Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP https://shackelford.law Law Firm - Dallas, Nashville, Fort Worth & Austin Sun, 29 Nov 2020 23:09:39 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.5.3 Lifelong Monitoring Now Required For Airmen Participating In The HIMS Program https://shackelford.law/news-aviation/lifelong-monitoring-now-required-for-airmen-participating-in-the-hims-program/ Sun, 29 Nov 2020 17:10:10 +0000 https://shackelford.law/?p=3323 The post Lifelong Monitoring Now Required For Airmen Participating In The HIMS Program appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
Airmen Medical Certification And Substance Dependence
As you may know, an airman who has an alcohol or substance dependence does not qualify for issuance of an unrestricted airman medical certificate under 14 C.F.R. §§ 67.307(a)(4), 67.207(a)(4), and 67.107(a)(4). However, the Federal Air Surgeon in the FAA’s Office of Aerospace Medicine may issue an Authorization for Special Issuance of Medical Certificate (“Special Issuance”) to an airman who does not qualify for an unrestricted medical certificate under 14 C.F.R. § 67.401.
The airman must convince the Federal Air Surgeon that he or she can perform the duties authorized by the applicable class of medical certificate without endangering public safety during the period in which the Special Issuance is in effect. Whether to issue a Special Issuance is at the sole discretion of the Federal Air Surgeon. And the Federal Air Surgeon’s decision whether to grant a Special Issuance is not subject to review by the National Transportation Safety Board.
So, how does an airman find him or herself in a position where the FAA may consider the airman disqualified due to a substance dependence condition? The most common reasons are
  • The airman is arrested for driving while intoxicated (“DWI”) or driving under the influence (“DUI”) and his or her blood alcohol concentration is 0.15 or greater. The FAA views the .15 level as an indicium of tolerance which shows an ongoing alcohol problem, rather than a one-time event;
  • The airman receives a second DWI/DUI; or
  • The airman refuses to take a breath or blood test, which the FAA assumes means the airman was, in essence, pleading guilty to DWI/DUI (the “guilty until proven innocent” approach, which also brings to mind the colloquial reference about what we do when we “assume”).
Once the FAA concludes that the airman has a substance dependence condition, then the airman is disqualified from being issued an unrestricted first, second, or third class medical certificate. However, the airman may still be able to qualify for a Special Issuance medical certificate, provided that the airman meets a multitude of conditions. This is where the HIMS program comes in.
The HIMS ProgramHimsProgram
The Human Intervention Motivation Study (“HIMS”) is a program specific to aviation that coordinates the identification, treatment and return to the cockpit of airmen who suffer from alcoholism and other chemical dependencies. The program is a balance between preserving the airmen’s careers while still ensuring air safety. The HIMS program provides a mechanism through which an airman with a disqualifying substance dependence condition may obtain a Special Issuance.
When an airman seeking a Special Issuance enters the HIMS program, he or she will be required to complete the following initial steps:
  • The airman must submit to a substance abuse assessment;
  • The airman must complete a 28-day (preferably in-patient) treatment program addressing his or her substance dependence;
  • The airman must establish peer and company sponsorship
  • Following the initial treatment program, the airman must complete 3 months of intensive outpatient follow up
  • The airman must regularly attend peer group meetings;
  • The airman must establish a regular aftercare regime; and
  • The airman must submit to psychiatric and neuropsychological evaluations by HIMS-trained addiction specialists.
Once the airman has completed the initial steps and he or she is established in recovery, then the airman can apply for a special issuance medical certificate. If the FAA is convinced the airman is, in fact, established in recovery, then the FAA may grant a Special Issuance of a limited duration (usually 12 months) that is conditioned upon the airman’s continuing compliance with certain “after care” requirements.
The airman bears the cost of his or her after care. While some airmen have insurance that may provide coverage for some, or maybe even all, of the after care requirements, many airmen do not. And unfortunately, the costs of complying with the ongoing after care requirements is expensive.
In the past, an airman who established and maintained recovery would eventually be eligible to receive an unrestricted first, second, or third class medical certificate. This meant the cost of complying with the Special Issuance after care requirements, including the monitoring, could eventually be eliminated. That is no longer the case.
The HIMS Step Down Plan
On August 17, 2020 when the Federal Air Surgeon released its “HIMS Step Down Plan” updating its after care requirements. Now, an airman who has obtained a special issuance medical certificate through the HIMS program is faced with lifetime monitoring by the FAA.
Under the new “HIMS Step Down Plan”, an airman with a history of substance dependence will be subject to the following after care requirements:
  • Permanent abstinence from mind and mood altering substances is expected for the duration of the flying career.
Initial Phase (Year 1, beginning with initial special issuance)
  • Aftercare weekly for 1 year;
  • HIMS psychiatrist/addictions specialist one visit at end of year 1;
  • Random testing 14 screens in 12 mos and/or mobile alcohol testing e.g. Soberlink;
  • Attendance at peer support group e.g. AA twice weekly;
  • Chief pilot/management assessment monthly;
  • Peer pilot assessment monthly; and
  • HIMS AME of record every 3 months (half the visits may be virtual).
Early Phase (Years 2-4)
  • Random testing 14 screens in 12 mos. and/or mobile alcohol testing e.g. Soberlink;
  • Attendance at peer support group e.g. AA twice weekly;
  • Chief pilot/management assessment monthly;
  • Peer pilot assessment monthly; and
  • HIMS AME of record every 3 months (half the visits may be virtual).
Advanced Phase (Years 5-7)
  • Random PEth testing (plus drug screens if indicated) 4 times in 12 months;
  • Attendance at peer support group e.g. AA weekly; and
  • HIMS AME of record every 6 months.
Maintenance Phase (Year 7 on)
  • HIMS AME of airman’s choice at each exam.
It is important to understand that each airman in the program is still evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Thus, the timing for progression through these phases may vary from airman to airman. Progression is not automatic.
Also, the testing frequencies are minimums. The airman’s HIMS AME may increase the frequency as needed, in the HIMS AME’s discretion.
Conclusions
Unfortunately, as is often the case, the FAA’s guidance is incomplete. It is not clear how or when the HIMS AME may exercise his or her discretion to increase the frequency of testing, and thereby increase the airman’s cost of compliance.
Equally unfortunate is the lifetime monitoring requirement. Airmen who have obtained a Special Issuance through the HIMS program are now stuck with the program for the rest of their flying careers. Although the HIMS program has certainly saved many airmen’s careers, for those in the program, and those who will enter the program in the future, the obligations and costs of participation are now are now a career-long commitment.

The post Lifelong Monitoring Now Required For Airmen Participating In The HIMS Program appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
Thoughts on Being a Veteran https://shackelford.law/news/thoughts-on-being-a-veteran/ Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:40:14 +0000 https://shackelford.law/?p=3311 I was probably 4 years old, and I instantly fell in love. She was a Ford Tri-Motor (commonly called a “Tin Goose”), built sometime in the 1920s and now being

The post Thoughts on Being a Veteran appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>

By David Norton | November 11, 2020 | The Texas Lawbook


I was probably 4 years old, and I instantly fell in love. She was a Ford Tri-Motor (commonly called a “Tin Goose”), built sometime in the 1920s and now being used by a small charter airline to fly passengers on a short hop out to an island in Lake Erie. Climbing up into the airplane, I looked up the aisle, saw the cockpit and was hooked.

Now fast forward 14 years of being fascinated by all things aviation – especially military aviation. Although there was little military background in my family (my parents were civilian schoolteachers, but my father had done his obligatory two-year stint in the U.S. Army), I had heard of the United States Air Force Academy while in high school. The more I learned, the more enamored I became. The thought of serving our country in general, of doing so as a USAF officer, and most importantly of having the chance to interface with military airplanes in any way—maybe even as a pilot—was exhilarating. Somehow, I managed to snag an appointment to the Academy and, even more amazingly to me, graduate from that institution four years later.

After raising my right hand to swear an oath to protect and defend the United States Constitution and pinning on my second lieutenant’s golden “butter” bars, I headed out into the world to begin my active duty service as an officer and aviator. One thing about serving in the U.S. military is that it gives you an awesome amount of responsibility and experience in a very short period of time and at a very young age. Within the following nine years, I would serve briefly as a Boeing KC-135A “Stratotanker” navigator, then primarily as a McDonnel Douglas KC-10A “Extender” pilot, aircraft commander and flight commander. I would become a veteran of, among other things, Operations Desert Watch and Desert Storm (the first Gulf War), Operation Southern Watch (the no-fly zone over Iraq) and Operation Restore Hope (relief operations into Africa). I would have the opportunity to work with—and lead before I had reached the age of 30—incredibly smart, well-trained and professional airman conducting complex flight operations over much of the world. Most importantly to me, I would forever be indelibly imprinted upon by my education at the Academy and my service in the USAF.

At the nine-year point I reached a proverbial fork in the road and had to decide whether to continue my career in the USAF or seek some new challenge. In contemplating which path to take, I remembered back to a class I had taken at the Academy called “Law for Commanders,” my first introduction to the law. I remembered being very intrigued at the time but was anxious to get out and fly so did not give it much further thought. Now, nine years later and having achieved my flying goals (and having heard one day of another pilot who was finishing law school and was going to focus on aviation law—I didn’t even know you could do that!), the thought of taking this new career path began to excite me just as my first experience of flight had opened the world of aviation to me many years earlier.

One of the hardest days of my life was the day that I walked into my commander’s office and submitted my resignation of my commission as a USAF officer so that I could start the aviation law path. As difficult as that was, I knew it was the right decision. Shortly afterward I found myself attending the Southern Methodist University Law School because it was the home of the Journal of Air Law Commerce, which seemed like the logical place to go. While at SMU I had the phenomenal opportunity of serving as the editor of that publication (noting that my experience at the Academy, followed by nine years of active duty service, made me a much better law student than I would have been otherwise), and upon graduation I began to immerse myself in the field of business aviation law.

Now, some 25 years later, I reflect on how and why I traveled down these two separate paths of military aviation and the law, and I see many similarities between them. In both I see key attributes such as service before self, an oath to defend and protect our U.S. Constitution, attention to detail and process, the qualities of teamwork while still taking personal responsibility for getting the job done and the opportunity to work with incredibly dedicated and smart individuals trying to make this world a better place.

I consider myself one of the luckiest people in the word to be where I am today. I know that having the opportunity to live and absorb all of the values and behaviors engrained into me—beginning with the day they shaved off my hair and made me a basic cadet at the Air Force Academy through becoming that captain on an Air Force DC-10—was a bigger force in shaping my life than I can ever acknowledge. It is hard for me to state how much I value all of the education and life experiences I received in the military, and then the opportunity to try to give back in some small measure to our country and our society within the legal community—and just how much that military experience prepared me for a career in the law.

That being said, in no way do I consider myself to be any kind of hero. I am just a very fortunate soul, and I am eternally grateful to the real heroes—all of my fellow brothers and sisters in arms who did not come back from the fight whole or who did not come back at all.

David Norton, MBA, JD, ATP, a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy, heads the aviation law practice at Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP. An internationally recognized aviation lawyer, he remains an active pilot.

 

Read the full article by David Norton on The Texas Lawbook

The post Thoughts on Being a Veteran appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
Service to Country a Natural Progression to Honor https://shackelford.law/news/service-to-country-a-natural-progression-to-honor/ Tue, 10 Nov 2020 17:42:03 +0000 https://shackelford.law/?p=3316 Unconventional paths and hard work highlight my life, professionally and personally. My life started in the rural farmlands of northeast Arkansas

The post Service to Country a Natural Progression to Honor appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>

By David Odom | November 10, 2020 | The Texas Lawbook


Unconventional paths and hard work highlight my life, professionally and personally. My life started in the rural farmlands of northeast Arkansas by my “farmer” parents who valued hard work and personal sacrifice. My father could neither read nor write. As fate would try and have its way in my life, I was destined to continue the family farming tradition. However, I had two God-given callings that conquered fate – flying airplanes and practicing law.

Years later in May 1984, I felt the calling to serve my country and pursue my dreams and enlisted in the U.S. Air Force. Soon after, I began attending college night classes in hopes of applying for Officer Training School. In a few short years, I graduated magna cum laude from Chapman University in Orange, California, with a B.S. in electronics.

Following graduation, I applied for OTS and Undergraduate Navigator Training simultaneously and was accepted for both. I graduated from OTS in 1987 and began UNT that same year. In 1988, I graduated from UNT in the top 10% of my class and was afforded the opportunity to select the aircraft and base of my choosing. I selected Barksdale AFB in Bossier City, Louisiana. My selected squadron flew the KC-135 Stratotanker, which is a modified Boeing 707 for midair refueling of other aircraft.

In September 1990, Operation Desert Shield began, and I left my pregnant wife to serve my country. My squadron deployed to Lajes Field in Lajes, Portugal, an island in the middle of the northeastern Atlantic Ocean. We played a key role by forming a refueling “air bridge” to the Middle East during the Gulf War. In 1991, I returned stateside to see my first and only child born at the base hospital.

Once Desert Storm was over, I applied to fly the B-1B Bomber, as an offensive systems officer. So in early 1993, I pivoted my career in the Air Force and pursued this new bomber opportunity. The B-1B is a highly complex, low level, supersonic, nuclear capable bomber with advanced technology to fly behind enemy lines without easily being detected by the enemy. After a successful and rigorous yearlong training program, I was assigned in 1994 to the B-1B squadron at Dyess AFB in Abilene.

In 1999, after almost 16 years of active duty service, I pivoted my career once again and resigned my commission as a captain in the Air Force. It was now time to follow my second calling in life – practicing intellectual property/patent law. In August 1999, my family and I set out for Franklin Pierce Law Center in Concord, New Hampshire, my first choice for law school due to its world-renowned reputation in intellectual property and patent law.

Honor, integrity, service before self and excellence are some of the core values of military service. Thus, naturally, my military service exemplifies and was an extension of my personal core values of service and honor to my God, my family and my friends.

I enlisted out of a duty to serve my country. In doing so, I was also able to fulfil my dream of flying in the USAF. Even though many of the world conflicts that would overlap my career in the military had not begun at the time of enlistment, I knew that it would be possible that I could be called to sacrifice as many before me did.

I knew of the importance of service to country although I did not have a strong family tradition of military service before me. To me, service to my country felt like a natural progression to honor and make sacrifices just as many others did before me. Serving others has been instilled in me since my childhood by being taught to serve my God, family and others. I am grateful because such has shaped me into the person I am today, both personally and professionally as an attorney.

Looking back at my entire career, everything happened for a reason and nothing happened “by chance” and every position and experience, especially in the U.S. Air Force, played an integral role in positioning and shaping me and my legal career. From my father, I learned at an early age that hard work will always pay off, even if you don’t realize it at the time. That is so true through my career as I took the unconventional path of serving my country before focusing on my long-term career in the legal world. Sometimes we get involved with the day to day demands and stresses of work that we forget the sacrifices of people that have come before us in shaping this great country.

My military service taught me at a high level, to be a leader, to make wiser decisions and to give the well thought advice. This overflows into my legal profession because it allows me to view every client and act in every situation to the highest degree with integrity, precision and wise counsel.

Since humble beginnings in rural Arkansas and throughout my career in the Air Force and my legal career, I never have shied away from a challenge or an opportunity. There are always calculated risks to any situation, but with my foundation of military professional training and my legal specialization in intellectual property, I am confident in the decisions I have to make and the advice I have to give each and every day. I am forever grateful for the opportunities that I have been given and for what I have learned throughout my years.

David L Odom is an intellectual property partner in the Dallas office of Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton. He was a captain in the U.S. Air Force and an aviator with more than 2,000 combined flying hours in the KC-135A and B-1B bomber aircraft. He also served as an electronics engineering liaison in cooperation with a defense contractor in the aviation defense B-1B flight simulation facility at Dyess AFB. He is a Desert Shield and Desert Storm veteran.

 

 

Read the full article by David Odom on The Texas Lawbook

The post Service to Country a Natural Progression to Honor appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
FAA’s Intentional Falsification Settlement Policy: Not Much Of An Offer https://shackelford.law/news-aviation/faas-intentional-falsification-settlement-policy-not-much-of-an-offer/ Mon, 09 Nov 2020 09:00:17 +0000 https://shackelford.law/?p=3307 The post FAA’s Intentional Falsification Settlement Policy: Not Much Of An Offer appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
As you might imagine, the FAA has a dim view of intentional falsification cases.  These situations arise when the FAA believes that a certificate holder (whether airman, mechanic, air carrier, repair station etc.) has intentionally falsified a required record.  They range from airmen who have failed to disclose information on their applications for medical certificate to mechanics who have either omitted information or included incorrect information in aircraft maintenance records.
According to the FAA’s Compliance and Enforcement Program, a certificate holder who intentionally falsifies a record lacks the qualifications to hold any certificate.  As a result, FAA’s sanction in these cases is revocation of all certificates, usually by emergency order.  And after revocation, the certificate holder is generally prohibited from re-applying for new certificates for one year following the effective date of the order of revocation.
However, before the FAA issues a revocation order, it conducts an investigation in which it gathers evidence, sends out a letter of investigation, reviews any response, and analyzes all of the evidence to support its case.  This process can take a period of time.  But the certificate holder retains all certificates up until the revocation order is issued.
The New Policy
In the case where an airman has allegedly falsified his or her application for medical certificate in violation of 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1)-(4), the FAA recently announced a new “prompt settlement policy.”  According to the FAA, the new policy will afford an airman “the opportunity to apply for any airman and ground instructor certificate sooner than had the case proceeded in the absence of the policy.”
Under the new policy, the airman would still have to wait one year, but that would happen “sooner than under the current process because much of the investigation and evaluation processes would be abbreviated or eliminated.”  The policy provides the airman with an opportunity to resolve the alleged violation with a settlement agreement in which the airman (1) accepts an order revoking all of the airman’s certificates; (2) immediately surrenders all of his or her certificate; and (3) waives all of his or her appeal rights.
The FAA believes this policy will provide predictability for airmen as to when the revocation order is issued, and accordingly, when the airman would again be able apply for a new certificate.  It is also supposed to “promote better resource allocation.”
Who Is Eligible For This Policy?
The policy would be available to an airman who the FAA believes has violated 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1)-(4).  However, the policy will not be available to an airman if (1) the FAA believes the airman may lack qualification to hold his or her certificate(s) (other than because the airman allegedly violated 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) through (4)); or (2) he or she has a prior violation of 14 CFR 67.403(a)(1) through (4).
How Does It Work?
When the FAA sends a letter of investigation (“LOI”) to an airman for alleged intentional falsification, the LOI will advise the airman that he or she may request consideration for a prompt settlement of the legal enforcement action.  If the FAA determines the airman is eligible, an FAA attorney will send the airman a settlement agreement with the following terms:
  1. The settlement agreement must be executed by the parties within ten days after the FAA sends the agreement to the airman;
  2. The FAA will issue an emergency order revoking all airman, ground instructor, and unexpired medical certificates the airman holds immediately upon receiving the fully executed settlement  agreement;
  3. The order of revocation will (a) require the immediate surrender of all airman, ground instructor, and unexpired medical certificates the individual holds to enforcement counsel; (b) notify the airman that the failure to immediately surrender these certificates could subject the airman to further legal enforcement action, including a civil penalty; and (c) inform the airman that the FAA will not accept an application for any new airman or ground instructor certificate for a period of one year from the date of the issuance of the order of revocation;
  4. The airman will waive all appeal rights from the order of revocation;
  5. The airman acknowledges that the agreement only concerns the legal enforcement action brought by the FAA and does not affect any actions that might be brought by State or other Federal agencies (whether civil or criminal), and that the agreement does not prevent the FAA from providing information about this matter to State or other Federal agencies;
  6. The parties will agree to bear their own costs and attorney fees, if any, in connection with the matter;
  7. The airman will agree to not initiate any litigation before seeking any costs, damages, or attorney fees, including applications under the Equal Access to Justice Act, incurred as a result of the legal enforcement action; and
  8. The airman will agree to waive any and all causes of action against the FAA and its current and/or former officials and employees relating to the legal enforcement action.
Is The Policy A Good Deal For An Airman?
From my perspective, this policy provides little real benefit to an airman, other than an airman who simply wants to roll over on his or her sword and start the clock ticking on his or her punishment.  Here are some of the problems I have with the policy:
  • An airman gives up all of his or her rights to have the FAA prove its case. The FAA has the burden of proof in these cases.  If the case involves factual issues as to whether the airman intentionally falsified rather than simply made a false statement, forcing the FAA to prove its case could be the difference between revocation of all certificates for intentional falsification versus revocation of just the airman’s medical certificate for making a false statement.
  • The policy does not protect the airman from criminal prosecution. An airman who the FAA believes committed intentional falsification could still be referred out to local or federal authorities for prosecution.  And the order of revocation and the facts upon which it was based would make it very easy for the prosecution to prove its case.  And since the FAA has, in fact, referred these cases out for prosecution, this is not a risk to be taken lightly.
  • The airman gives up his or her right to negotiate a reduction in the one-year prohibition on reapplication. If an airman appeals an order of revocation alleging intentional falsification, it is not uncommon for the FAA to agree to a 10 month, or in unusual circumstances a 9 month, prohibition in order avoid having to litigate its case against the airman before an NTSB administrative law judge.
  • The airman must surrender his or her certificates immediately. In the absence of surrender, the airman could have retained his or her certificates while the FAA completes its investigation and until it issues the revocation order.  This could be several months when the airman could continue to exercise the privileges of his or her certificates.
Conclusion
If you find yourself facing an allegation of intentional falsification, you know you made a mistake, and you just want to put the matter behind you, then the new policy may be worth considering.  However, you should also consider what you will give up.  In most situations it will likely make more sense to work through the enforcement process to obtain a more favorable resolution.

The post FAA’s Intentional Falsification Settlement Policy: Not Much Of An Offer appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
Shackelford Litigators Recognized as Best Lawyers in America https://shackelford.law/news/shackelford-litigators-recognized-as-best-lawyers-in-america/ Thu, 29 Oct 2020 19:05:59 +0000 https://shackelford.law/?p=3302 We are proud to announce that 11 Shackelford litigators were selected to be recognized on The Best Lawyers in America© list.

The post Shackelford Litigators Recognized as Best Lawyers in America appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>

We are proud to announce that 11 Shackelford litigators were selected to be recognized on The Best Lawyers in America© list. These nominees include Jay Bowen, Hilary Borow, Talmage Boston, Jay Brown, David Elrod, Martha Hardwick Hofmeister, Mark McQuality, Josh Northam, Will Parsons, Steven Pawlowski and Worthy Walker.

The Best Lawyers in America list is formed by peer review and acknowledges the top legal talent in the country. The list was established over 30 years ago and is known as the “oldest and most respected peer-review publication in the legal profession.” 

The post Shackelford Litigators Recognized as Best Lawyers in America appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
Former U.S. Secretary of State James A. Baker, III, To Speak at Chiles Lecture Series at Baylor Law https://shackelford.law/news/former-u-s-secretary-of-state-james-a-baker-iii-to-speak-at-chiles-lecture-series-at-baylor-law/ Thu, 01 Oct 2020 19:23:23 +0000 https://shackelford.law/?p=3291 Former U.S. Secretary of State James A. Baker, III, whose 30-year legacy of public service includes senior positions under three U.S. presidents, will be interviewed

The post Former U.S. Secretary of State James A. Baker, III, To Speak at Chiles Lecture Series at Baylor Law appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>


Former U.S. Secretary of State James A. Baker, III, whose 30-year legacy of public service includes senior positions under three U.S. presidents, will be interviewed at the
2020 Starr Federalist Lecture at Baylor Law on Monday, October 13 at noon CDT. Secretary Baker will be interviewed by accomplished author and distinguished trial lawyer Talmage Boston, as they discuss Secretary Baker’s remarkable career, the leadership lessons learned from his years of experience in public service, and the skills and capabilities of lawyers that contribute to success as effective leaders and problem-solvers. 

Baker and Boston will also discuss Baker’s newly released biography, The Man Who Ran Washington: The Life and Times of James A. Baker III, by Peter Baker and Susan Glasser.  The Wall Street Journal calls The Man Who Ran Washington “an illuminating biographical portrait of Mr. Baker, one that describes the arc of his career and, along the way, tells us something about how executive power is wielded in the nation’s capital.” In Talmage Boston’s review of The Man Who Ran Washington, published in the Washington Independent Review of Books, Boston states, “[This] book provides a complete, persuasive explanation of how this 45-year-old prominent but politically inexperienced Houston transactional lawyer arrived in the nation’s capital as undersecretary of commerce in July 1975, and within six months, began his meteoric rise to the peak of the DC power pyramid…”  The New York Times calls it “enthralling,” and states that, “The former Secretary of State’s experiences as a public servant offer timeless lessons in how to use personal relationships, broad-based coalitions and tireless negotiating to advance United States interests.”

A 1991 recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, Baker served as Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush, as Secretary of the Treasury under President Ronald Reagan, and as Under Secretary of Commerce during President Gerald Ford’s administration. He was also White House Chief of Staff under Reagan and GHW Bush. More recently, he served as a personal envoy of United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan and as co-chair of the 2006 Federal Commission on Election Reform, the Iraq Study Group, and the National War Powers Commission. Baker is senior partner in the law firm of Baker Botts and honorary chairman of the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University. He lives in Houston with his wife, Susan.

Talmage Boston, author of 1939: Baseball’s Pivotal Year: From the Golden Age to the Modern Era, Raising the Bar: The Crucial Role of the Lawyer in Society, and Cross-Examining History: A Lawyer gets Answers from the Experts about our Presidents, maintains his full-time law practice as a commercial litigator in Dallas, Texas. He is a partner at Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP and has been recognized in Texas Monthly magazine as a “Texas Super Lawyer” every year since 2003 and named among the “Best Lawyers in America” since 2013.

The annual lecture series was established by Baylor benefactors John and Marie Chiles to showcase the importance of the Federalist Papers. The Federalist Papers are a collection of 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay between 1787 and 1788. The authors wrote under the name “Publius” and attempted to make the case for the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, outlining how the new government would operate and why it was the best choice for the United States of America.

This session has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of Texas Committee on MCLE in the amount of 1 credit hour.

Pre-registration for this virtual event is required. Participants in the 2020 Vision for Leadership Conference at Baylor Law are automatically registered. All others may register, here: https://www1.baylor.edu/ers/register.aspx?event_id=129521 

 


 

ABOUT BAYLOR LAW

Established in 1857, Baylor University School of Law was one of the first law schools in Texas and one of the first west of the Mississippi River. Accredited by the American Bar Association and a member of the Association of American Law Schools, Baylor Law has more than 7,600 living alumni and a record of producing outstanding lawyers, many of whom decide upon a career in public service. The Law School boasts among its notable alumni two governors, members or former members of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate, two former directors of the FBI, U.S. ambassadors, federal judges, justices of the Texas Supreme Court and members of the Texas Legislature. In its law specialties rankings, U.S. News & World Report ranks Baylor Law’s trial advocacy program as among the best in the nation at No. 2, while the Law School is ranked in the Top 50 of the 2021 edition of “Best Graduate Schools.” The National Jurist ranks Baylor Law as one of the “Best School for Practical Training,” and in the top 15 “Best Law School Facilities” in the country. The Business Insider places Baylor Law among the top 50 law schools in the nation. Baylor Law received the 2015 American Bar Association Pro Bono Publico Award, making it only the third law school in the nation to be honored with the award since the award’s inception in 1984. Learn more at baylor.edu/law

ABOUT BAYLOR UNIVERSITY

Baylor University is a private Christian University and a nationally ranked research institution. The University provides a vibrant campus community for more than 17,000 students by blending interdisciplinary research with an international reputation for educational excellence and a faculty commitment to teaching and scholarship. Chartered in 1845 by the Republic of Texas through the efforts of Baptist pioneers, Baylor is the oldest continually operating University in Texas. Located in Waco, Baylor welcomes students from all 50 states and more than 80 countries to study a broad range of degrees among its 12 nationally recognized academic divisions. Learn more at baylor.edu

 

 

Media Contact:

Ed Nelson, Marketing & Communications Director
254-710-6681
ed_nelson@baylor.edu

Sheila & Walter Umphrey Law Center

1114 South University Parks Drive
One Bear Place, #97288
Waco, Texas 76798

The post Former U.S. Secretary of State James A. Baker, III, To Speak at Chiles Lecture Series at Baylor Law appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
Virtual Wine Tasting https://shackelford.law/news/virtual-wine-tasting/ Mon, 28 Sep 2020 16:54:50 +0000 https://shackelford.law/?p=3286 Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP is proud to sponsor a Virtual Wine Tasting hosted on October 2nd from 6:00-7:00 PM CDT in connection with the HIPLA/IPIL 2020 36th Annual Fall Institute on Intellectual Property Law being held virtually and in-person Oct. 1-3, 2020

The post Virtual Wine Tasting appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>

Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP is proud to sponsor a Virtual Wine Tasting hosted on October 2nd from 6:00-7:00 PM CDT in connection with the HIPLA/IPIL 2020 36th Annual Fall Institute on Intellectual Property Law being held virtually and in-person Oct. 1-3, 2020 (https://hipla.org/event-3941257).

Nice Winery and their renowned Sommelier and winemaker, Ryan Levy, will be educating and entertaining us about the experience and enjoyment of wine.

 

Our Wine Makers

Winemaker and Foodie superduo Ryan Levy and Ian Eastveld of Nice Winery are Certified Sommeliers, wine educators, and Le Cordon Bleu trained chefs. Their hand crafted, boutique wines are poured in top restaurants and have won gold medals in internationally recognized wine competitions. Ryan and Ian have built their epicurean pedigree while studying in Paris, France, directing culinary education for Viking, teaching cuisine to thousands of students at Central Market, and operating their restaurant and catering companies, Republic and Nuance. They make their wines from estate vineyards in Texas, Argentina, and California.

 

 

 

The Virtual Wine Tasting is made possible by

www.shackelford.law

The post Virtual Wine Tasting appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Final Patent Fee Changes Become Effective October 2, 2020 https://shackelford.law/news/u-s-patent-and-trademark-office-uspto-final-patent-fee-changes-become-effective-october-2-2020/ Thu, 24 Sep 2020 21:56:24 +0000 https://shackelford.law/?p=3272 The USPTO is setting or adjusting certain patent fees for Fiscal Year 2020.  The new fees become effective on October 2, 2020 and will be the first fee increase in almost three years.  Also included are newly established fees of $400 for non-DOCX filings.

The post U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) <br> Final Patent Fee Changes Become Effective October 2, 2020 appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>


The USPTO is setting or adjusting certain patent fees for Fiscal Year 2020. The new fees become effective on October 2, 2020 and will be the first fee increase in almost three years.
Also included are newly established fees of $400 for non-DOCX filings. However, the implementation of DOCX filings has been delayed until January 2022. According to the USPTO, a primary justification for the increased fees is to provide the USPTO with sufficient financial resources to maintain operation at effective and reliable levels, especially in times of financial fluctuations and economic uncertainly. The overall takeaway of the fee increases is that any Applicants in a position to file new patent applications or pay fees in pending applications, and patentees eligible to pay maintenance fees on issued patents, should do so before October 2, 2020, to avoid paying higher fees.

We note from the USPTO’s Table of Patent Fee Adjustments, that the filing, search, and examination fees for utility applications are going up by approximately 5.8%. Several other key fees are also increasing by more than 5%, including the following, which reflect the large-entity rates:

  • Extension of time fees: up to 10% increase
  • RCE fees: approximate 5% increase
  • Issue Fee: 20% increase to $1,200
  • Reissue Fee: 20% increase to $1,200
  • First (3.5 year) Maintenance Fee: 25% increase to $2,000
  • Second (7.5 year) Maintenance Fee:approx. 5% increase to $3,760
  • Third (11.5 year) Maintenance Fee: approx. 4% increase to $7,700
  • Late Maintenance-Fee Payment Surcharge: 213% increase to $500
  • Expedited Examination of Design Patent Application: 78% increase to $1,600
  • The ~5% increases to the utility patent filing, search and examination fees will add up to $100 more, for a total of $1820.The increases to the PCT application transmittal and search fees will add up to $120 more, for a total of $2,440.

Issue Fees Exception

Please note that any issue-fee amount listed on a Notice of Allowance issued before October 2, 2020 will not be changed by this increase in fees. There is therefore no need to pay issue fees early in order to avoid the fee increases that will go into effect on October 2.

Miscellaneous Fees

Other fees, such as petition fees, fees to revive an abandoned application or for a delayed submission of a priority/benefit claim, or patent term fees, are going up, generally by around 5% as well. Non-prosecution fees, including fees for Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings and ex parte reexamination requests, are also going up by around 5%.

The USPTO also indicated that it will not implement its long-threatened “annual active patent practitioner” fee. The new rules do require practitioners to submit a registration statement to continue active status. Failure to timely submit the statement may result in the practitioner being subject to a “delinquency fee” and administrative suspension (which may result in more fees).

Patent Fee Increases Effective October 2, 2020

The following chart provides a sample of some of the most familiar patent fees and reflects the amounts that go into effect October 2, 2020. For a full listing of all patent fees, see https://www.uspto.gov/learning-and-resources/fees-and-payment/uspto-fee-schedule-effective-october-2.

 

Patent application filing fees

Fee code

37 CFR

Description

Fee

Small entity
fee

Micro entity
fee

1011/2011/3011

1.16(a)

Basic filing fee – Utility (paper filing also requires non-electronic filing fee under 1.16(t))

320.00

160.00

80.00

4011†

1.16(a)

Basic filing fee – Utility (electronic filing for

small entities)

n/a

80.00

n/a

1012/2012/3012

1.16(b)

Basic filing fee – Design

220.00

110.00

55.00

1017/2017/3017

1.16(b)

Basic filing fee – Design CPA

220.00

110.00

55.00

1013/2013/3013

1.16(c)

Basic filing fee – Plant

220.00

110.00

55.00

1005/2005/3005

1.16(d)

Provisional application filing fee

300.00

150.00

75.00

1014/2014/3014

1.16(e)

Basic filing fee – Reissue

320.00

160.00

80.00

1019/2019/3019

1.16(e)

Basic filing fee – Reissue (Design CPA)

320.00

160.00

80.00

1051/2051/3051

1.16(f)

Surcharge – Late filing fee, search fee, examination fee, inventor’s oath or declaration, or application filed without at least one claim or by reference

160.00

80.00

40.00

1052/2052/3052

1.16(g)

Surcharge – Late provisional filing fee or coversheet

60.00

30.00

15.00

1201/2201/3201

1.16(h)

Each independent claim in excess of three

480.00

240.00

120.00

1204/2204/3204

1.16(h)

Each reissue independent claim in excess of three

480.00

240.00

120.00

1202/2202/3202

1.16(i)

Each claim in excess of 20

100.00

50.00

25.00

1205/2205/3205

1.16(i)

Each reissue claim in excess of 20

100.00

50.00

25.00

1203/2203/3203

1.16(j)

Multiple dependent claim

860.00

430.00

215.00

1081/2081/3081

1.16(s)

Utility application size fee – for each additional 50 sheets that exceeds 100 sheets

420.00

210.00

105.00

1082/2082/3082

1.16(s)

Design application size fee – for each additional 50 sheets that exceeds 100 sheets

420.00

210.00

105.00

1083/2083/3083

1.16(s)

Plant application size fee – for each additional 50 sheets that exceeds 100 sheets

420.00

210.00

105.00

1084/2084/3084

1.16(s)

Reissue application size fee – for each additional 50 sheets that exceeds 100 sheets

420.00

210.00

105.00

1085/2085/3085

1.16(s)

Provisional application size fee – for each additional 50 sheets that exceeds 100 sheets

420.00

210.00

105.00

1090/2090/3090

1.16(t)

Non-electronic filing fee — Utility (additional fee for applications filed in paper)

400.00

200.00

200.00

1053/2053/3053

1.17(i)(1)

Non-English translation

140.00

70.00

35.00

1091/2091/3091

1.21(o)(1)

Submission of sequence listings of 300MB to 800MB

1,060.00

530.00

265.00

1092/2092/3092

1.21(o)(2)

Submission of sequence listings of more than 800MB

10,500.00

5,250.00

2,625.00

Patent search fees

Fee code

37 CFR

Description

Fee

Small entity
fee

Micro entity
fee

1111/2111/3111

1.16(k)

Utility search fee

700.00

350.00

175.00

1112/2112/3112

1.16(l)

Design search fee or Design CPA search fee

160.00

80.00

40.00

1113/2113/3113

1.16(m)

Plant search fee

440.00

220.00

110.00

1114/2114/3114

1.16(n)

Reissue search fee or

Reissue (Design CPA) search fee

700.00

350.00

175.00

Patent examination fees

Fee code

37 CFR

Description

Fee

Small entity
fee

Micro entity
fee

1311/2311/3311

1.16(o)

Utility examination fee

800.00

400.00

200.00

1312/2312/3312

1.16(p)

Design examination fee or Design CPA examination fee

640.00

320.00

160.00

1313/2313/3313

1.16(q)

Plant examination fee

660.00

330.00

165.00

1314/2314/3314

1.16(r)

Reissue examination fee or Reissue (Design CPA) examination fee

2,320.00

1,160.00

580.00

Patent post-allowance fees

Fee code

37 CFR

Description

Fee

Small entity
fee

Micro entity
fee

1501/2501/3501

1.18(a)(1)

Utility issue fee

1,200.00

600.00

300.00

1511/2511/3511

1.18(a)(1)

Reissue issue fee

1,200.00

600.00

300.00

1502/2502/3502

1.18(b)(1)

Design issue fee

740.00

370.00

185.00

1503/2503/3503

1.18(c)(1)

Plant issue fee

840.00

420.00

210.00

n/a

1.18(d)(1)

Publication fee for early, voluntary, or normal publication

0.00

0.00

0.00

1505/2505/3505

1.18(d)(3)

Publication fee for republication

320.00

320.00

320.00*

* Third-party filers are not eligible for the micro entity fee.

Patent extension of time fees

Fee code

37 CFR

Description

Fee

Small entity
fee

Micro entity
fee

1251/2251/3251

1.17(a)(1)

Extension for response within first month

220.00

110.00

55.00

1252/2252/3252

1.17(a)(2)

Extension for response within second month

640.00

320.00

160.00

1253/2253/3253

1.17(a)(3)

Extension for response within third month

1,480.00

740.00

370.00

1254/2254/3254

1.17(a)(4)

Extension for response within fourth month

2,320.00

1,160.00

580.00

1255/2255/3255

1.17(a)(5)

Extension for response within fifth month

3,160.00

1,580.00

790.00

The post U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) <br> Final Patent Fee Changes Become Effective October 2, 2020 appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
Ross Robinson and Stan Moore Selected as Best Lawyer 2020 https://shackelford.law/news/ross-robinson-and-stan-moore-selected-to-2020-best-lawyers/ Wed, 23 Sep 2020 20:31:20 +0000 https://shackelford.law/?p=3269 The attorneys of Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP continue to prove their excellence as lawyers across the country.

The post Ross Robinson and Stan Moore Selected as Best Lawyer 2020 appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
The attorneys of Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP continue to prove their excellence as lawyers across the country. Two key principles from our Dallas office have been selected as Best Lawyer for 2020. Ross Robinson, Partner, and Stanley “Stan” R. Moore, Of Counsel, have been selected for their respective area of practice. Our congratulations to them both for earning this prestigious award.

The post Ross Robinson and Stan Moore Selected as Best Lawyer 2020 appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>
Salesmanship Club of Dallas Elects Mike McKinley to Serve as its President https://shackelford.law/news/salesmanship-club-of-dallas-elects-mike-mckinley-to-serve-as-its-president/ Wed, 16 Sep 2020 15:44:16 +0000 https://shackelford.law/?p=3255 A longtime champion of the Salesmanship Club of Dallas and its impactful community service, Mike McKinley has been tapped to serve as the organization’s 101st president.

The post Salesmanship Club of Dallas Elects Mike McKinley to Serve as its President appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>

McKinley to Lead as the Service Organization Culminates its 100th Anniversary Year

Dallas, Texas (September 10, 2020) – A longtime champion of the Salesmanship Club of Dallas and its impactful community service, Mike McKinley has been tapped to serve as the organization’s 101st president.  Since 1920, the nonprofit service organization has been committed to changing the odds for children through the educational and therapeutic programs of Momentous Institute. The Salesmanship Club of Dallas is also the host organization of the AT&T Byron Nelson, its primary fundraiser for Momentous Institute. McKinley’s election culminates the Salesmanship Club of Dallas’ 100th anniversary year.

“For 100 years, the Salesmanship Club of Dallas has dedicated its efforts to support critical programs for children and families in areas of our community which lack equitable opportunities,” said McKinley. “We believe that prioritizing education and social emotional health will improve the ability of children to reach their full potential. It’s my honor to lead this organization forward in that mission, alongside my fellow Club members, as we continue to be a force of genuine service.” 

McKinley, a member of the Salesmanship Club of Dallas since 1992, has most recently served as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Salesmanship Club Charitable Golf of Dallas, Inc. and as Chairman of the Advisory Board for the Northern Texas PGA.  McKinley proved instrumental in the AT&T Byron Nelson’s move to its new home at TPC Craig Ranch in McKinney.  In 2013, McKinley served as Chairman of the AT&T Byron Nelson.

McKinley has 40 years of experience in banking, business and corporate law and is a founding partner in the law firm of Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP. He was named to the “Best Lawyers in Dallas” list, published by D Magazine, in Business Law in 2018.  As an active member of University Park United Methodist Church, McKinley has also served in leadership roles in several faith-based organizations. 

McKinley succeeds Pete Lodwick in the role. Lodwick has strategically navigated the organization and its fundraising efforts through the unprecedented COVID-19 crisis.  Though the 2020 AT&T Byron Nelson tournament could not be played due to the pandemic, the Club’s support of Momentous Institute has remained unwavering, under his leadership. Through the AT&T Byron Nelson, the Salesmanship Club of Dallas has raised $167 million for Momentous Institute since 1968, making it the largest charitable fundraiser on the PGA TOUR.

“The Salesmanship Club of Dallas’s first Club president Woodall Rodgers set the tone for the Club leadership by directing us to, ‘Do good, without being stuffy about it,’” said Lodwick. “One hundred years later, we are still wholeheartedly committed to transforming children’s lives. I’ve been honored to follow in that legacy and know Mike will continue to steward our organization and incomparable charity responsibly and with the utmost integrity.”

McKinley is committed to creating an environment where everyone can serve side by side with compassion and dignity.  He will serve a one-year term, alongside six members elected to the following leadership positions on the Salesmanship Club of Dallas Board of Directors:

  • First vice president: W. Kelvin Walker, Dallas Citizens Council
  • Second vice president: James K. McAuley, Texas Health Resources Foundation
  • Secretary: Edward W. Moore Jr., Frost Brown Todd LLC
  • Treasurer: Timothy P. Costello, Newstone Capital Partners, LLC
  • Momentous Institute Board Chair: Bruce W. Hunt, Petro-Hunt, LLC
  • Salesmanship Club Charitable Golf of Dallas Board Chair: John L. Jenkins, 42 Real Estate, LLC

First vice president W. Kelvin Walker is the CEO of the Dallas Citizens Council. He has been a member of the Salesmanship Club of Dallas since 2013. During his time at the Salesmanship Club, Walker has served on numerous boards and committees including: AT&T Byron Nelson Golf Board, Momentous Institute Governance Committee, Momentous Institute Marketing Committee, and the Salesmanship Club of Dallas Strategic Planning Committee. 

Additional members of the 2020-2021 Board of Directors include:

Mike Haggerty, Fields Family Office, Peter A. Lodwick, RGT Wealth Advisors, Timothy Marron Jr., BCW Food Products, Inc., W. Scott Ragland, Ragland Strother & Lafitte, Steven W. Van Amburgh, KDC Real Estate Development, William H. Vanderstraaten, Chief Partners, L.P., Walter A. Walne, Walne Family Holdings, Joseph A.I. Worsham, Worsham Properties, John M. Yeaman, Tyler Technologies, Retired, James Yoder, Velocis. 

About the Salesmanship Club of Dallas

Founded in 1920, the Salesmanship Club of Dallas is a nonprofit service organization of more than 600 business leaders dedicated to education and building and repairing social emotional health through the programs of Momentous Institute. The Salesmanship Club of Dallas hosts the AT&T Byron Nelson golf tournament which has raised over $167 million for Momentous Institute since 1968. Each year, Momentous Institute partners with over 5,500 children and family members through innovative education and therapeutic services, as well as, invests in research and training reaching far more children than could ever be seen directly.

Media Contact:

Rhonda Reddick
800-559-4534
rhonda@androvett.com

The post Salesmanship Club of Dallas Elects Mike McKinley to Serve as its President appeared first on Shackelford, Bowen, McKinley & Norton, LLP.

]]>