The 3 Toughest Process Services I Ever Made

Most people think of process serving as dangerous, clandestine, and done in an unscrupulous manner as typically depicted in the movies.  In general, nothing could be further from the truth.  It is, if done right, quite easy and non-threatening to both the person being served and the process server.

After 33 years as a process server, I have seen it all.  From serving top celebrities to heads-of-state, I have “enjoyed” some pretty interesting service assignments.  Not all were simple and some were quite dangerous – each of them were rewarding after being completed.

Service of process on celebrities is an interesting procedure since most of them are difficult to serve.  They often have employees and security personnel who shield them from the public.  I have served Michael Jackson, Germaine Jackson, Wolfgang Puck, Eric Estrada (Chips), Brittany Spears, Dean Martin, Jackie Mason, and other lesser-knowns.

Serving celebrities is nothing compared to having to serve a head-of-state or other high profile individual.  I have served, or had served, Muammar Gaddafi, former ruler of Libya, Sheik Issa bin Zayed al Nahyan, brother of the Crown Prince of UAE , Khalia bin Laden, brother of Osama bin Laden, Imelda Marcos, former President of The Philippines.  Some were extremely difficult while others were quite easy.

Tough Service #1:

Of the 3 toughest services I have ever completed, serving the Sheik Issa had the most potential danger.  In 2009, I was contracted to serve the Sheik at his office in Dubai.  I was paid handsomely, including first-class airfare and luxury hotel, to complete the service.  I left Los Angeles on Monday evening and returned home on Friday morning of the same week – a trip around the world in 4 days!

It was an interesting case, to say the least, and involved the alleged murder of a servant of the Sheik which was caught on video.  The Sheik’s assistant misplaced the video and was thought to have sold it or concealed it for future use against the Sheik.  He was imprisoned, tortured, and eventually escaped using his contacts within the government.  He made his way back to the U.S. and filed a civil suit against the Sheik for 4 billion dollars.  The lawsuit had to be served and I was fortunate, or maybe not so, to receive the assignment.

I was given the business address of the Sheik, and after a good night sleep in Dubai, I took a taxi to the address which was located in one of the numerous high-rise office buildings along Sheik Zayed Road.  My driver waited out front while I went inside to make the service.  The only problem was the Sheik had moved his office.  Later in the day I found the new address and took a second taxi to the location.  Unfortunately, my driver would not wait and left me there to fend for myself in getting back to the hotel.

I knew that the Sheik’s newest project was building a new city-within-a-city in Dubai.  It was to include residential units, stores and office buildings – a self-contained city.  When I went inside the offices, I observed a model of the proposed city and pretended to be intently interested.  A pleasant male employee came over to greet me and asked if he could assist.  I said, without hesitation, “Yes, I’m here to see Sheik Issa.” The worst possible reply was immediate, “I’m sorry but the Sheik is out of town and will not return until early next week. Did you have an appointment?”  My heart dropped! My flight back to the states was scheduled for that evening and I could not wait until some unknown date without an assurance that I would actually be able to meet with the Sheik.  I made an instant decision to complete the assignment by substituted service.

I was invited into a private office where the employee, the Sheik’s assistant, gave me his business card.  We discussed the pending urban development project and I found the right time to change the subject and advise him that, although I was there to investigate the possibility of opening a business in the complex, I had also been given legal documents directed to the Sheik.  He politely accepted them, looked them over and returned to the subject of future business involving the commercial project.  After our discussions concluded, I left and walked down the street in desperate search of a taxi.  Several sped by, most were empty, and I became increasingly concerned that employees of the Sheik would come out of the building and do who knows what.  Even worse was the sudden fear of government officials being called to arrest me.  After several minutes of anxiety, a taxi stopped and took me back to the hotel.

There were no incidents following the service although when I arrived at the airport, I was concerned that somehow my identity had been discovered and that I may not make it out of the country.  I arrived home just 4 short days after beginning the trip and all ended well – except the civil suit was eventually dismissed.  I had done my job.

Less than a month later, an article appeared in the New York Times describing the case and the attorney for the plaintiff, who had hired me, said “Tucker has balls of steel.”  I took that as a compliment.

Tough Service #2:

Brothers Michael and Jermaine Jackson were being served with a civil lawsuit.  Another process server had tried on numerous occasions to serve them and even used a stake-out for several days – all with no success.  I was eventually hired based on a recommendation from one of my clients.

I had served Germaine previously in a divorce case and knew that I could sub-serve his agent.  However, my client insisted on personal service so I quoted a rate accordingly.  During the afternoon and evening hours, it was common for one of two limousines to leave and return to the gated house.  The problem was you could not see through the tinted glass to know who was inside.

When all else failed, I went to the neighbor next door and showed my badge and advised that I was attempting service on the Jackson brothers.  The neighbor did not get along well with the Jacksons due to the late night noise at the residence that often caused problems.  She gave me details as to which vehicle was used by each brother and the days and times they typically left the compound.

I waited outside the gate and when it opened, I immediately walked inside the compound and approached the driver of the limo with my badge out.  He rolled down the window and I advised him that I had legal documents for Michael and Jermaine. He motioned for me to go towards the rear of the car and when the window came down, there were both of the brothers.  Jermaine took the documents but Michael kept looking away through the passenger side window. There was no question as to who the world-famous celebrity was!

Tough Service #3:

In the early 2000’s, Britney Spears was a hot entertainer.  She lived in a gated complex in the Hollywood Hills with no intercom at the entrance.  She, too, used a limo to leave and return to the house.

I went to her website and found that she was scheduled to perform at a free mid-day concert at the Nokia Theater in Hollywood. I arrived 2 hours before and security was tight. I maintained a low profile, waiting for the opportunity to catch her as she was coming to the stage.  It soon became evident that service would not be possible with so much law enforcement and private security present.

Using my best judgment and assessment of the situation, I developed a plan. I waiting until just before she was coming to the stage and paid a young man $20.00 to advise the security chief that a man on the other side of the crowd was planning on serving Britney with legal documents when she came on-stage.  All of the security personnel quickly rushed to that area and I was free to hand her the service documents when she came through the walkway….and, I did!  She smiled as she thought she was signing an autograph as I told her what the documents actually were.  Job done!

Process serving is always interesting, but rarely dangerous, if you know how to think on your feet and outsmart the person you are serving.

Why International Process Service Is So Expensive

People ask me all of the time, “Why is international service of process so expensive?”  My answer is simple although it does not resonate well with some attorneys and paralegals. 

Process serving is more expensive in most countries than locally because of 1) security issues, 2) cost of living in the foreign nation, 3)  scarcity of qualified process servers in some areas, 4) currency exchange, 5) fuel costs, 6) travel time, 7) number of attempts required to complete service, 8) expertise of the U.S. firm which is handling the service, 9) belief by foreign process servers that U.S. attorneys can afford to pay more, 10) bank transfer costs to pay foreign process servers, and 11) bribes that are often required in order to obtain permission to perform the service.  Please allow me to explain each reason:

1.       Although the bribery issue may be the most shocking, the primary cause of high costs is security issues associated with serving legal documents in many nations.  For example, it is customary for a process server in other countries to have 2-4 bodyguards with him while making the service. That extra security is not related to actually serving the documents, but rather, to issues such as kidnapping, mugging, and attack by street people.  If you calculate the costs of two to four additional people involved in the service, you quickly see that the costs can be staggering.  Process servers are subjected to threats that are unheard of in most areas of North America and they must take additional precautions to insure their safety.

2.       The cost of living and prevailing rates charged by process servers in many areas of the world explain high costs.  Hong Kong, Singapore and Paris are good examples of cities having an extreme cost of living and process service fees are proportionally higher than in such places as Dublin, Vancouver or Cancun.

3.       Because process serving is not a common task in many countries due to their legal system, there are often no qualified process servers to perform the assignment.  When Process Service Network began serving in foreign countries, we developed a team of private process servers, private investigators, and off-duty law enforcement officers to handle the tasks.  Often, we had to train the person in order to have a qualified agent to handle services. Now, we offer the #1 training program in the world through our own Process Service University. Costs are affected by currency exchange rates in such areas as Europe, especially the UK where the Sterling Pound is strong against the Dollar.  A service that would normally cost $100 in the U.S. would be $200 in the UK, assuming all other factors were equal.

4.       Fuel costs are seriously higher in almost every area of the world compared to the states. In most of Europe gas is over $6.00 per gallon while in Taiwan is often reaches $8.00 per gallon.

5.       Travel time is a major factor in international service of process as it is common for drive time to be several hours to get from one side of a major city to the other.  If you have ever visited Manila, Mexico City, Tokyo, Taipei, Beijing, Paris or Rome you understand.  Service in outlying areas where there are no process servers often require overnight stays and multiple attempts, thus increasing the cost.

6.       Process servers are contracted for completing a service rather than simply making attempts.  Therefore, they set their fees to accommodate having to make numerous attempts at service.  For example, it is common for 10 or more attempts at service be made prior to completing the service.  Since the foreign process server must pay his/her own expenses, their quoted rates are high due to anticipated trips.

7.       Just as an attorney is entitled to significant hourly rates based on their expertise, companies which specialize in international service of process have specific expertise that command a fair market rate.  Fortunately, process service firms charge a flat rate for the case, not by the hour.

8.       There is a perception among foreign process servers that all U.S. attorneys are rich….too much television.  That opinion leads them to believe that they can gouge American law firms.  In reality, U.S. attorneys face the same fiscal constraints as those in any other country.  Educating the overseas process server is the job of a reputable company that facilitates international service of process on behalf of their clients.

9.       Bank wire fees, and sometimes, Western Union fees lead to increased costs.  Since many foreign process servers require payment, in advance, it is usually necessary to make payment by bank transfer or other methods prior to making the assignment.

10.   The final cost that creates higher rates is the money that must be paid for bribes to get permission from local officials to serve legal documents.  Bribes are a reality and are quite common in most regions of the world – it’s the way things get done.  Process servers are forced to pay “fees” to government officials in order to get law enforcement cooperation and even, in some cases, to avoid prosecution for not paying the bribe.

In summary, things work differently in most parts of the world than in North America.  You may not fully understand that until you visit certain regions and experience the hidden costs that are often associated with conducting business.

The solution to avoiding unknown hidden costs is to employ the services of a reputable process service firm that specializes in international service.  They understand the ins-and-outs of the business and know how to circumvent many of the concealed costs.

For answers to questions you may have about this article, please contact Nelson Tucker, CEO of Process Service Network, LLC, by email at processnet@sbcglobal.net, phone at 1-800-417-7623, or visit the website at www.processnet1.com.

The Biggest Mistake Attorneys & Paralegals Make!

(when it comes to International service of process)

That’s a pretty provocative headline – attorneys and paralegals don’t make mistakes, do they? In the case of international service of process, mistakes are the norm but can be easily avoided.

Law schools forgot to teach about serving civil process on defendants out of the country so it’s not the lawyer’s fault that they do not have the expertise when it comes to such service.  Paralegals, too, were not taught about a topic that may seem innocuous since, until recently, there was not much demand for such knowledge.

[So, what is the most common mistake that legal professionals make?  It is getting the wrong information from unreliable sources. ]

Times have changed and as the world shrinks and the global economy expands, the need for international process service has multiplied in recent years.  Attorneys in every discipline have had, or soon will have, the prospect of serving a defendant or witness in a foreign country.  When that occasion arises, get ready for the possibility of some serious errors that will delay the case, or worse, cause it to be dismissed! 

So, what is the most common mistake that legal professionals make?  It is getting the wrong information from unreliable sources.  Those untrustworthy sources include (believe it, or not) the U.S. Department of State, online postings, and process servers who are not qualified to answer questions about international service of process.  Please allow me to address each of those without seeming self-serving. 

The State Department is, to say the least, a bureaucracy filled with employees who have limited knowledge of issues outside their own narrow expertise.  If you do not believe that, just try communicating with the department on a specific issue.  Now, do not get me wrong, there are some extremely capable people there who are hidden away from public contact. They understand the ins-and- outs of international service issues – I know because I supply updates to them on specific changes in foreign countries as they become available to me through personal knowledge or my contact abroad.  The State Department’s website is often outdated and occasionally has erroneous information that is construed by an unknowing eye as fact. 

The second problem area faced by legal professionals is online postings by individuals, organizations, groups and corporations.  For example, a Google search for “Service of Process International” will provide you with websites on the first page (we are usually there, as well) that have inaccurate, misleading, and false information.  Blogs are full of information which, if followed, could result in civil and criminal prosecution against the attorney who arranges for the service.  That topic was handled in my blog in October 2011.  Bad information leads to bad results.  Be careful! 

The final category of misinformation comes from process servers who are not qualified to answer questions or provide guidance on international service issues.  Always ask the process service firm two questions: 1) “How long have you been in business?” and 2) “How long have you specialized in international service of process?”  Ask for proof of both in order to insure that you are dealing with a reputable and qualified firm.

In summary, call us and ask those questions, You'll be glad you did!

Taking the Mystery Out of Letters Rogatory

“Letters Rogatory – what the heck is that?” people often ask. Dictionaries describe it as (ro·ga·to·ry) adj. Law - requesting information. A Letter Rogatory or Letter of Request is a formal request from a court to a foreign court for some type of judicial assistance. The most common remedies sought by Letters Rogatory are service of process and taking of evidence. It comes from Latin meaning “to ask.”  Simple enough - But, why is it such a mystery?

Letters Rogatory are typically used when there is no treaty in effect between the two countries and enforcement of a judgment will be required.

The definition makes perfect sense – it’s the practical application that is the challenge.  Almost every country has different wording requirements, formatting rules, and idiosyncrasies that make you want to scream when filling out the forms.  No need for frustration – there are international service experts who can handle the task in a flash.

To begin, a case must have already been filed with the court of proper jurisdiction.  The next step is to prepare the Letters Rogatory (or Request for Judicial Assistance) in a civil case and Letter of Request in a criminal case.  It takes a thorough knowledge of the rules of the court of destination to prepare the document properly. Otherwise, the service will be rejected and returned un-served.

The Letters are then submitted to the court of jurisdiction for signatures of both the Clerk of the Court and the Judge.  Many Judges are reluctant to sign the formal request if they have not previously had the honor of such experience.  There are clauses that deal with reciprocity for costs (Judges do not like to obligate their court to unknown costs), manner of service, and mutuality of services.  Judges often hand write changes on the documents to meet their own wishes – no, no, Your Honor!  He/she just invalidated the request in most countries.

So, how do you convince a Judge that they must do it “your way?”  Cite the law and foreign requirements like you would do with anything you do before a Judge.  There are wording techniques in the preparation of the Letters that prevent Judges from making inappropriate changes.  An experienced expert will know the “tricks of the trade.”

After the Letters are signed by both the Clerk of the Court and the Judge, they are returned to the requesting attorney for processing.  Originals must always be used when submitting to the foreign court along with the proper number of service copies.  In addition, a cover letter must accompany the request which contains specific wording.  Oh, did I mention that all documents must be translated into the official language of the country of destination?

The properly prepared packet is forwarded to the U.S. Department of State for processing.  There is an Embassy fee of $2275.00, in addition to the service of process fees.  The State Department plays with it for a couple of months and the documents are eventually sent through diplomatic channels to the proper court in the foreign nation where the documents are to be served.

The service is assigned to a local court which does who-knows-what and then they assign it to a law enforcement official who serves the papers.

After service, the process goes back through the system, in reverse, until the proof of service ends up in the court file where the case originated. Neither the foreign court nor the State Department notifies the requesting attorney that it has been served. Strange, huh?

It is commonly stated that the Letters Rogatory process takes over one year to complete.  Au contraire! It normally takes only 7-10 months.  Feel better?  There are cases, however, that take up to two years due to the bureaucracy and protectionism of assets in some countries.

So, what is the solution to the Letters Rogatory dilemma?  Simple:  Hire an international service of process professional who understands the challenges an attorney may face and who has the resources to get the job done right.

Nelson Tucker is the CEO of Process Service Network, LLC, in the Los Angeles area.  His firm specializes in international and hard-to-serve cases and has completed over 16,000 Letters Rogatory services in the past 33 years.  You may contact him at via email at processnet@sbcglobal.net or at www.processnet1.com for a free consultation.

*****

Make sure to bookmark this article for future reference.

Not One Legal Secretary Surveyed Preferred Working with Women Partners; Prof Offers Reasons Why

[Editor's note: This is the first time that I have posted someone else’s work, but here it is (Reprinted from ABAJournal)

By Debra Cassens Weiss

Clarification: When Chicago-Kent law professor Felice Batlan surveyed 142 legal secretaries at larger law firms in 2009, not one expressed a preference for working with a female partner.

Asked whether they preferred to work for male or female partners or associates, 35 percent preferred working for male partners, 15 percent preferred working for male associates, 3 percent preferred working for female associates, none preferred working for female partners, and 47 percent had no opinion.

Ninety-five percent of the legal secretaries who responded to the online survey were women. Most were middle aged and had considerable experience. They came from firms of more than 100 lawyers. Batlan wrote about the results in an article (purchase req.) published by Emerald Insight. Forbes' She Negotiates blog also reported on the survey findings.

Some secretaries elaborated on why they preferred to work for males, with these survey comments:

• “Females are harder on their female assistants, more detail oriented, and they have to try harder to prove themselves, so they put that on you. And they are passive aggressive where a guy will just tell you the task and not get emotionally involved and make it personal.”
• “I just feel that men are a little more flexible and less emotional than women. This could be because the female partners feel more pressure to perform.”
• “Female attorneys have a tendency to downgrade a legal secretary.”
• “I am a female legal secretary, but I avoid working for women because [they are] such a pain in the ass! They are too emotional and demeaning.”
• “Female attorneys are either mean because they're trying to be like their male counterparts or too nice/too emotional because they can't handle the stress. Either way, their attitude/lack of maturity somehow involves you being a punching bag.”
• Women lawyers have “an air about them.”

Some legal secretaries said they didn’t like working for women because they were too independent, Batlan writes. One woman wrote of her male boss: “My partner in particular tends to forget the little things. I often find myself tailing him as he's walking out the door to a meeting going down a list of things he may need. Oddly, I don't feel like my female attorneys need that kind of attention.”

A sizable minority—45 percent of the respondents—said they did personal tasks for lawyers. Still, most respondents indicated that the concept of legal secretary as “second wife” is old school, particularly since secretaries typically work for more than one lawyer.

Batlan wondered if legal secretaries’ attitudes toward women lawyers is influenced by societal expectations. “For a woman to serve a man is an arrangement that conforms to and reproduces dominant and traditional, although contested and changing, gender arrangements,” she writes. “Gender structures tell men that they are entitled to women's help and that women are supposed to freely give it.”

Other possible reasons: Men still have the power in law firms, and legal secretaries want to work for those in power. Or women lawyers may be more abrupt because of tensions created by conflicts between work and family. Or female lawyers may perceive that the secretaries are willing to do more work for male than women bosses, creating frictions.

Batlan suggests that women lawyers may be “in a double-bind situation.” If they don’t behave like males, they are perceived as too emotional, and if they do act like men, they are perceived as putting on airs.

Other survey findings:

• Nearly 71 percent of the surveyed secretaries said the recession had affected their jobs, and nearly 81 percent said their firms had laid off secretaries. Some now worked for more lawyers, some reported decreased benefits, and some reported no or little pay increases. Eighteen percent had been recently laid off.

• Asked about the traits that make a good legal secretary, many indicated that it was important to control their emotions. One secretary listed the traits this way: “Gets to work on time, does the assigned work, hasn't murdered a lawyer by the end of her day.”

• The legal secretaries were generally satisfied with their work schedules. Seventy-five percent worked 30 to 40 hours a week.

• Asked if attorneys respected them, 67 percent of the secretaries said they were respected, and 29 percent said “it depends.”

*****

I did not write this – just reporting the findings.  Have any thoughts?  I welcome them at nelson@processnet1.com

Like this article? Don't forget to bookmark it!

Process Serving in the 21st Century

If you own a process service firm, this is not your grandfather’s business!  The good ‘ole days of banging on doors and slapping defendants in the chest with service papers, as portrayed in the movies, are gone – thankfully, forever.

A brief look at the history of process serving tells us that the service of a Summons originated in England, where the court would order the Sheriff to arrest the defendant and bring him into court to answer the allegations. This was an obvious hardship on defendants, especially when plaintiffs failed to prove their case.               

The courts eventually relaxed this harsh procedure and simply ordered that the Sheriff deliver a Summons to the defendant, which required him to appear in court. The defendant was, therefore, "summoned" to court. 

In the United States, process serving was originally a function that was performed by the local Constable or Sheriff. They were an authority figure with the full power of the law. Even today, in some areas of the United States, only government officials may serve legal documents.               

Eventually, private process servers were permitted to serve legal documents. They were required to be of "highest moral character" with unimpeachable ethical standards. As a way of proving that service had been completed, they were required to bring back a piece of the defendant's clothing.               

Later, a written document entitled "Proof of Service" or Affidavit of Service was developed to indicate who was served and the method of service.               

No one has been able to clearly define when the first “private” process service began. By the 1950's, a few were in business, primarily in the largest cities. Today, they are everywhere. 

So, what methods for service exist today that were not available in the early days?  For starters, private process servers (those authorized by state laws) have more authority and are allowed more discretion than in the past. For example, in California, Registered Process Servers are allowed to enter guard-gated communities for the purpose of serving documents and they are allowed to trespass on private property while in the act of serving.  In all states, process servers are allowed to use ruses to complete a service, as long as it does not violate the law. 

Most highly competent process servers today utilize search tools which can save them time and money.  Prior to attempting service, Google Earth is a great (free) research tool to determine whether a service address is a residence or business location.  Obviously, if it is a business, an evening attempt would be a waste of time.  It also gives an indication, in advance, of the type of neighborhood. 

There are some very effect tools available to process servers to assist in locating a defendant’s address.  My favorites are TLO and Merlin Data, but there are many others that are excellent.  Avoid public access websites that charge for a public records search which are often full of outdated and confusing information. 

Some innovative techniques utilized by experienced servers include “notices” which are left on the door of a defendant who is evading service.  The notice advises as to what actions will result if they do not contact the process server to arrange for acceptance of the service. Adverse actions may include service at their place of employment, stake-out of their home, investigation costs to locate them, and other expenses which may be added to the judgment.  It makes it clear that it is in the best interest of the defendant to accept service rather than delay the inevitable which will add financial liability to the case against them. 

Social media is a tool that is often overlooked.  With the advent of Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and many others, it is becoming easier to find a defendant whose address or whereabouts is unknown. It requires that a process server set up a dummy account with these websites that allows for communication with people without disclosing the identity or occupation of the process server.  It is amazing how much information defendants will disclose to a total stranger on social networks. 

Networking with other process servers and investigators is a way to expand your process service business.  I regularly consult with newer process servers and private investigators who tell me right away the area they cover and where they will not go.  I typically give them a long, hard stare and ask the magical question, “Why?”  In other words, why do they limit themselves to a local area, or why do they not do stake-outs, or why do they not serve some types of documents?  The answer is always the same: “I’ve never done it that way.”  If you do not offer a complete package that every attorney would need which is related to service of process, you are selling yourself short.  The solution?  Partner with other qualified legal support professionals who perform a service that you do not offer or who cover an area beyond your own.  It’s called networking! 

Marketing your process service business takes skill and professionalism.  You may be able to do it yourself or find that professional help will allow you to concentrate on what you do best.  Yellow page advertising is a thing of the past; internet marketing of your services is vital to your success in the 21^st Century.  There are some excellent books in print on marketing your process service and investigation services in today’s marketplace.

So, bringing it all together, how does a process server find the innovations and new tools needed to be successful?  One of the ways is to visit www.processnet1.com and see the books available or to see what is available at www.pimall.com.

Process Service University was formed to help both new and experienced process servers and private investigators to learn new “tricks of the trade.”  Every aspect of the service of process profession is covered in a flexible learning environment.  Details can be found at www.ProcessServiceUniversity.com

Process serving is an old profession with many new ways to get the job done easier, faster and more profitable.

***

Be sure to bookmark  this article for future reference.

Patent Law Changes Good for American Lawyers

Congress recently passed and President Obama signed into law the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act after more than six years of legislative efforts to reform the existing patent laws.

The act represents the most comprehensive and substantial patent legislation since the Patent Act of 1952. The act changes significantly the processes for both obtaining and litigating patents. Of particular note for patent prosecutors, the act changes the United States from a “first-to-invent” to a “first-to-file” patent system, eliminates interference proceedings, and expands the scope of prior act under the statute.

Entirely new procedures for post-grant review have been put in place, phasing out inter partes re-examinations and replacing them with post-grant review and revised inter partes review processes. In addition, the act establishes a special transitional post-grant review process for business-method patents.  

So what does all of this mean for the U.S. attorney?  The new law includes many important changes for patent litigators, including new rules affecting joinder of parties in patent infringement actions, changes to the false marking provisions, new statutory provisions regarding advice of counsel, and expansion of the prior user defense. 

The act makes it much easier for U.S. attorneys to litigate patent infringement claims against foreign nationals and corporations. 

Details and full text can be viewed at: Leahy-Smith America Invents Act.