Real Results, Real Impact

The Challenge

Our client, a Vancouver-based AI software company, wanted to acquire a Seattle startup with complementary tech. Sounds straightforward, right? Except the target had messy IP ownership issues, three different investor groups with competing interests, and a ticking clock because another buyer was circling. Plus we had to navigate both Canadian and US securities regulations while the target's board was split on the deal.

Our Approach

We didn't waste time with standard playbooks. First thing we did was bring in a specialized IP audit team to untangle the ownership mess - turned out two key patents were still technically owned by a founder who'd left. We negotiated directly with him while simultaneously structuring the deal to protect our client if that fell through.

On the investor front, we identified which groups had the real leverage and which were just making noise. Crafted individual term sheets that gave each faction what they actually needed, not what they said they wanted. The cross-border regulatory stuff we handled by filing simultaneously in both jurisdictions with coordinated disclosures.

The Outcome

Closed the deal in under three months, which for a cross-border acquisition is basically lightning speed. Our client saved an estimated $3.2M compared to what the competing buyer was offering, mainly because we structured it smarter. The IP issues got resolved with the former founder actually coming back as a consultant, which ended up being a bonus nobody saw coming.

The target's board unanimously approved after we restructured the earn-out provisions. Both regulatory bodies cleared us without requesting additional information, which almost never happens. Our client's now successfully integrated the technology and just closed a Series C based partly on the combined IP portfolio.

The Challenge

A manufacturing client got hit with a massive lawsuit from their biggest supplier claiming our client failed to meet order commitments, causing the supplier "irreparable harm" and loss of other business opportunities. The supplier had emails, documented orders, the whole nine yards. Our client's insurance was capped at $5M and they were staring down potential bankruptcy if this went south.

To make it worse, discovery was showing our client had indeed missed some delivery deadlines and the internal documentation was... let's just say it wasn't great. Their previous counsel had been pushing hard for settlement at around $8M.

Our Approach

We came in skeptical of the settlement push. Something felt off about the supplier's damages claims - they were way too round, too convenient. We dug deep into their financials during discovery and found they were already losing those "other clients" before our client missed any deadlines. Their whole business model was actually falling apart.

Then we caught a break. Buried in some production records we found evidence the supplier had been systematically delivering substandard materials while charging for premium grade. We brought in a materials expert who confirmed the supplied components were causing our client's production issues. That's why they'd missed deadlines - they were dealing with defective inputs.

We flipped from defense to offense, filed a counterclaim for fraud and breach, and watched their case start crumbling. Their attorney knew they were cooked.

The Outcome

The case got dismissed before trial after the judge reviewed our materials evidence in a summary judgment motion. The supplier's fraud was pretty clear-cut once we laid it all out. Our counterclaim went to mediation where we settled for $2.3M - not as much as we could've gotten at trial, but our client wanted to move on and we respected that.

More importantly, we saved them from what would've been a business-ending payout. They've since restructured their supply chain and implemented better quality control protocols. Last I heard they're actually doing better than before this whole mess started.