<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2010/03/03/just-say-nol-delaware-upholds-4-99-rights-plan-to-protect-nols/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 May 2026 11:33:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.8</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Just Say NOL: Delaware Upholds 4.99% Rights Plan to Protect NOLs</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2010/03/03/just-say-nol-delaware-upholds-4-99-rights-plan-to-protect-nols/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=just-say-nol-delaware-upholds-4-99-rights-plan-to-protect-nols</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2010/03/03/just-say-nol-delaware-upholds-4-99-rights-plan-to-protect-nols/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 13:14:29 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Court Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mergers & Acquisitions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delaware cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Delaware law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NOLs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Selectica v. Versata]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/?p=7742?d=20100303091429EST</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Editor’s Note: Theodore Mirvis is a partner in the Litigation Department at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen &#38; Katz. This post is based on a Wachtell Lipton memorandum by Mr. Mirvis, Eric S. Robinson, William Savitt and Ryan A. McLeod, regarding the recent decision of the Delaware Court of Chancery in Selectica, Inc. v. Versata Enters., Inc.; [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:10px"><strong>Editor’s Note:</strong> <a href="http://www.wlrk.com/Page.cfm/Thread/Attorneys/SubThread/Search/Name/Mirvis,%20Theodore%20N." target="_blank">Theodore Mirvis</a> is a partner in the Litigation Department at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen &amp; Katz.  This post is based on a Wachtell Lipton memorandum by Mr. Mirvis, <a href="http://www.wlrk.com/Page.cfm/Thread/Attorneys/SubThread/Search/Name/Robinson,%20Eric%20S." target="_blank">Eric S. Robinson</a>, <a href="http://www.wlrk.com/Page.cfm/Thread/Attorneys/SubThread/Search/Name/Savitt,%20William" target="_blank">William Savitt</a> and <a href="http://www.wlrk.com/Page.cfm/Thread/Attorneys/SubThread/Search/Name/McLeod,%20Ryan%20A." target="_blank">Ryan A. McLeod</a>, regarding the recent decision of the Delaware Court of Chancery in <em>Selectica, Inc. v. Versata Enters., Inc.</em>; the opinion is available <a href="http://www.wlrk.com/docs/SelecticaVsVersata.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>. This post is part of the <a href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/the-delaware-law-series/">Delaware law series</a>, which is cosponsored by the Forum and Corporation Service Company; links to other posts in the series are available <a href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/the-delaware-law-series/">here</a>.</div>
<p>Friday’s decision by the Delaware Court of Chancery in the <em>Selectica</em> case upheld the use of a rights plan with a 4.99% trigger designed to protect the company’s net operating loss carryforwards (NOLs), even when the challenger had busted through the threshold and suffered the pill’s dilutive effect. <a href="http://www.wlrk.com/docs/SelecticaVsVersata.pdf" target="_blank"><em>Selectica, Inc. v. Versata Enters., Inc.</em>, C.A. No. 4241-VCN (Del. Ch. Feb. 26, 2010)</a>. Vice Chancellor Noble’s post-trial decision carefully considered the particular circumstances inherent in using a pill to protect NOLs, but it also contains much of importance to Delaware takeover doctrine generally. The decision confirms that rights plans remain an important bulwark, notwithstanding continued attacks from academic and other quarters. </p>
<p>Although Selectica never achieved an operating profit, it had generated NOLs of approximately $160 million. These NOLs could have substantial value in the event the company becomes profitable or merges with a profitable company, but under IRC § 382 they can be adversely affected if the company experiences an “ownership change” of over 50% during a three-year period (measured by reference to holders of 5% or larger blocks). </p>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2010/03/03/just-say-nol-delaware-upholds-4-99-rights-plan-to-protect-nols/#more-7742" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading Just Say NOL: Delaware Upholds 4.99% Rights Plan to Protect NOLs">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2010/03/03/just-say-nol-delaware-upholds-4-99-rights-plan-to-protect-nols/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
