In what ways can a triangular merger be specifically designed to ensure the continuity and protection of valuable IP and brand identity?

The US-India Advantage: Strategic Work Distribution

Our patenting service model strategically distributes patent work between US and Indian professionals to optimize both quality and cost-effectiveness.

US-based registered patent attorneys and agents maintain direct client relationships and provide strategic oversight, while our Indian team contributes technical expertise and support services that enhance the overall patent prosecution process.

The US patenting team provides:

• Direct client communication and strategic guidance

• Final review and quality assurance of all submissions

• USPTO communications management

• Strategic decision-making and recommendations

• Direct representation before the USPTO

The Indian patenting team contributes:

• Technical research and analysis

• Prior art searching and analysis

• Draft amendment of patent application

• Office action response support

• Patent drawings and illustrations

• Technical specifications development

Why Us
Cost-Effective Service Delivery & Optimized Resource Allocation

Our working model achieves cost savings through:

• Strategic distribution of technical tasks

• Efficient workflow management

• Time zone advantages for faster turnaround

• Reduced overhead costs

• Economies of scale

Transparent Pricing Structure

We offer clear pricing models that reflect our cost advantages:

• Fixed-fee arrangements for standard services

• Customized packages for portfolio clients

• Volume-based discounting

• Flexible engagement models

The apt approach would be to isolate IP assets in a separate legal entity while integrating operational aspects into another entity. This protects the assets from operational risks, liabilities, or dilution during the merger. To structure a triangular merger that preserves valuable intellectual property (IP) and brand assets for a food technology based company, Company A (the innovator) would first establish a first subsidiary.

This first subsidiary would consolidate all critical IP and brand assets from Company A, Company B (a research institution), and Company C (a marketing firm). Company A would transfer its patents for novel food technologies (e.g., plant-based protein formulations, fermentation processes, or sustainable packaging), trade secrets, and proprietary R&D data to first subsidiary entity. Company B, as a research institution, would contribute academic patents (e.g., for bioengineered ingredients or food safety innovations), research datasets, and licensing agreements related to food science breakthroughs. Company C, the marketing firm, would transfer trademarks (e.g., for a popular food brand), customer relationship databases, and proprietary marketing strategies (e.g., digital campaigns targeting health-conscious consumers).

By isolating these assets in the first subsidiary entity, the merger ensures that the combined entity's operational risks (e.g., supply chain disruptions, and regulatory challenges) do not compromise the value of the IP or brand equity. This structure also allows for tax-efficient management of intangible assets and strategic flexibility to license or commercialize innovations without entangling operational liabilities.

To manage day-to-day operations Company A (the innovator) creates a second subsidiary. Company B and Company C transfer operational assets (e.g., labs, staff, marketing teams, and contracts) to the second subsidiary. In totality, Company A (parent) owns the second subsidiary and Company B and Company C cease to exist as standalone entities, and their operational assets/liabilities transfer to second subsidiary. Now the first subsidiary entity (owned by Company A) retains all IP/brand assets and the second subsidiary (owned by Company A) runs the combined business operations.