Alle indl�g af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor)

N�gleord: Danish American Dual Citizenship, Danish law, Dual Citizenship Udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor), den 12/03/15 7:57 PM Kategori: Publikationer

Dansk lov om dobbelt statsborgerskab træder i kraft pr. 1. september 2015

[:en]By: Boryana Arsova, J.D., LL.M., Associate

On December 18, 2014, the Danish parliament voted to pass a law which will allow Danes to become citizens of another country without having to give up their Danish citizenship.  The new law will also make it possible for people who have lost their Danish citizenship by becoming citizens of another country to reinstate their Danish citizenship during a five year period, from September 1, 2015 to August 31, 2020.

The new law will come into effect on September 1, 2015.  The reason for this delayed implementation is that Denmark, which is currently a party to the European Council’s Convention on the Reduction of Cases of Multiple Nationality and on Military Obligations in Cases of Multiple Nationality, needs to denounce Chapter I of that Convention, which provides that in case of voluntary naturalization nationals of Contracting Parties cannot retain their former nationality.  The denunciation requires a one-year notice and will take effect for Denmark on August 26, 2015.

If you want to take advantage of the new Danish law and become a dual citizen after September 1, 2015, this is what you need to know:

How to Apply for US Citizenship? 

If you are a Danish citizen and live in the United States, you may be eligible to apply for US citizenship if you meet the following requirements:

• You are at least 18 years old at the time of your application;
• You have been a U.S. permanent resident – a green card holder – for at least five years (three years if your permanent residency is based on marriage to a U.S. citizen);
• Demonstrate continuous residence and physical presence in the United States;
• Demonstrate that you have lived in the state or USCIS district where you will apply for U.S. Citizenship for at least three months;
• You are a person of good moral character;
• Successfully pass a U.S. civics test and an English test;
• Demonstrate an attachment to the principles and ideas of the U.S. Constitution; and
• Take an oath of allegiance to the United States.

When considering whether or not to apply for a U.S. citizenship, you should consider the benefits and privileges, as well as the obligations that follow from acquiring U.S. citizenship.

If you become a U.S. citizen, you will enjoy the following privileges:

• Bring family members to the United States: family members of U.S. citizens are given priority when legally immigrating to the United States.
• Right to vote in elections for public officials.
• Right to apply for federal employment requiring U.S. citizenship.

• Right to run for elected office.
• International protection: the United States protects its citizens abroad through its embassies and consulates.
• Federal Student Aid: the federal government provides different types of financial assistance for students, including scholarships and grants that are open exclusively to U.S. citizens.
• Estate planning benefits:

• The unlimited marital deduction applies only if the surviving spouse is a U.S. citizen. Under that rule, assets that are left to a surviving spouse, who is a U.S. citizen, are not subject to federal estate tax, no matter how much their value is. This rule, however, does not apply to a surviving spouse who is not a U.S. citizen, even if he or she is a permanent resident.
• If your spouse is a U.S. citizen, any gift given to him or her during your life is free of federal gift tax. If your spouse is not a U.S. citizen, however, the special tax-free rule for spouses is limited to $147,000 a year (for 2015; the amount is indexed for inflation).

As a U.S. citizen you will also have certain responsibilities, such as:

• Serve on a jury when called upon.
• Pay federal, state and local taxes honestly and on time.
• Support and defend the Constitution.
• Defend the country if the need should arise.
• Participate in the democratic process.
• Participate in your local community and stay informed on issues affecting your community.
• Respect and obey federal, state and local laws.

How to Regain Danish Citizenship?

If you have acquired the citizenship of another country and as a result have lost your Danish citizenship, you may be able to reinstate your Danish citizenship. Under the new law, you will be required to submit a declaration to reinstate your Danish citizenship within the five year period from the time the law comes into effect, i.e. September 1, 2015 until August 31, 2020. The declaration is available from Udlændinge- og Integrationsministeriet . The declaration must be submitted to Udlændinge- og Integrationsministeriet in Denmark; please contact your nearest Danish Consulate or Embassy for further instructions and assistance.

If a parent files a declaration to reinstate Danish citizenship, his or her unmarried child under the age of 18 will be automatically included in the declaration, unless it is explicitly stated that the child is not included. The parent filing the declaration must have custody of the child to be able to include him or her in the declaration.  If the child is adopted, the adoption process must have been completed before the child turns 12 years old and must have also been ratified by the Danish authorities.

A person who has been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment between the time he or she lost his or her Danish citizenship and the present will not be eligible for reinstatement of Danish citizenship.

Children Born Abroad

The new Danish law allowing dual citizenship will not affect the “22-Year Rule” applicable to children born abroad by one or two Danish parents. Under that rule, children who were born abroad but can demonstrate a close association with Denmark prior to their 22nd birthday, can apply to retain their citizenship.  The child must file the application either between the age of 20 and 21 OR between the age of 21 and 22 years, otherwise the child will forfeit his or her citizenship upon turning 22 years old.  The exact window for submitting the application depends on the country of origin of the documents submitted with the application. Please call your nearest Embassy or Consulate to find out when the application must be submitted.

Danes born abroad by one or two Danish parents and now over the age of 22 are still allowed to apply for “Proof of Danish Citizenship.” Again, a key requirement is that the application must show that the person maintained close ties with Denmark and that he or she had permanent residency in Denmark for at least a year before turning 22 years old.

For more information on the process of applying for a “Certificate of Danish Citizenship,” please contact the Danish Consulate or Embassy nearest you or read more at the website for Udlændinge- og Integrationsministeriet .

Important Caveats 

It is important to note that the old rules regarding dual citizenship in Denmark remained in effect until September 1, 2015.  This means that if you became a citizen of another country before that date, you automatically lost your Danish citizenship.

Also, please note that the reinstatement period under the new law is only five years.  If you do not file a declaration to reinstate your Danish citizenship within this period, you will not be able to take advantage of the simplified procedure under the new law, but would instead have to go through the general naturalization process in Denmark, which requires proof of continuous residency in Denmark.

Martensen Wright PC has a singular focus: Serving Danes in the US.  For more information on how to obtain U.S. citizenship and how the experienced attorneys of Martensen Wright PC can help you with the process, contact us at info@usa-eurolaw.com.[:da]Af: Boryana Arsova, J.D., LL.M., Associate

Den 18. december 2014 vedtog det danske Folketing en lov, der gør det muligt for danskerne at blive borgere i et andet land uden at skulle opgive deres danske statsborgerskab. Den nye lov vil også gøre det muligt for personer, der har mistet deres danske statsborgerskab ved netop at blive statsborger i et andet land, at generhverve deres danske statsborgerskab i en overgangsperiode på 5 år, nemlig fra den 1. september 2015 til 31. august 2020.

Årsagen til at denne nye lov først træder i kraft den 1. september 2015 er, at Danmark har tiltrådt Europarådets konvention, kapitel 1, der vedrører begrænsning af dobbelt statsborgerskab og værnepligt for personer med dobbelt statsborgerskab, og som nu skal opsiges. Opsigelsesvarslet er 1 år.

Hvis du overvejer at blive dobbelt statsborger efter den 1. september 2015, bør du være opmærksom på følgende:

Opnåelse af amerikansk statsborgerskab 

Hvis du er dansk statsborger og bor i USA, kan du blive amerikansk statsborger, hvis du opfylder følgende krav:

* Du er fyldt 18 år på ansøgningstidspunktet

* Du har været bosiddende i USA på Green Card (”U.S. Permanent Resident”) i mindst 5 år (3 år, hvis din permanente opholdstilladelse er baseret på ægteskab med en amerikansk statsborger)

* Du skal kunne demonstrere uafbrudt ophold og fysisk tilstedeværelse i USA

* Du skal kunne bevise, at du har boet mindst 3 måneder i den stat eller det USCIS- distrikt, hvor du ønsker at indgive din ansøgning om amerikansk statsborgerskab

* Du skal have god moralsk karakter

* Du skal kunne bestå en amerikansk samfundslæreprøve og en engelsk sprogtest

* Du skal kunne demonstrere kendskab til den amerikanske forfatning

* Du skal være villig til at aflægge troskabs-ed til USA (”Pledge of Allegiance”).

Når du overvejer at søge om amerikansk statsborgerskab, bør du også kende de fordele og privilegier samt de forpligtelser, der følger med erhvervelse af amerikansk statsborgerskab.

Som amerikansk statsborger vil du have følgende privilegier:

* Du får mulighed for at få familie til USA: Familiemedlemmer af amerikanske borgere prioriteres højere ved ansøgning om immigration til USA

* Du får stemmeret ved valg til offentlige embeder

* Du kan søge om føderal beskæftigelse i tilfælde, hvor det er et krav, at du er amerikansk statsborger

* Du bliver valgbar og kan opstille som valgkandidat

* Du nyder international beskyttelse: USA beskytter sine borgere i udlandet gennem sine ambassader og konsulater

* Du får adgang til Federal Student Aid: Den føderale regering giver forskellige former for økonomisk støtte til studerende, herunder legater og stipendier, der kun er til rådighed for amerikanske borgere

* Arveregler – Det ubegrænsede ægteskabsfradrag gælder kun, hvis den længstlevende ægtefælle er amerikansk statsborger. I henhold til denne lov beskattes aktiver, der er efterladt til den længstlevende amerikanske ægtefælle, ikke føderalt, uanset aktivernes værdi. Denne regel er imidlertid ikke gældende for en ikke-amerikansk længstlevende ægtefælle, selvom han eller hun er fastboende i USA. – Hvis du, mens du er i live, giver din amerikanske ægtefælle en gave, skal der ikke svares føderal gaveafgift. Hvis din ægtefælle ikke er amerikansk statsborger, begrænser den særlige regel for skattefrie gaver til ægtefæller beløbet til 147.000 dollars om året (for 2015 er beløbet inflationsreguleret).

Som amerikansk statsborger vil du også have visse forpligtelser, såsom: 

Du skal

* stå til rådighed som jurymedlem

* betale føderale, statslige og lokale skatter

* støtte og forsvare den amerikanske forfatning

* forsvare landet, hvis behovet skulle opstå

* deltage i den demokratiske proces

* tage aktiv del i, hvad der foregår i dit lokalområde

* respektere og overholde føderale, statslige og lokale love.

Generhvervelse af dansk statsborgerskab 

Hvis du har opnået statsborgerskab i et andet land, og som følge heraf har mistet dit danske statsborgerskab, får du pr. 1. september 2015 mulighed for at generhverve dit danske statsborgerskab i en overgangsperiode på 5 år, der løber fra den 1. september 2015 til og med den 31. august 2020. I denne periode er det muligt for tidligere danske statsborgere samt deres mindreårige børn at generhverve dansk statsborgerskab ved en erklæring. Erklæringen, som kan findes på Udlændinge- og Integrationsministeriets hjemmeside, www.uim.dk , skal indsendes til Indfødsretskontoret (Udlændinge- og Integrationsministeriet) i Danmark. Vi råder folk til at kontakte det nærmeste danske konsulat eller ambassade for yderligere vejledning og assistance.

Hvis en forælder indgiver erklæring om generhvervelse af dansk statsborgerskab, vil vedkommendes ugifte børn under 18 år, som forælderen har forældremyndighed over, automatisk være omfattet af ansøgningen, medmindre det udtrykkeligt er angivet, at barnet ikke er inkluderet. Hvis barnet er adopteret, skal adoptionen være gennemført, inden barnet fylder 12 år, og adoptionen skal tillige være godkendt af de danske myndigheder.

Der gøres opmærksom på, at en person, der er blevet idømt frihedsstraf, som også indebærer en frihedsstraf ifølge de danske regler, vil ikke kunne generhverve sit danske statsborgerskab.

Børn født i udlandet 

Den nye danske lov, der tillader dobbelt statsborgerskab, påvirker ikke unge, der er omfattet af “22-års-reglen”. I henhold til denne regel vil børn født i udlandet, og som kan påvise den fornødne tilknytning til Danmark, kunne ansøge om at bevare deres danske statsborgerskab efter det fyldte 22. år.  Ansøgningen om ”Bevarelse af Dansk Indfødsret” skal indgives enten mellem det 20. og 21. år eller mellem det 21. og 22. år, afhængigt af hvilket land udstedte de attester og dokumenter, der vedhæftes ansøgningen.  Kontakt venligst den nærmeste danske representation for at finde ud af hvornår ansøgning skal indgives. Hvis ansøgningen ikke indgives, eller hvis ansøgningen ikke bliver godkendt af Indfødsretskontoret, vil barnet automatisk miste sit danske statsborgerskab ved det fyldte 22. år.

Danskere, der er født i udlandet af en eller to danske forældre og som nu er over 22 år og ikke fik søgt om ”Bevarelse af Dansk Indfødsret” kan dog søge om “Bevis for Dansk Indfødsret”. Igen er det et centralt krav, at ansøger kan bevise et tæt tilhørsforhold til Danmark. Det er i denne forbindelse yderligere et krav, at ansøger har haft fast bopæl i Danmark og har været tilmeldt Folkeregistret i mindst et år før det fyldte 22. år.

Hvis du ønsker mere information om ansøgning om ”Bevarelse af Dansk Indfødsret” eller “Bevis for Dansk Indfødsret,” kan du kontakte nærmeste danske repræsentation eller læse mere på hjemmesiden for Udlændinge- og Integrationsministeriet .

Vigtigt forbehold 

Det er vigtigt at bemærke, at den nye lov om dobbelt statsborgerskab først trådte i kraft den 1. september 2015. Dette betyder, at hvis du blev statsborger i et andet land, inden 1. september 2015, mistede du automatisk dit danske statsborgerskab.

Bemærk også, at ansøgningsperioden for generhvervelse af dansk statsborgerskab kun er 5 år, nemlig fra den 1. september 2015 til og med den 31. august 2020. Hvis du ikke indsender en erklæring om at generhverve dit danske statsborgerskab indenfor den nævnte periode, vil du ikke længere kunne nøjes med at indsende en erklæring, men vil i stedet skulle igennem den normale naturaliseringsproces, hvilket bl.a. kræver permanent ophold i Danmark i en vis årrække.

Martensen Wright PC har ét overordnet mål: At hjælpe danskere i USA. For mere information om hvordan du får amerikansk statsborgerskab, generhverver dit danske statsborgerskab, eller hvordan de erfarne advokater i Martensen Wright PC kan hjælpe dig med processen, kontakt os på info@usa-eurolaw.com.[:]

N�gleord: Udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor), den 28/02/13 11:00 PM Kategori: Publikationer

Enforcing Foreign Judgments in California by Loren Lunsford, Esq.

Foreign Judgments may be enforced in California in the same manner as California judgments. However, before a foreign judgment may be enforced, it must be recognized by the California Courts. The procedure for recognition of the foreign judgment depends on whether the foreign judgment is classified as a sister state judgment or a foreign country money judgment.

A sister state judgment is defined as “that part of any judgment, decree, or order of a court of a state of the United States, other than California, which requires the payment of money, but does not include a support order as defined in Section 155 of the Family Code.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1710.10. A foreign-country judgment, on the other hand, means “a judgment of a court of a foreign country” and includes “a judgment by any Indian tribe recognized by the government of the United States.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1714(b). A ’Foreign Country’ means a government other than any of the following:

(1) The United States.
(2) A state, district, commonwealth, territory, or insular possession of the United States.
(3) Any other government with regard to which the decision in this state as to whether to recognize a judgment of the government’s courts is initially subject to determination under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution.

Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1714(a).

Subject to some exceptions, California will recognize a foreign-country judgment to the extent that the judgment both: (1) grants or denies recovery of a sum of money; and under the law of the foreign country where rendered, is final, conclusive, and enforceable. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1715(a). California, however, will not recognize a foreign-country judgment even if the judgment grants or denies recovery of a sum of money, to the extent the judgment is for taxes, a fine, or a penalty. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1715(b).

The procedure for recognition of a sister state judgment is different than that for recognition of a foreign-country money judgment. The judgment creditor with a sister state judgment simply files an application with the superior court in the county where the judgment debtor resides, or, if no judgment debtor resides in the states, in any county, requesting that the judgment be recognized. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §§1710.15(a) and 1710.20(a) and (b).

The application for recognition shall be executed under oath and shall include all of the following:
(1) A statement that an action in this state on the sister state judgment is not barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
(2) A statement, based on the applicant’s information and belief, that no stay of enforcement of the sister state judgment is currently in effect in the sister state.
(3) A statement of the amount remaining unpaid under the sister state judgment and, if accrued interest is to be included in the California judgment, a statement of the amount of interest accrued on the sister state judgment (computed at the rate of interest applicable to the judgment under the law of the sister state), a statement of the rate of interest applicable to the judgment under the law of the sister state, and a citation to the law of the sister state establishing the rate of interest.
(4) A statement that no action based on the sister state judgment is currently pending in any court in this state and that no judgment has previously been entered in any proceeding in this state.
(5) Where the judgment debtor is an individual, a statement setting forth the name and last known residence address of the judgment debtor. Where the judgment debtor is a corporation, a statement of the corporation’s name, place of incorporation, and whether the corporation, if foreign, has qualified to do business in California. Where the judgment debtor is a partnership, a statement of the name of the partnership, whether it is a foreign partnership, and, if it is a foreign partnership, whether it has filed a statement pursuant to Section 15800 of the Corporation Code designating an agent for service of process.
(6) A statement setting forth the name and address of the judgment creditor.

Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. 1710.15(b). In addition to the above-referenced statements, the application for recognition shall also include a properly authenticated copy of the sister state judgment. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1710.15(c). The California Judicial Council has approved Form Number EJ-105 which may be used in applying for recognition of a sister state judgment.

Upon the filing of the application for recognition, the clerk shall enter a judgment based on the application in the amount remaining unpaid under the sister state judgment, plus the amount of interest accrued on the sister state judgment and the amount of the fee for filing the application for entry of the sister state judgment. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1710.25(a). Entry of the judgment is made in the same manner as entry of an original judgment of the California court. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1710.25(b).

Notice of the application for recognition of a sister state judgment is not required to be served on the judgment debtor prior to entry of the judgment, however, once the judgment has been recognized and entered as a judgment with the court, the judgment creditor is required to serve a notice of entry of judgment promptly upon the judgment debtor in the manner provided for service of summons (Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §§415.10, et seq.). Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1710.30(a). The notice shall be in the form prescribed by the Judicial Council and shall inform the judgment debtor that the judgment debtor has 30 days within which to make a motion to vacate the judgment. Id. The Judicial Council has approved Form Number EJ-110 which may be used to provide notice of entry of judgment.

A writ of execution cannot be issued and the judgment creditor cannot begin enforcement of the recognized judgment until at least 30 days after the judgment creditor serves notice of entry of the judgment on the judgment debtor. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1710.45(a). Not later than 30 days after service of notice of entry of judgment upon the judgment debtor, the judgment debtor may file a motion to vacate the judgment based “on any ground which would be a defense to an action in this state on the sister state judgment, including the ground that the amount of interest accrued on the sister state judgment and included in the judgment entered . . . is incorrect.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1710.40(a).

The judgment debtor’s filing a motion to vacate the judgment can be a basis for the court to grant a stay of enforcement of the judgment. The court may also grant a stay of enforcement where:

(1) An appeal from the sister state judgment is pending or may be taken in the state which originally rendered the judgment. Under this paragraph, enforcement shall be stayed until the proceedings on appeal have been concluded or the time for appeal has expired.
(2) A stay of enforcement of the sister state judgment has been granted in the sister state. Under this paragraph, enforcement shall be stayed until the sister state stay of enforcement expires or is vacated.
* * *
(4) Any other circumstance exists where the interests of justice require a stay of enforcement.
Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1710.50(a).

If no stay has been entered and more than 30 days have passed from the date when the judgment debtor was served with notice of entry of judgment, the recognized judgment “shall have the same effect as an original money judgment of the court and may be enforced or satisfied in like manner.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1710.35.

Where a sister state judgment may be entered by the clerk upon filing of an application, recognition of a foreign country money judgment must be initiated either by the filing of an original matter or may be raised by counterclaim, cross-claim, or affirmative defense. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1718. The party seeking recognition of a foreign-country judgment has the burden of establishing that the foreign-country judgment is entitled to recognition. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1715(c).

To the extent the foreign-country judgment grants or denies recovery of a sum of money and, under the law of the foreign country where rendered, is final, conclusive, and enforceable, and is not for taxes, a fine, or penalty, California shall recognized such a judgment unless:

(1) The judgment was rendered under a judicial system that does not provide impartial tribunals or procedures compatible with the requirements of due process of law.
(2) The foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the subject matter.
(3) The foreign court did not have jurisdiction over the subject matter.
Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1716(b). In addition to the above-referenced basis by which a California court may not recognize a foreign-country judgment, a court in California is not required to recognize a foreign-country judgment if any of the following apply:
(1) The defendant in the proceeding in the foreign court did not receive notice of the proceeding in sufficient time to enable the defendant to defend.
(2) The judgment was obtained by fraud that deprived the losing party of an adequate opportunity to present its case.
(3) The judgment of the cause of action or claim for relief upon which the judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of the State of California or the United States.
(4) The judgment conflicts with another final and conclusive judgment.
(5) The proceeding in the foreign court was contrary to an agreement between the parties under which the dispute in question was to be determined otherwise than by proceedings in that foreign court.
(6) In the case of jurisdiction based only on personal service, the foreign court was a seriously inconvenient forum for the trial of the action.
(7) The judgment was rendered in circumstances that raise substantial doubt about the integrity of the rendering court with respect to the judgment.
(8) The specific proceeding in the foreign court leading to the judgment was not compatible with the requirements of due process of law.
(9) The judgment includes recovery for a claim of defamation unless the court determines that the defamation law applied by the foreign court provided at least as much protection for freedom of speech and the press as provided by both the United States and California Constitutions.

Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1716(c).

While the initial burden is on the party seeking recognition to establish that the foreign judgment meets the requirements of Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1715, the party resisting recognition has the burden of establishing a ground for non-recognition exists. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1716(d).

With regards to the requirement that the foreign court had personal jurisdiction over the defendant, a foreign-country judgment shall not be refused recognition for lack of personal jurisdiction if any of the following apply:
(1) The defendant was served with process personally in the foreign country.
(2) The defendant voluntarily appeared in the proceeding, other than for the purpose of protecting property seized or threatened with seizure in the proceeding or of contesting the jurisdiction of the court over the defendant.
(3) The defendant, before the commencement of the proceeding, had agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of the foreign court with respect to the subject matter involved.
(4) The defendant was domiciled in the foreign country when the proceeding was instituted or was a corporation or other form of business organization that had its principal place of business in, or was organized under the laws of, the foreign country.
(5) The defendant had a business office in the foreign country and the proceeding in the foreign court involved a cause of action or claim for relief arising out of business done by the defendant through that office in the foreign country.
(6) The defendant operated a motor vehicle or airplane in the foreign country and the proceeding involved a cause of action or claim for relief arising out of that operation.

Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1717(a). The above-referenced list is not exclusive and the courts of California are free to recognize bases of personal jurisdiction other than those listed above as sufficient to support a foreign-country judgment. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 1717(b).

Once a California court finds that the foreign-country judgment is entitled to recognition, to the extent that the foreign-country judgment grants or denies recovery of a sum of money, the foreign-country judgment is both:
(a) Conclusive between the parties to the same extent as the judgment of a sister state entitled to full faith and credit in this state would be conclusive.
(b) Enforceable in the same manner and to the same extent as a judgment rendered in California.
Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1719.

To the extent that the foreign-country judgment is rendered in a currency other than the currency of the United States, the Uniform Foreign-Money Claims Act (“UFMCA”) provides that except in the case of assessed costs, “a judgment or award on a foreign-money claim shall be stated in an amount of the money of the claim.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 676.7(a). Such a judgment is payable in that foreign money or, at the option of the judgment debtor, “in the amount of United States dollars which will purchase that foreign money on the conversion date at a bank-offered spot rate.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §676.7(b). Costs assessed by the California court shall be entered in United States dollars. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §676.7(c).

When seeking recognition of a foreign-country judgment that is stated in the money of the foreign country, California law provides that the judgment rendered by a California court substantially in the following form complies with the requirements of the UFMCA:

“IT IS ADJUDGED AND ORDERED, that Defendant (insert name) pay to Plaintiff (insert name) the sum of (insert amount in the foreign money) plus interest on that sum at the rate of (insert rate – see Section 676.9) percent a year or, at the option of the judgment debtor, the number of United States dollars which will purchase the (insert name of foreign money) with interest due, at a bank-offered spot rate at or near the close of business on the banking day next before or near the close of business on the banking day next before the day of payment, together with assessed costs of (insert amount) United States dollars.”

Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §676.7(f).

California Code of Civil Procedure section 676.9 provides that with respect to a foreign-money claim, recovery of pre-judgment or pre-award interest and the rate of interest to be applied in the action or distribution proceeding, except as provided in subdivision (b), are matters of the substantive law governing the right to recovery under the conflict-of-laws rules of California. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §676.9(a). Subdivision (b) requires the court or an arbitrator to “increase or decrease the amount of pre-judgment or pre-award interest otherwise payable in a judgment or award in foreign money to the extent required by the law of [California] governing failure to make or accept an offer of settlement or offer of judgment, or conduct by a party or its attorney causing undue delay or expense.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §676.9(b).

The judgment or award entered on a foreign-money claim bears interest at the rate applicable to judgments of California. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 676.9(c). A “foreign-money claim” means “a claim upon an obligation to pay, or a claim for recovery of a loss, expressed in or measured by a foreign money,” and for the purposes of this article would include a foreign judgment expressed in a foreign money. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §676.1(6).

Once a foreign-country money judgment is recognized and judgment is entered on it, or a judgment is entered on a sister-state judgment under the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution, either judgment may be enforced in the same way and in the same manner as a California State judgment.

N�gleord: Udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor), den 13/12/12 9:41 PM Kategori: Publikationer

Nye USCIS værktøjer der skal hjælpe udenlandske iværksættere med at starte og udvikle virksomheder i USA

In November this year the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has launched a new “Entrepreneur Pathways” resource center for foreign entrepreneurs who seek to start a business in the United States. This new online resource offers useful tools designed to help entrepreneurs understand what visa or green card options are available to them depending on their particular circumstance. If you are an entrepreneur who is considering opening your own business in the United States, it is a great tool to explore and a good place to start before you contact an immigration lawyer.

The resource center can be assessed through the following link:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/eir

The resource center has two main tools: a “Getting Started” page, which includes a detailed overview of the immigration process and a “Visa Guide” to the nonimmigrant visa categories available to entrepreneurs.

“Getting Started” page can be accessed here:

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/About%20Us/EIR/EIR-SlideShow/OverviewNew.html

makes a very important distinction between a nonimmigrant and an immigrant. It also provides a very detailed description of the US visa application process.

“Visa Guide” page can be accessed here:

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.749cabd81f5ffc8fba713d10526e0aa0/?vgnextoid=ef26d8f4a80a8310VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=ef26d8f4a80a8310VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

offers information regarding several nonimmigrant visa options that allow foreign entrepreneurs to explore or start a new business in the United States. In addition to the general information, Visa Guide resource has specific questions related to the requirements for each visa type. These questions can be very helpful in evaluating what kind of visa would be suitable in a particular situation. Another great feature of this web resource is the description of the types of documents that may be submitted to the US immigration authorities in order to satisfy specific visa requirements.

Nye USCIS værktøjer der skal hjælpe udenlandske iværksættere med at starte og udvikle virksomheder i USA

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) lancerede i november måned 2012 et nyt ressourcecenter “Entrepreneur Pathways” for udenlandske iværksættere, som ønsker at starte egen virksomhed i USA. Dette nye online-ressourcecenter tilbyder nyttige værktøjer og informationer, der skal hjælpe iværksættere med at finde ud af, hvilke visum- eller greencard-muligheder, der er tilgængelige for dem alt afhængig af deres specifikke situation. Hvis du er iværksætter, og du overvejer at starte egen virksomhed i USA, er det et fantastisk værktøj at udforske og et godt sted at starte, før du kontakter en immigrationsadvokat.
Dette ressourcecenter finder du ved at følge dette link:

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/eir

Ressourcecentret har to hovedværktøjer: “Getting Started” indeholder en detaljeret oversigt over immigrationsprocessen, og “Visa Guide” indeholder korte beskrivelser af de ikke-immigrant visumkategorier, som er til rådighed for iværksættere.
Introduktionssiden “Getting Started” kan du finde her:

http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/About%20Us/EIR/EIR-SlideShow/OverviewNew.html

Denne side forklarer forskellen på ikke-immigrant og immigrant, som mange blander sammen. På denne side kan du også finde en meget detaljeret beskrivelse af visumansøgningsprocessen til USA.

“Visa Guide” -sides kan du finde her:

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.749cabd81f5ffc8fba713d10526e0aa0/?vgnextoid=ef26d8f4a80a8310VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=ef26d8f4a80a8310VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD

Denne side indeholder information om adskellige ikke-immigrant visummuligheder for udenlandske iværksættere til at udforske eller starte virksomhed i USA. Ud over de generelle oplysninger om hvert visum, stiller ”Visa Guide”-siden også en række spørgsmål, som man selv kan besvare for at finde ud af, om man lever op til kravene for det enkelte visum. Disse spørgsmål kan være nyttige til at vurdere, hvilket slags visum, der er bedst egnet til en bestemt person. En anden behjælpelig ressource på denne side er beskrivelsen af de typer dokumentation, som kan bruges overfor de amerikanske immigrationsmyndigheder for at imødekomme specifikke visumkrav.

N�gleord: D&B, D&B Record, Dunn & Bradstreet, greencard, greencard application, request for evidence, USCIS, VIBE, VIBE system, VIBE toll, visa, visa application Udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor), den 12/04/12 8:14 PM Kategori: Publikationer

Another Hurdle in Employment-based Applications for US Visas and Green Cards

Another Hurdle in Employment-based Applications for US Visas and Green Cards.
By: Olga Quinones, LL.M., Legal Assistant

Obtaining US work visas and employment-based green cards is a challenging process nowadays. The US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) – a US government agency that processes many visa and green card applications – has become very restrictive in their review of the work visas and green card applications. This results in visa/green card processing delays and even denials. One of the recent developments is the addition of a web-based VIBE (Validation Instrument for Business Enterprises) tool. The USCIS introduced this new web-based tool to validate certain information about businesses and organizations that apply for work visas and employment-based green cards. For more information, please visit the USCIS VIBE page.

After numerous complaints from the immigration attorneys and companies regarding this new tool, the USCIS has published a New Streamlined Process for Submitting Information used in USCIS VIBE. You can find the description of this New Streamlined Process here.

VIBE may be a useful tool for the USCIS, but it is a hurdle for companies and immigration attorneys. VIBE allows the USCIS to crosscheck the company-related information contained in the visa/green card application against the information available from the Dun & Bradstreet report. Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) is a commercial database that provides information on businesses and corporations for use in credit decisions, B2B marketing and supply chain management. D&B can obtain company information from various sources and create a database without the company’s knowledge. If during the VIBE crosscheck the USCIS sees that some information is missing from the D&B database or if some information contradicts the information in the visa/green card application, the USCIS issues a Request for Evidence asking the company to provide the additional documentation showing the missing information or explaining the discrepancy. Such Requests for Evidence are issued even in cases where the application package submitted to the USCIS already included the official corporate documentation from the company showing the information required by the immigration regulations. Needless to say, these Requests for Evidence delay the visa/green card application process and place an additional burden on the company and the attorneys representing the company before the USCIS.

In order to minimize the risk of receiving a D&B-related Requests for Evidence, we advise our clients to update the company’s D&B record at least two weeks before the visa/green card application is submitted to the USCIS. In many cases we are able to update the D&B database on our clients’ behalf because our office provides corporate secretary services for the majority of our clients. We know exactly what information the USCIS is looking for, so we are in the best position to update the D&B record. This additional service saves our clients the time and effort of updating the D&B database themselves. Such D&B updates have become a necessary step in the employment-based visa and green card application process.

N�gleord: 401(k), California, EDD, ESD, expenses, federal tax, federal withholding tax, FUTA, internal revenue service, IRS, medicare tax, payroll, payroll tax, payroll tax withholding, social security tax, state withholding tax, SUI, unemployment, unemployment tax, United States tax, withholding Udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor), den 12/04/12 6:38 PM Kategori: Publikationer

Payroll Tax Withholding and Expenses in the United States

Payroll Tax Withholding and Expenses in the United States
By Nancy E. Miller, PHR

Payroll taxes are administered by a variety of agencies in the United States, depending on where your employees work and live. In this article, you will learn about the main taxes that all employers must either withhold from their employees’ paychecks or which employers must themselves pay as a payroll expense. We will also introduce some of the more unusual taxes that appear at times from state to state or even city to city.

Payroll Tax Withholdings

Each employee must have the following types of payroll taxes withheld from their paycheck:
– Social security tax
– Medicare tax
– Federal withholding tax
– State withholding tax (in most states)
– Other miscellaneous taxes in some states or cities

Social security and Medicare taxes are administered and paid to the federal Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service (IRS). These taxes are used to provide for a number of federally administered programs to help disabled, unemployed and retired citizens. The taxes are paid partially by the employees as a withholding tax and partially by the employer as a payroll tax expense.

For many years, Social Security tax was 12.4% of the employee’s wages up to a particular wage base for the current year (for 2012 the wage base is USD 110,110). Half of this was paid by the employee and half by the employer. However, in 2011, the federal government instituted a temporary tax cut for employees where the employee would only be required to pay 4.2% of their wages up to the wage base while the employer continued to pay 6.2%. This tax cut has been renewed by the government through December 31, 2012.

Medicare is also paid partially by the employee and partially by the employer. Currently the employee must pay 1.45% of all their taxable wages while the employer also pays 1.45% of the taxable wages.

Federal Withholding Tax is also administered by the IRS. Anyone who earns wages that are taxable by the federal government must file a tax return each year. The employer must be able to calculate the appropriate amount of Federal Withholding Tax to withhold from each employee’s check every payday. Therefore every new employee must complete a Form W-4, Employee’s Withholding Allowance, and turn it in to their employer. Current employees may complete a new Form W-4 at any time if necessary. If you are using a payroll service, you simply need to give them the information that is on the completed Form W-4 and the payroll service will access the tax tables provided by the IRS to calculate the appropriate amount.

Most states also have a State Withholding Tax which is similar to the Federal Withholding Tax. Each state has its own unique tax return, tax table, and method of payment. Some states even have their own withholding form similar to a Form W-4 that employees must complete in order to calculate the State Withholding Tax. We can help you determine your state’s requirements. Your payroll service can also be of great help in this area.

Some states, such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky and Colorado, also have local taxes. Each of these types of taxes is unique. For example, in Pennsylvania the local tax is a municipality tax that is used to fund local school districts and emergency services. In Colorado, only a few cities have a local tax – this tax is called an Occupational Privilege Tax and is assessed on anyone who works in that city, but not on people who live in the city and work outside the city.

In addition to state and local withholding taxes, some states have additional special withholding requirements. For example, California employees must pay 1% of their taxable wages to the state-run Disability Insurance program. Three states (Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Alaska) require employees to pay part of the unemployment tax. Because each of these taxes is unique, it is very important to check with us or your payroll service when you hire an employee in a new state to avoid future penalties and interest.

Employer Tax Expenses

In addition to the withholding taxes, there are also a few taxes that the employer must pay:
– Social security
– Medicare
– Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
– State Unemployment Tax (SUI)
As mentioned above, the employer pays part of the social security tax. Currently the employer portion is 6.2% of taxable wages for the first USD 110,110 that each employee earns in the year. The employer portion of Medicare is 1.45% of taxable wages.

FUTA tax is an employer tax of 0.08% that only applies to the first USD 7,000 that each employee earns in a calendar year. Sometimes at the end of the year you may be required to pay extra FUTA tax if your employees work in a state that has experienced a “credit reduction.” This is an extra tax levied against employers in states that have taken out loans from the FUTA program in order to fund their own SUI programs and not paid the loans back yet. Your payroll service will let you know if you are required to pay the extra credit reduction at the end of the year.

SUI tax is administered by each state in order to run their unemployment and worker training programs. Each state has its own wage base and each employer is assigned their own SUI rate, based on how many of their former employees have used the state unemployment system. Each state will send you your company’s new SUI rate before the beginning of each year. Be sure to forward this information on to your payroll service.

Most states have similar SUI agencies and refer to them as “Department of Labor” or “Department of Employment.” But other states are unique. For example, Washington has an “Employment Security Department” and California runs both their withholding and their SUI program under the same agency, the “Employment Development Department.” Another oddity is New Jersey, which bases its SUI rates on a fiscal year that runs from July through June instead of a calendar year and also requires employers to deduct a portion of the unemployment tax from their employees.

Tax Exemptions

Some types of companies are exempt from paying certain types of tax expenses. In addition, there are a few types of employees who do not have to pay certain types of withholding taxes. Plus, there are certain types of payments and deductions that can reduce an employees’ taxable wages.

Most employers are required to pay unemployment taxes, both federal (FUTA) and state (SUI). Charities and Non-Profit companies that are eligible under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code are exempt from paying these and other taxes. Please be sure to let your payroll service know if you believe that your company is exempt from payroll taxes.

Some of your employees may be exempt from having certain taxes withheld from their pay. Certain workers who are in the United States on a F-1, J-1, M-1, or Q-1/Q-2 nonimmigrant status visas may be exempt from paying social security and Medicare. In addition, the United States and Demark have entered into an Agreement providing an exemption to the payment of social security tax. This Agreement covers some Danish residents employed by Danish companies who are sent by their employer to work in the United States for a temporary period of time. It is very important that you speak with one of our attorneys regarding the applicability of these tax exemptions before asking the payroll service to stop withholding taxes!

Many employees take advantage of opportunities to lower their taxable wages through deferrals to a 401(k) retirement plan or health insurance-related deductions. These plans must be sponsored by the employer and should be administered by a provider who is familiar with the related tax laws. Retirement plans and health insurance programs are an excellent way to attract and keep the best employees. Please let us know if you would like to set up any of these programs and we will help you find an appropriate provider.

If you have any other questions about processing payroll in the United States, please feel free to email or call us at any time.

N�gleord: ccTLD, cubersquatters, cyberpiracy, cyberpirate, cyberpirates, cybersquatters, cybersquatting, domain, famous trademark, famous trademarks, gTLD, gTLD Applicant Guidebook, ICANN, infringement, secondary market, TLD Application system, Top Level Domain, trademark, trademark infringement, WIPO Udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor), den 4/08/11 11:22 PM Kategori: Publikationer

Dangers Inherent in New Top Level Domain (gTLD) Sale

Piracy on the Worldwide Web:
What Trademark Holders Need to Know About ICANN’S New Top Level Domain Name Decision
By Loren Lunsford, Esq.

On June 20, 2011, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (“ICANN”) announced that its Board of Directors had approved a plan to allow an increase in the number of available generic top-level domains (“gTLDs”). Top-level domains, TLDs, are the right most label in a domain name. Examples of which are .com, .org, .info, .us, .dk, etc. TLDs with two letters are designated as country code TLDs (“ccTLDs”). Accordingly, .us is the ccTLD for the United States, .de for Germany, .dk for Denmark, .ch for China, and so forth. TLDs with three or more letters are gTLDs. These are the commonly found .com, .org, and .info. There are currently 22 gTLDs.

According to a press release, due to ICANN’s recent decision “internet address names will be able to end with almost any word in any language.” As further stated in the press release, “virtually every organization with an online presence could be affected in some way.” This is especially true for trademark owners and their need to police their marks on the internet. Not only will trademark owners need to police the use of their trademarks in domain names, which will become increasingly harder with an infinite number of gTLDs to deal with, but also in the gTLDs themselves, i.e., .nike.

The fear is that cyberpirates and cybersquatters will obtain domain names and gTLDs utilizing trademarked words and terms and either hold them ransom, demanding excessive payments from the trademark owners, or will use the trademarked terms to drive traffic to their own websites selling competing products. There are laws in place, both in the United States and internationally, that protect trademark owners from this type of infringement. However, the costs in pursuing multiple cyberpirates and cybersquatters can quickly mount, especially for smaller companies.

ICANN’s release of new gTLDs is set to begin in January, 2012. In an effort to provide protection to trademark owners, ICANN has drafted application procedures which will allow trademark owners to participate in the application process – the process gives the trademark owner a voice, allowing them to object to applications they believe would infringe on their trademarks.

Trademark owners would be advised to develop a strategy now, well ahead of the beginning of the application process, on how they propose to protect their marks in light of ICANN’s decision to open the field of gTLDs. The following summary of the application process will aid trademark owners in developing their strategy.

ICAAN’S new gTLD application process

ICANN has set out the new gTLD application process in the “gTLD Applicant Guidebook” (“Guidebook”) published on May 30, 2011. As the Guidebook states, it has yet to be approved and remains subject to further consultation and review.

The Guidebook places several barriers before potential cyberpirates and cybersquatters, in an effort to keep them at bay. The first hurdle, and a not so insignificant hurdle, is the evaluation fee. At the opening of the application period, potential applicants must first register in the TLD Application System, and pay a deposit of $5,000. Following registration and the payment of the deposit, an application must complete the full application and pay $180,000, as the remainder of the evaluation fee. The total $185,000 application fee should dissuade casual cybersquatters and cyberpirates out of the application process.

Additionally, ICANN does not permit individuals to apply for gTLDs, and corporations applying for gTLDs must demonstrate financial capability to operate a gTLD registry and financial planning in preparation for long-term stability of the new gTLD. As part of the evaluation process, ICANN also reviews whether the applicant has a history of cybersquatting or cyberpiracy. The initial barriers in the application process may provide some comfort to trademark holders that their marks will not be held hostage by squatters and pirates. Others, however, may want to take more proactive steps to protect their intellectual property. These owners can either make protective registrations – applying for their own gTLDs, or participate in voicing their objections during the application process.

Those companies desiring to file defensive registrations are advised to make the decision now and to begin gathering the documentation and information necessary to complete the gTLD application. The initial registration period is short (60 days) and limited to 1000 gTLDs a year, regardless of how many applications are received. Because of the high evaluation cost, most companies will find that applying for their own gTLDs is not worth the expense. Trademark owners not desiring to make defensive filings can still protect their intellectual property by making formal and informal objections during the evaluation process.

At the close of the application period, if an applicant has submitted a complete application and paid the required application fee, the application enters into the evaluation process. Incomplete applications and applications without a full evaluation fee payment are not considered. Applications passing the initial administrative completeness check are then posted to the public for comments.

Once an application is posted, the public is invited to post comments related to the application. The public comment period lasts 60 days and is open to everyone to submit their comments. This comment period provides an opportunity for a trademark holder to make informal comments directing evaluators to deficiencies in a specific application and to the existence of possible trademark infringement.

Public comments are not formal objections and are not treated as such. The evaluators are not arbiters deciding the merits of a trademark dispute. By making an informal public comment, a trademark owner is hoping that the evaluator will acknowledge the comment and provide the applicant with an early warning highlighting the potential trademark infringement, and that the applicant voluntarily withdraws the application. Barring voluntary withdrawal, a trademark owner’s last line of defense against the issuance of a potential infringing gTLD is to file a formal objection.

Objection Process and Dispute Resolution

The objection period lasts for 7 months, within which time a trademark owner may file a formal objection. There are only four bases for formal objections: String Confusion; Legal Rights; Public Interest; and Community Objection. Trademark issues fall within the Legal Rights category. You must be the rightsholder in order to file an objection in the Legal Rights category. Formal objections are not filed with ICANN, but rather with the appropriate Dispute Resolution Service Provider (”DRSP”) for the applicable objection category. The DSRP for the Legal Rights category is the Arbitration and Mediation Center of the World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”).

Objections are filed electronically. The electronic addresses for filling objections have yet to be created. Objections must be submitted in English. All objections must be filed separately. If an Objector wishes to object on more than one ground or to more than one application, the Objector must file separate objections with the appropriate DRSP(s).

Objections must contain the following information:
1. The names and contact information of the Objector;
2. A statement of the Objector’s basis for standing; and
3. A description of the basis for the objection, including:
a. A statement of the ground upon which the objection is being filed;
b. An explanation of the validity of the objection and why the objection should be upheld.

Upon receipt of an objection, WIPO will appoint a case manager. Unless the parties agree otherwise, the dispute will be resolved by a Single-Expert Panel, the expert being appointed by WIPO from its List of Experts. The parties, however, can agree to have the dispute resolved by a Three-Expert Panel. In such cases, each party submits a list of three experts from WIPO’s List of Experts, in order of preference. One of each party’s preferences, if available, will be appointed to the panel. The third expert is selected by WIPO and is the presiding expert.

WIPO requires a payment of fees in its dispute resolution procedures. The DRSP fee is $2,000 for a Single-Expert Panel and $3,000 for a Three-Expert Panel. In addition, there are panel fees: $8,000 for a Single Expert Panel and $20,000 for a Three-Expert Panel.

Conclusion

ICANN’s decision to increase the number of gTLDs requires trademark owners to be diligent in policing their marks. The high cost of the gTLD application process, combined with a trademark owner’s ability to object during the evaluation process, should help to minimize the potential for cyberpirates and cybersquatters to obtain gTLDs which infringe on trademark owners’ rights.

There is still the possibility that innocent applicants will attempt to procure a gTLD which contains someone else’s trademark or tradename. In those cases, the informal comment period would provide forewarning to the innocent applicant allowing them to voluntarily withdraw a potentially infringing application and receive a partial refund.

Large corporations with readily recognizable trademarks, would likely be justified in securing a gTLD comprised of the trademark, examples would be .nike, .apple, .microsoft.

Although there are safeguards in the gTLD application process to protect against cyberpiracy and cybersquatting, trademark owners will need to continue to be diligent in policing their marks in the secondary market. Domain name registries will be purchasing new gTLDs. They will in turn sell domain names containing those new gTLDs. Cybersquatters and cyberpirates can then purchase these domain names.
For example, say a domain register applies for and is granted the gTLD “.inc”. .inc has the potential to become a well known gTLD along the lines of .com, .org, or .info. With the introduction of vastly greater numbers of gTLDs, policing one’s trademarks becomes infinintely more difficult. There have been laws enacted to curtail cyberpiracy and cybersquatting, which also make it easier for a trademark owner to enjoin the use of its trademarks in an infringing domain or have the domain transfered to the trademark owner. But policing one’s trademarks among a myriad of new gTLDs will be difficult and enjoining infringing domains will be very costly.

My advise to trademark owners: Get involved early. If you are a large corporation, secure the gTLDs for your world famous marks. Smaller companies, review the gTLD applications. If you find that there are applications that infringe your trademarks, make a public comment or attempt to resolve the matter informally by contacting the applicant. If that fails, file a formal objection.

In the secondary market, you are going to have to pick your battles. Not all new gTLDs are going to make a mark on the internet. It will not be worth the cost of disputing every infringing domain name associated with every new gTLD. At the same time, trademark owners cannot ignore infringers. If a trademark owner does not police its mark and take efforts to curb infringement, that inactivity may give rise to equitable defenses to the infringer.

In short, the ICANN’s new gTLD decision cannot be ignored by trademark owners. Trademark owners are cautioned to develop a plan as to how they will confront potential cyberpiracy and cybersquatting under the new rules.

N�gleord: administrative, corporate, corprate formation, international, US market Udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor), den 24/05/11 6:03 PM Kategori: Quotes

SiteImprove

[:en]“When we decided to enter the US market, Martensen Wright PC was there to give us valuable advice on corporate formation.
Six years later the Martensen Wright Team continues to be very supportive not only on the corporate side, but also with administrative issues.”

Torben Rytt, SiteImprove, Inc., Minnesota[:da]“Da vi besluttede os for at gøre indtog på det amerikanske marked var Martensen Wright PC der til at give os råd om selskabsstiftelse.
Her seks år senere er Martensen Wright-holdet stadig en stor støtte for os, ikke blot på den selskabsretslige side, men også med udførelse af administrative opgaver”.

Torben Rytt, SiteImprove, Inc., Minnesota[:]

N�gleord: Udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor), den 28/04/11 10:17 AM Kategori: Quotes

JAI

“I can’t say enough good things about Olga at Martensen Wright PC. She helped me secure a Green Card, overcoming major hurdles in the process. In doing so, Olga assured that my company maintained key expertise here in the U.S., and most importantly, made it possible for me and my wife to remain in the U.S.”

Jimi Meshulam, former CFOJAI, Inc., San Jose, California“Jeg kan ikke lovprise Olga hos Martensen Wright PC nok. Trods mange og store forhindringer og kun med Olgas hjælp lykkedes det mig at få Green Card. Olga sikrede således, at min arbejdsplads fik lov at til beholde den nødvendige ekspertise, men endnu vigtigere; Olga gjorde det muligt for min kone og mig at blive i USA.”

Jimi Meshulam, tidligere økonomichef,JAI, Inc., San Jose, Californien

N�gleord: Udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor), den 28/04/11 10:13 AM Kategori: Quotes

ChemoMetic

[:en]“Martensen Wright PC formed our U.S. subsidiary and serves as our Corporate Secretary. They also assist with our administrative work. They help us daily to navigate in a system that is very different from what we see in Denmark.
Martensen Wright’s assistance has been invaluable in establishing our U.S. operation.”

Søren Rhiger, ChemoMetec A/S, Allerød, Denmark[:da]“Martensen Wright PC har stiftet vores amerikanske selskab og fungerer som selskabets Corporate Secretary. De hjælper os tillige med visse administrative opgaver. De navigerer os igennem systemer, som er forskellige fra dem, vi kender fra Danmark.
Martensen Wright PCs assistance har været os til stor hjælp i forbindelse med etableringen i USA.”

Søren Rhiger, økonomichef, ChemoMetec A/S, Allerød, Danmark[:]

N�gleord: Udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor), den 28/04/11 10:13 AM Kategori: Quotes

PNN Medical

[:en]”Pnn Medical A/S has for a number of years had a US subsidiary.  Although our activities there are limited – and perhaps especially because of that – it has been important for us to have good advisors.  We get our legal advice from Martensen Wright PC, which has always provided quick and highly professional responses.  As a Danish company, we also benefit from being able to communicate in the Danish language.
Based on our experience, we would always refer other Danish companies in need of legal counsel to Martensen Wright PC. ”

Kurt Henrik Wolf, CFO, Pnn Medical, Inc. & Pnn Medical US A/S, Kvistgård[:da]”Pnn Medical A/S har gennem en årrække haft et datterselskab i USA. Selv om der har været tale om begrænsede aktiviteter – eller måske netop derfor, har det været vigtigt at have gode rådgivere. Martensen Wright PC har været vore juridiske rådgivere og vi har fået en altid topprofessionel, vedkommen og hurtig betjening. For en dansk virksomhed har det været et ekstra plus, at vi også har kunnet korrespondere på dansk. I mange henseender er det, når alt kommer til alt, en stor fordel.
Skulle vi anbefale juridiske rådgivere til andre danske virksomheder, ville vi altid anbefale Martensen Wright PC ud fra det kendskab og det behov vi har haft for juridisk rådgivning i USA.”

Kurt Henrik Wolf, økonomichef, Pnn Medical, Inc. & Pnn Medical US A/S, Kvistgård[:]

Emner

Find andre artikler i vores artikeldatabase

Forfatter

L�s alle artikler udgivet af Alexander S. Mikkelsen (revisor)