Care

Kelly Sharpe — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 14:00:30 -0500

Anthony E. Dowell and Brian P. Lynch Join Taft's Indianapolis Office

Kelly Sharpe — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:57:58 -0500

INDIANAPOLIS, IN — Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP announces that Anthony E. Dowell and Brian P. Lynch have joined the firm’s Indianapolis office.

Dowell is of counsel and a member of the firm’s Intellectual Property and Litigation practice groups. He is an experienced trial lawyer who has litigated complex commercial cases throughout the United States. Dowell focuses on patent litigation and licensing and has also tried other types of intellectual property and complex commercial litigation cases. He has successfully litigated intellectual property disputes in diverse areas, including contact lenses, asphalt plants, sunglasses, papermaking machinery, furniture, home decorations, gaming devices, maps and steam heating systems. Dowell received his B.S. in Interdisciplinary Engineering from Purdue University and earned his J.D., magna cum laude, from the University of Notre Dame Law School.

Lynch, a registered patent agent, has worked with Dowell on patent litigation and prosecution matters since 2007. He received his bachelor’s degree in chemistry from Colorado College and his doctorate in chemistry from Purdue University.

Dowell and Lynch join an already robust intellectual property practice at Taft. The firm’s Intellectual Property group now includes 25 professionals, including eight registered patent attorneys and two patent agents, who cover a full range of engineering and scientific disciplines, including mechanical, electrical, chemical, computer software and biological/life sciences. Taft’s IP attorneys also provide advice on trademark prosecution and litigation, anti-counterfeiting programs and strategies, licensing, trade secret issues and global portfolio management.