legal-outsourcing « WordPress.com Tag Feed

Vijay — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 06:28:03 +0000

With President Obama giving a big thumbs down to outsourcing, and literally compelling all bailout beneficiaries to stop sending their work overseas, he has instilled fear in the minds of “over worked” and “underpaid” stressed skilled laborers (sic) here in India. Whilst some people believe that Indians will successfully ward of this threat through a back door entry, others believe that Obama or no Obama, outsourcing is here to stay; it is so very much cost effective… and so on and so forth and other such arguments I have heard a million times.

Now, the big question is whether the legal outsourcing industry will suffer if President Obama is able to halt the outsourcing phenomenon. I don’t think so… I don’t think so because it is not the policies that will affect the legal industry in as much as the quality of the work product delivered.

This brings us to the next question, are lawyers in India able to help American attorneys in their endeavor to serve the American public efficiently. Well… this is a very complicated question because lawyers everywhere are a different breed and it is not easy to please them. Legal outsourcing industry is waking up to the fact that there cannot be a fixed process to do the legal work and the only way to please lawyers is understand the requirements of every individual attorney they are catering to. There is however, a brighter side to this, when a young lawyer (working overseas) is confronted with complicated legal issues, and an individual requirement of every attorney, that young lawyer learns fast and improves his legal skills. This is so because that young lawyer is not restricting his interactions to one attorney in a law firm; he will be interacting with the best in that law firm, these interactions mean getting trained by the best. Therefore, the lawyers here not only learn to solve a legal issue, they also learn to write and present a brief. Even if you are good at interpreting law but if you don’t write well then your skills are irrelevant. It is not only the understanding of law, but also the presentation that matters. It is a very challenging job. I believe, Indian lawyers are able to meet expectations and will raise the bar soon.

Now the most important question of all, should legal work be outsourced to India, at the cost of an attorney’s job back in the US? This is a very emotional question; I don’t think any response would do justice to this question. I don’t believe that outsourcing legal work to India should cause any job losses in the US. No matter what lawyers in India do, they cannot be physically present to execute the work. It is important to understand how outsourcing works before condemning it. Lawyers work on a mandate given by the attorneys who in turn have been authorized by their clients to outsource work. The basic idea behind outsourcing is to reduce costs, and in times such as now, the best way to protect legal rights is cost effective legal advice. This can be achieved with outsourcing. The process is still at a nascent stage and it will have an exponential growth based on the quality of deliveries.

I would like to share some of the challenges that I have faced and my experiences of working in the legal outsourcing industry in my future posts.

Global credit crisis leads to boom times for LPOs specializing in IP

pixeljayanta — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 11:15:00 +0000

In adversity lies opportunity and no more so than in the fledgling Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO) industry. Peter Ollier from MIP has authored a brilliantly researched article on how, amongst other reasons, the gloomy economic scenario in the West is actively forcing American companies to cut legal costs, by outsourcing to the Indian LPO industry, tasks such as patent drafting, prior-art searches, due diligence and also litigation support in the form of document review. The article points out that outsourcing to India can apparently slash costs by 50% to 75%. For example patent proof reading can be done for around $70 to $80 in India while the same costs between $120 to as much as $750 in the U.S. Similarly a standard prior-art search can be done for about $450 in India, which is about half of what is charged in the U.S. A freedom to operate search which costs about $2500 to $4000 in the U.S. can be done for about $1000 in India. Interestingly cost-cutting is not the only reason for the increasing outsourcing of work. Ollier points out that some of the work is being outsourced because of a shortage of manpower in the U.S. In addition litigation support review is also being offerred by some LPO firms resulting in huge savings for companies involved in litigation in the U.S. The one area of work that the LPO sector is lagging in is the field of patent-drafting. The reason for this is because patent drafting is a highly skilled task and there is general shortage in India of skilled patent-drafters.

Provided the LPO industry maintains consistent quality controls and assures safety of data, the industry is expected to grow to over $200 million dollars by 2012 from the current $40 million dollars in 2008. The top 5 firms listed by MIP are Evalueserve, Pangea 3, CPA, Lexadigm & Clairvolex. Surprisingly only one of these firms is an offshoot of a conventional IP firm i.e. Clairvolex is backed by Lex Orbis. I am a little intrigued as to why other Indian IP firms have not forayed into this highly lucrative field of IP outsourcing especially since most of them will possess the skills to carry out basic processes such as prior-art searches and proof reading. In addition most of these firms already have several international clients.

Creating an adequate legal framework for the LPO industry

One of the first concerns that jumps to mind in the context of outsourcing is data protection especially since other spheres of outsroucing have been affected by it. This concern is probably magnified by several times when the data in question pertains to confidential legal information. The recent amendments to the IT Act provide for a stringent data-protection law and along with the Indian Penal Code, will help in providing for a strong legal deterrent against data theft. The real concern however, in my opinion, is whether or not the professional communications between employees of the LPO industry and their clients in foreign jurisdictions will be protected by the conventional client-attorney privileges in all national jurisdictions.

Historically client-attorney communications are privileged in common law countries like U.S., India & the U.K. The common law privileges can be split into litigation advice privilege and legal advice privilege. The former covers all communications made by the litigant once the decision to initiate litigation has been taken, not only to his lawyer but also to his servants. Legal advice privilege protects only those communications made between the lawyer and the litigant and not all communications between the litigant and his servants. In all probability legal advice rendered by a patent agent to their clients, before the decision to initiate litigation, will not be privileged under common law.

In countries like India the Evidence Act deems inadmissible as evidence, in a court of law, any communications between clients and advocates. But the term advocate covers only those who are enrolled with the Bar Council of India and several patent agents may not be enrolled with the Bar Council of India. Therefore all such communications may be produced in a Court of Law. A more important issue is whether an American court can compel an Indian patent agent to dispose in a case of patent infringement in the U.S.

Almost a year ago AIPPI & WIPO had begun discussions on the need to have a new international treaty to bring about consistency in defining client-attorney privileges in various national jurisdictions especially since IP litigation involves several professionals who may not be covered under ordinary client-attorney privileges. Treaty making is a lengthy process and I’m guessing it will be a long time before we the final text of any such treaty.

Account outsourcing in india

rskpo — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 06:10:35 +0000

ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE

RSKPO understands that a successful business depends on effective financial management rather than quality. Our account receivables services enables you preventing long delay between the time of service delivered and payment receipt and thus avoiding diminishing of your business cash flow.

The moment RSKPO receives the client accounts our team analyze the timely filing limits, payer wise breakups (say Federal, Commercial, or self pay), coding issues, and billing errors. Our main focus is on the cash transactions, watching on the aging reports and cash posting. We impose right action on every individual account. We coordinate with the clients seeking clarification or additional documentation. We then review all accounts of normal reimbursement and check against carrier’s fee structure.

RSKPO saves time and utilities and leads you focus on forming core competencies. We have our calling department equipped for claim status follow up and appeal interacting with case workers, employers, attorneys, patients, doctors’ office and insurance companies. Finance Outsourcings’ account receivable service enhances cash flow, reduces account receivables, increases collection figures, and improves customer relationships with timely Accounts Receivable Follow-Up Service.

RSKPO team calls to question the clients with the provided script of its information passed on to the billing analysts where they review the outcome to call again for clarification if arises.

We provide accounting solution for your business. if you are a company, Individual Firm or partnership. We can manage your accounts in prominent way with less- cost

Our related Accounting solutions are:

Basic accounting
Manage final accounts
Final Adjustments
MIS Reports
Strategy effective ROI
Minimum output appliances
Annual statement preparation
Investment reporting and reconciliations
Preparation of tax returns and annual reports, such as personal property and sales & use
Payroll processing
Meeting and conference registration processing
Preparation of financial analyses, including charts and graphs
Asset accounting management
Cash disbursements

We have improved receivable management processes for the leading National and Regional Services companies.

We are unique delivering account receivables services by:

Experienced Finance Outsourcing executive leadership team
Project design and implementation expertise
Assured quality process
Latest accounts receivable technology
Committed communication for mutual benefits

We can provide full or partial outsourcing; we can provide both in-house and off-site services; and we can provide temporary services and/or resources that might, from time to time, be needed. Our professionals have extensive experience in serving a diverse array of organizations that vary in size, nature and complexity.
Article By : R.S.Chandak

Business Name : RSKPO

Visit Us : www.rskpo.com

Mail Us : info@rskpo.com

Business Description :

Indian KPO Company stands for accounting outsourcing,
inventory management outsourcing, auditing outsourcing,legal outsourcing, Data entry, outsourcing, kpo, legal, legal outsourcing, consultancy, law, web, promotion, Indian taxation, kpo outsourcing.

Indian outsourcing company

rskpo — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 05:02:07 +0000

Data Entry :

Every large scale industries manage a large database regarding various issues like: employee’s profile, salary distribution management, large client network, various employment levels, production unit managing, cost effective planning schedules (overtime etc), PPF, promotional scheme, marketing, bonus, news circulars, supplementary supporting and all the rest issues regarding company profile. There is a major issue to proper data entry management in a targeted time. Our high Skill Professionals and entry operators help you in that case.

our related Data Entry Operations are :

1. Custom clients data controls

2. Business circular(s)

3. Diversify system controlling

4. Products price listing and maintenance

5. Certain overtime schedule management

AUDITING:

Due to increase taxation formalities a business person always confused with their transaction and about committed their liabilities regarding business. Unit owner take all these very cautious on the matter or accuracy. We provide auditing facility to overcome all these virtual burdens. We have our associates who will deliver you the best practice in, accounts evaluation and examination, financial and other operations.

A statutory auditor, who will study the audit system and internal auditor’s work, will evaluate all the work of an internal auditor. Below are few points to our object oriented solution:

Review of the organizational policies and there operations to ensure smooth operations.
Assistance in internal control system.
Applicability of accounting policies and standards.
Ensuring Safeguarding the business assets and right disposal of assets.
Verification of the accuracy and euthenics of the accounting records.
Errors and fraud management, help in detecting and provide preventions for that.
Helps in smooth functioning of internal check system.

Currently five senior level chartered accountants having more than 20 years of experience are associated with us and provide us complete range of services. Apart from them, we have trainee auditors who have two years of experience in handling the internal audit system.

Our related Auditing solutions are:

Management Audit
Audit of a Banking Company
Educational Institutions
Audit of a Insurance company
Audit of Hospitals
Audit of the co-operative societies
Tax Audit and Tax planning

We are looking forward to provide you pool of talents in this field and act as a one-stop contact point. All the works will be evaluated, checked before the final delivery.

Contact us today for your accounting needs. We will provide you a no obligation proposal that works for you in practical terms.

Article By : R.S.Chandak
Business Name : RSKPO
Visit Us : www.rskpo.com
Mail Us : info@rskpo.com
Contact Us : +91-941 431 8943
Business Description :

Guest Post: USPTO "Patent Outsourcing" Notice and Implications for LPO's

pixeljayanta — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 18:14:00 +0000

An earlier SpicyIP post dealt with a controversial USPTO notice that some alleged would kill the Indian LPO (legal process outsourcing) industry. In a guest post for us, Dr Sushil Kumar of Clairvolex, a leading Indian LPO, effectively rubbishes such claims.

Dr Kumar is Vice President, Patent Operations at Clairvolex, a premier Indian IP outsourcing company. He is a Ph.D in Bio-Chemistry from Delhi University and a registered Indian patent agent. Prior to Clairvolex, he was practising patents at Lex Orbis, a premier IP firm in New Delhi.

It ought not to be lost on our readers that Dr Kumar’s note comes at a time when the US and many world markets are taking a beating and many patent clients are looking to cut costs. Although LPO’s are not just about “cost arbitrage”, cost cuttings are a major driver of this booming legal sector.

USPTO Notice on the “Scope of Foreign Filing Licenses” – Implications for the IP Outsourcing Industry

A recent USPTO notice titled “the Scope of Foreign Filing Licenses” has been widely discussed in the context of its impact on the IP outsourcing industry. The language in which the notice is worded probably prompted a commentator to ask if “it sounds like the Death Knell for Indian LPOs” . The stated purpose of the notice is rather straightforward. It is in the form of a reminder to patent applicants and registered patent practitioners that a foreign filing license does not authorize them to send invention disclosures abroad to draft patent applications for eventual first filings in the United States. This article analyzes the implications of this notice, (if any), on the emerging IP outsourcing industry.

The Objectives of the Notice
The notice is titled “the Scope of Foreign Filing Licenses”. This means the objective of the USPTO is to explain the scope of the foreign filing licenses issued under Part 5 of Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) . The notice, which essentially is a reminder to patent applicants and registered patent practitioners, carries two messages:-

a. The export of subject matter (read invention disclosures) abroad (read to a country like India) pursuant to a foreign filing license is limited to purposes related to the filing of foreign patent applications.

b. Applicants who are considering export of subject matter abroad (meaning thereby sending invention disclosures from the United States to a country like India) for the preparation of patent application to be filed in the United States should contact the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) at the Department of Commerce for appropriate clearances.

The supplementary information of the notice further explains that the PTO has been receiving requests for foreign filing license with “short abstracts, PowerPoint® slides and even titles of the invention as the disclosure”. A foreign filing license granted on the basis of such a short description of the invention may not authorize filing abroad the ultimate resulting patent applications and may not authorize any additional material added after the initial request for foreign filing license. By implication, a request for foreign filing license must accompany a disclosure sufficiently describing the invention, though the notice does not specify what constitutes a sufficient disclosure. The notice however states that a foreign filing license obtained, basing itself on a short technical disclosure may not authorize a resulting foreign application with additional material.

Foreign Filing License
At the outset, it is important to know what the US law says with respect to foreign filing license. The rules concerning foreign filing license are codified under 37 CFR Part 5. According to the rules, a foreign filing license must be obtained to file a patent application abroad for an invention made in the United States, if the applicant does not intend to file a US patent application or if the foreign application is filed before 6 months of filing the US patent application . The license must be obtained before filing such foreign patent application including any modifications, amendments, or supplements thereto or divisions thereof or for the registration of a utility model or industrial design .

37 CFR 5.11(b) explains that a foreign filing license would also authorize the export of technical data abroad for purposes relating to the preparation, filing or possible filing and prosecution of a foreign patent application without separately complying with the regulations contained in 22 CFR parts 121 through 130 (International Traffic in Arms Regulations of the Department of State), 15 CFR parts 730–774 (Regulations of the Bureau of Industry and Security, Department of Commerce) and 10 CFR part 810 (Foreign Atomic Energy Programs of the Department of Energy). Here arises the first issue for consideration – Does the scope of a foreign filing license as articulated in 37 CFR 5.11(b) confine to the preparation, filing or possible filing and prosecution of a foreign patent application? The notice says it does. And the notice goes onto clarify that – “a foreign filing license from the USPTO does not authorize the exporting of subject matter abroad for the preparation of patent applications to be filed in the United States” and advises applicants to contact the BIS for appropriate clearances. This necessitates a review of the provisions contained in 15 CFR Parts 730-774 .

The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) & the Commerce Control List (CCL)
The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) is an agency under the US Department of Commerce responsible for implementing and enforcing the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), which regulate the export and re-export of most commercial items. The items regulated by the BIS are often called the “dual-use” items, which means that the item can have both commercial and military or proliferation applications. A comforting statement in the BIS’s ‘Introduction to Commerce Department Export Control’ is that “a relatively small percentage of total U.S. exports and re-exports require a license”.

License requirements are dependent upon an item’s technical characteristics, the destination of export, the end-user, and the end-use. The exporter must determine whether the export requires a license. The BIS recommends that ‘When making that determination consider what is being exported, to where, who will receive the item and what will it be used for’ . The Commerce Control List (CCL) refers to a list of controlled technologies (covered items) under the export control jurisdiction of the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS). CCL contains 10 categories of controlled items:

Category 0 – Nuclear Materials, Facilities & Equipment (and Miscellaneous Items)
Category 1 – Materials, Chemicals, Microorganisms, and Toxins
Category 2 – Materials Processing
Category 3 – Electronics
Category 4 – Computers
Category 5 (Part 1) – Telecommunications
Category 5 (Part 2) – Information Security
Category 6 – Sensors and Lasers
Category 7 – Navigation and Avionics
Category 8 – Marine
Category 9 – Propulsion Systems, Space Vehicles and Related Equipment

Each of the [above] categories is divided into 5 Product Groups:

A. Systems, Equipment and Components
B. Test, Inspection and Production Equipment
C. Material
D. Software
E. Technology

Items subject to the EAR that are not controlled by the CCL Category or do not fall under any other category in the CCL are designated by the number EAR99. EAR99 items generally consist of low-technology consumer goods and do not require a license in many situations. However, if the export of an EAR99 item is to an embargoed country, to an end-user of concern or in support of a prohibited end-use, a license may be required. It may be noted that the export control laws apply only to those technologies that are covered in the CCL category or by the EAR99. The technologies that do not fall under the above mentioned categories would not attract the export control laws.

Numerous technical fields where inventive activities take place regularly seem to be falling under the 10 categories of controlled items listed in the CCL. As such, it becomes mandatory for US patent filers to carry out an export clearance check before sending invention disclosures to India for the purposes of drafting patent applications. So, the following points emerge from the analysis:

a. US patent filers should not consider a foreign filing license as the authorization required to send invention disclosures to India for drafting a complete patent application

b. US patent filers must conduct an export clearance check before sending invention disclosures to India for drafting patent applications

c. If the export clearance check reveals that the subject matter is a controlled item, the US patent filer must seek the necessary clearance from the BIS.

Now let’s look at how the notice impacts the IP outsourcing industry in general.

Implications for the IP Outsourcing Industry
The following propositions capture the implications of the USPTO notice on the IP outsourcing industry:-

A. The notice will have no bearing on any IP service rendered by an Indian vendor relying on publicly available information such as published patent applications, issued patents, expired patents, and the information available at the Public PAIR of the USPTO’s website.

B. Examples of offshore IP services that will be unaffected by the notice are:

(1) Invalidity Search: Search for identifying arts that can be used to invalidate a patent. Invalidity search does not involve sharing of technology between an instructing client in the United States and a vendor abroad, in a country such as India. All that needs to be shared is the number of the patent that is to be validated. The instructions will trigger a search and analysis, mainly of the File Wrapper which is again available to the public; leading to identification of potentially damaging disclosures are grounds that could be used to invalidate a patent.

(2) Proofreading of issued US patents. A pre-cursor to correct errors in an issued patent caused by the PTO or by the applicant by filing a certificate of correction is to proofread the patent. Proofreading involves comparative review of the patent application and the issued patent in light of the various prosecution steps (such as claim amendments) as captured in the File Wrapper. So, the notice has no bearing on this activity as well.

(3) Freedom-to-operate (FTO) search. Search and analysis to identify patent applications or patents that could potentially block the freedom to market a new product or process does not require the client to share/release/export technology from the United States to an overseas destination where a vendor rendering such service is located.

(4) Remote Electronic Docketing is a major service line in the Indian IP offshoring space. The Indian outsourcing vendors, especially those who are backed by established IP law firms, are able to deliver high quality (read error free) docketing services remotely to US corporations. The USPTO notice has no direct bearing on docketing services. However, it could be argued that the Indian docketing personnel must not be given access to an invention disclosure stored in the same server. This is easy to achieve by configuring an appropriate access level.

(5) Office Action Response Aid – Some of the Indian vendors, especially those having knowledge of US patent prosecution, help US companies write technical summaries of the grounds for claim rejections cited by the Examiners. Typically these are technical summaries and do not contain qualitative statements or opinions. The Office Actions are available in the Public PAIR so are the filed applications and voluntary amendments, if any, made prior to the issuance of the office action. Therefore, the notice will have no bearing on this service as well.

(6) Novelty Searches. If a client in the United States wants an Indian vendor to conduct novelty searches, the client will be required to send a technical description of the subject matter to be searched upon to India. The vendors would typically have a standard format in which the search inputs/submissions are captured. Based on the search inputs/submissions, the searchers will develop the search strategy (the choice of databases, the search methodology (the parameters used for the search), the key words, the key strings, narrowing down the results, enlisting the most relevant art in the order of relevance etc.). The following questions arise for consideration:

a. What extent of technology needs to be disclosed for a searcher to perform a sophisticated and targeted novelty search?

b. Whether a client needs to disclose the invention, fully or even partially, for a searcher to develop the search strategy?

c. Can the search input be such that it does not amount to export of technology to an overseas destination by a US client?

It is very much possible that the technical description required to perform a novelty search can be articulated in a manner that does not amount to sending the complete invention disclosure abroad, warranting an export control check.

(7) Patent Licensing Support Services such as claim charting & product to claim mapping. These services strictly employ publicly available information and the notice will not have any bearing on them.

(8) White space analysis, patent mapping, technology landscape studies. No invention or confidential or proprietary technology needs to be shared with an overseas vendor to perform white space analysis, mapping and landscape studies. As such, the notice will not have any bearing on these services lines.

(9) File Wrapper Analysis for litigation or licensing support is performed on the basis of the documents available at the Public PAIR of the USPTO and does not involve release of technology by a US company to an overseas vendor.

(10) Paralegal Services. This is a major service line in the Indian IP outsourcing industry and does not strictly confine to the prosecution of patent or trademarks application at the USPTO. Many vendors, especially the ones promoted by IP law firms, have substantial knowledge of managing global patent and trade marks portfolios. The functions include – IDS management, recordal of assignment/change of name, attending to missing part filing, management of correspondences with associates, and a number of paralegal services connected with IP prosecution. Some of these services are closely linked to docketing, and some can be delivered stand alone. As in the case of docketing, so long as the paralegals have no access to invention disclosures, the USPTO notice will have no bearing on these services. It is feasible to configure restricted access and ensure that a paralegal does not get access to invention disclosures.

In addition to the above, numerous Client-Specific IP functions that the Indian vendors handle do not require release of technology from the US corporations to Indian vendors. A recent study by Value Notes reveals how rapidly the Indian IP outsourcing space is evolving. The services that drive the growth of this space include patent searches, analytics, docketing, paralegal and prosecution support functions. These are scalable services that are run on robust processes deployed alongside docketing platforms. And as such, they are scalable. The hiring, training and retention of personnel can be much faster in these areas as compared to patent drafting and patent illustration. US companies who have taken the lead in IP outsourcing see substantial value in off-shoring a variety of paralegal functions and in discovering newer functions that can help them reduce costs, turnaround time and maintain a highly efficient and lean in-house IP department.

Therefore, rendering the final analysis the USPTO notice:

(A) Will have no or little bearing on the majority of the services rendered by the Indian outsourcing industry

(B) Has no bearing on the drafting of patent applications by Indian vendors based on inventions made in India at the R&D facilities of US corporations – a trend that is on the rise

Accordingly, the USPTO notice will not adversely impact the growth of the Indian IP outsourcing industry. As someone jokingly put it, the notice on the contrary helps the Indian vendors to add another service line – export clearance check! From a practical point of view, many high quality patent attorneys involved in managing off-shored IP functions in India believe that patent drafting is not a candidate function for a scalable off-shoring program. But, this can be the subject for another debate and an extensive analysis. US corporations will continue to drive IP outsourcing forward so long as it makes better business sense to them. Outsourcing IP functions by US companies to Indian vendors is a credible, and by now empirically validated value proposition. Regulatory barriers seldom withstand the forces of globalization. The free movement of services across the nations will continue to rise in an increasingly ‘flattening world’. Quality, management advantages and cost savings will continue to drive forward the fast emerging IP off-shoring space.

Need Account Outsourcing

rskpo — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 02:25:02 +0000

ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE

RSKPO team calls to question the clients with the provided script of its information passed on to the billing analysts where they review the outcome to call again for clarification if arises.

We provide accounting solution for your business. if you are a company, Individual Firm or partnership. We can manage your accounts in prominent way with less- cost

Our related Accounting solutions are:

Basic accounting
Manage final accounts
Final Adjustments
MIS Reports
Strategy effective ROI
Minimum output appliances
Annual statement preparation
Investment reporting and reconciliations
Preparation of tax returns and annual reports, such as personal property and sales & use
Payroll processing
Meeting and conference registration processing
Preparation of financial analyses, including charts and graphs
Asset accounting management
Cash disbursements

We have improved receivable management processes for the leading National and Regional Services companies.

We are unique delivering account receivables services by:

Experienced Finance Outsourcing executive leadership team
Project design and implementation expertise
Assured quality process
Latest accounts receivable technology
Committed communication for mutual benefits

RSKPO serve industries like Financial, Credit card issuers, Banks, Auto and installment lenders, Debt purchasers, Retail, Private label credit issuers, Communications, Wire line, Wireless, Cable.

Please feel free to contact us.

Article By : R.S.Chandak
Business Name : RSKPO
Visit Us : www.rskpo.com
Mail Us : info@rskpo.com
Contact Us : +91-941 431 8943
Business Description :
Indian KPO Company stands for accounting outsourcing,
nventory management outsourcing, auditing outsourcing,legal outsourcing, Data entry, outsourcing, kpo, legal, legal outsourcing, consultancy, law, web, promotion, Indian taxation, kpo outsourcing.

KPO in India

rskpo — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 04:24:02 +0000

KPO At a glance
KPO (Knowledge process outsourcing) is the concept of service outsourcing.
Benefits of KPO
Standardized technical education is now widely available to all in the developing countries. This trained manpower is also accessible at very low cost as well. It therefore makes sense to utilize their services.
KPO Skills Defined
The following skills form the basis of knowledge-based firms and their workforce.
    * Analyzing data and information to produce meaningful documents.
    * Researching information from various sources.
    * Converting raw technical data into presentable documents.
    * Use of high levels of conceptualization and theoretical knowledge.
    * Proficiency with various advanced software and hardware devices.
    * Maintaining workflow, meeting deadlines, and applying quality controls.
Outsourcing to KPO firms can provide the following benefits:
    * Valuable cost savings that can be utilized elsewhere.
    * Standard operational efficiency.
    * Trained professionals at work.
    * Savings in time and management energy for maintaining in house services.
    * Increase in profits.
Our services:
Accounts Solution:
Our Accounts solution experts manages Financial accounts, Business ROI Management. we provide accounting solution for your business.if you are a company,Individual Firm or partnership. we can manage your accounts in prominient way with less- cost.

Internal Audit In India:
Internal audit is an independent appraisal, involving specialized application of techniques of auditing in accordance with the specific needs of the organization.

Consultancy services:
We Provide all type of consultancy regarding accounting, BookKeeping, Auditing, Inventory Handlling, payroll Law cases and web-sites.

Entry Outsourcing:
Every large scale industries manage a large database regarding various issues like: employee’s profile, salary distribution management, large client network, various employement lavels,production unit managing, cost effective planning schedules (ovrtime etc), PPF,promotional secheme, marketing, bonus, news circulars, supplimentery supportings and all the rest
issues regarding company profile.There is a major issue to proper data entry management in a targeted time. Our high Skill Professionals and entry operators helps you in that case.

Inventory management:
You have a store, godown and manage a large storage then the major difficulities to manage all in well formed. and in finalize according requirement. common factors in inventory management are LIFO, FIFO. But when the problem is to manage reordering lavel and manage effective cost management then every one person faces more difficulties and seems cumbersome job.

Legal Outsourcing:
Dealing with legalities need professional hands as it is a very complex field. We believe that proper interpretation and understanding of a Law, drafting of legal documents can only be done through professionals well versed in this field. Depending on your requirements we select the right person amongst our highly skilled legal professional desk so as to fully justify your money’s value. We provide services of experienced professionals at very competitive charges.

Tax Services:
The company you choose to handle tax outsourcing should be professionally strong enough to provide you with the services you need. At Brigade our state-of-the-art tax outsourcing solutions and proven methodology enable clients to substantially reduce cost, while focusing on their core business. A trusted tax outsourcing partner with the ability to help improve your process while reducing costs, Brigade can offer your company a tax
outsourcing solution designed to meet your needs.

Web Site Outsourcing:
Web Site designing, Development & promotion is the key skill of web services and regarding matter.

Article By : R.S.Chandak
Business Name : RSKPO
Visit Us : www.rskpo.com
Mail Us : info@rskpo.com
Contact Us : +91-941 431 8943
Business Description :
Indian KPO Company stands for accounting outsourcing, nventory management outsourcing, auditing outsourcing,legal outsourcing, Data entry, outsourcing, kpo, legal, legal outsourcing, consultancy, law, web, promotion, Indian taxation, kpo outsourcing.

Celebrating Independence Day: Freedom from Trade Protection?

pixeljayanta — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 04:42:00 +0000

SpicyIP wishes its readers a very happy independence day.

In a previous post, we highlighted a US guideline that appeared to possess all the trappings of a trade protectionist measure. Gauri Kamath has an interesting article on this theme in the Businessworld, which I reproduce below. She quotes David Perla, co-CEO of New York’s Pangea3, a leading LPO that employs lawyers in India, as stating that the guideline will not really have any significant impact on Indian service providers. (Perhaps) In response to Gene Quinn’s highly provocative and outlandishly absurd statement that the USPTO notice “will certainly kill all patent outsourcing (and) likely will also kill a lot of technical development outsourcing as well”, Perla notes that “certain patent law firms are using the notice to misinform and mislead clients and potential clients”.

Outsourcing Snags

A US notice on patent outsourcing has caused a lot of confusion

GAURI KAMATH
08 Aug 2008

Is the US trying to discourage its companies from availing of cheap legal services from low-cost economies such as India? At the heart of the debate is a recent notice by the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) to persons and companies who send information regarding their inventions overseas in the course of patenting them. The notice clarifies that unless this ‘export’ of information is intended to facilitate the filing of a foreign (non-US) patent, it will need to be cleared by the Bureau of Industry and Security, or BIS, in the US Department of Commerce. The BIS is concerned with advancing US economic interests without compromising its security.

It is common practice for US companies and law firms to avail of cut-price services from India for things like patent search and drafting to aid the filing of a US patent. According to Pune’s ValueNotes, patent services made up 20 per cent of the value of legal services outsourced to India’s so-called legal process outsourcing, or LPO, companies in 2007. It estimates the overall Indian LPO business at between $225 million and $240 million, at least a 50 per cent jump over 2006.

Information that clients disclose to these LPOs in order to help them do their job appears to fall under the purview of the latest USPTO notice, stoking fears that this might put the brakes on patent services outsourcing. The US stance “will certainly kill all patent outsourcing (and) likely will also kill a lot of technical development outsourcing as well”, writes Gene Quinn, a patent attorney at the Maryland-based patent law firm White & Quinn on his blog IPWatchdog.com. Quinn, who is opposed to legal services outsourcing, thinks this recent notice will “bring jobs back to the US”.

But that is an extreme reaction, says David Perla, co-CEO of New York’s Pangea3, a leading LPO that employs lawyers in India. Perla explains that in the first place, only those companies that have inventions around certain specified software and dual-use technologies need BIS clearance to send information overseas. And Pangea3 does not have any business in that area, he says. “A lot of companies don’t outsource that,” he adds.

Besides, the USPTO has merely restated an old rule. The only impact, says Perla, is “confusion in the short term” as companies inquire whether this changes anything. “Large corporations have quickly recognised that the notice is merely a re-statement of current law and policy,” he says. “They realise that there is no need to change their current pro-outsourcing posture.” Perla alleges that “certain patent law firms are using the notice to misinform and mislead clients and potential clients”.

The notice does not explicitly ban patent offshoring, says Neeraja Kandala, principal analyst for legal services at ValueNotes, though any need for government clearance has the potential to slow things down. “But to understand the implications, we need to investigate this further,” she says.

The USPTO’s decision to issue a clarification suggests that at least some companies might not have been aware of this rule. “A great majority of the Indian law firms may not have been aware… till the notice,” writes Shamnad Basheer, a patent expert, on his blog spicyip. But he suggests that less than 10 per cent of outsourced patent applications might be affected.

In the meantime, Pangea3 has drafted a formal response to its clients explaining how the notice impacts the current patent prosecution work outsourced to India. For the moment, “there is still confusion”, says Perla. But he expects it to die down as things become clearer.

Audit outsourcing in india

rskpo — Sun, 03 Aug 2008 03:52:08 +0000

Rskpo provide complete professional solutions by our experts in their profession. Our knowledge of vast range of professional experience handling them and execute properly all the assignments for our clients. Our services do not just satisfy your requirements, but also want to enhance and grow you business standards, we plan, manage and execute every part of your entire project life cycle. Our straightforward approach towards our customer services helps us to provide honest commitments. We are more focused on delivering true customer values, by providing them cost effective solutions, time bound deliveries, error free and quality products.

AUDIT OUTSOURCING:

Due to increase taxation formalities a business person always confused with their various types of transactions and about their commitments. The business concerns want to handle all these matters very carefully by an expert to avoid all obstacles. We provide auditing facility to overcome all these virtual burdens. We have our associates who will deliver you the best practice in, accounts evaluation and examination, financial and other operations.

A statutory auditor, who will study the audit system and internal auditor’s work, will evaluate all the work of an internal auditor. Below are few points to our object oriented solution:

Review of the organizational policies and there operations to ensure smooth operations.

1. Assistance in internal control system.

2. Applicability of accounting policies and standards.

3. Ensuring Safeguarding the business assets and right disposal of assets.

4. Verification of the accuracy and authenticity of the accounting records.

5. Errors and fraud management, help in detecting and provide preventions for that.

6. Helps in smooth functioning of internal check system.

Our related Auditing solutions are:

1. Management Audit

2. Audit of Individuals

3. Audit of Partnership firms

4. Audit of Companies

5. Tax Audit and Tax planning

6. Audit of the co-operative societies

7. Audit of a Govt Sector industries

All the works will be evaluated, checked before the final delivery. Contact us today for your Auditing Services. We provide proposal for the specific requirements of your work on your demand.

Visit Us : www.rskpo.com
Mail Us : info@rskpo.com
Contact Us : +91-941 431 8943

US Guidelines on Patent Outsourcing: Sounding the Death Knell for Indian LPO's?

pixeljayanta — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 14:57:00 +0000

The recent WTO talks came a cropper: despite intense negotiations over several weeks, member states couldn’t agree on critical “agricultural” issues. Intellectual Property issues also featured prominently, as developing countries pressed for international norms on GI’s and mandatory “disclosure of origin” (in so far as patent applications covering bio-resources were concerned).

While some blame the newly emerging economies such as China and India for the failure of these talks, others have pointed fingers at the “developed” bloc. With elections around the corner and the Congress already being accused of getting too cosy with the US on the “nuclear” issue, it was a foregone conclusion that the suave Kamal Nath was not going to budge. It certainly paid off for him–for he returned a “hero” to the millions of farmers in India. And earned accolades from even the Left Parties!

All this leaves one with the very perplexing question: what kind of impact will the growth of countries such as China and India have on the future of world trade? Particularly, when their clout seems to be increasing exponentially, making them less susceptible to the pressure tactics from the developed bloc.

Will we see less trade liberalization in future? Is this the end of the WTO? Will there be more nationalization and less internationalisation? More bilaterals and less multilaterals? Only time will tell.

But, I digress here. The purpose of this post is not to predict the future of the world trading system. But to rather highlight the fact that paradoxically, as countries speak the language of free trade at various multilateral fora, domestically, they find new ways to erect trade barriers.

The latest in this regard is a USPTO notice that many suspect will eat into the profits of the rapidly growing LPO (legal process outsourcing) industry in India. Some even predict that it will “kill” the industry altogether! Much like IT outsourcing, legal process outsourcing leverages the “cost” advantage. Illustratively, an LPO unit can help cut costs for a client by as much as 60-70%. If IBM pays a US law firm USD 10,000 to prepare a complete patent specification, and Indian LPO could do this for as little as USD 3000. That the industry is slated to boom in the future is evident from this Times of India report which notes:

“A study by ValueNotes, a Pune-based research firm shows, revenues from the Indian patent services offshoring industry are estimated at $46 million for 2007. It’s expected to reach $206 million by end 2012. The study reveals the current addressable value of the patent services offshoring market is estimated at $2.2 billion.

“We believe that the Indian patent offshoring industry will grow 35% per annum over the next four years. As for the number of employees, our estimate is that about 6,950 people will be employed by the end of 2012,” says Subha Kalathur, senior analyst with ValueNotes.

…Last year, there were about 50 vendors offering patent services from India. As of now, US accounts for 60% of the work.”

Anyway, back to the notorious USPTO notice which has already been highlighted by Kruttika in this post here. The gist of this notice is explained quite succinctly in this note from iplaw (you need to be a registered subscriber to access this):

“The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has cautioned against certain outsourcing practices, issuing a reminder that shipping data about an invention to another country for the purpose of preparing a U.S. patent application may not be legal.

In a notice published in the Federal Register Thursday, the USPTO said inventors that want to get their U.S. patent applications prepared overseas need to get appropriate clearances from the Bureau of Industry and Security at the Department of Commerce before exporting subject matter abroad. “

With the U.S. economy faltering, companies are increasingly looking to drive down costs by outsourcing legal work to foreign law firms or legal service providers that charge cut-rate prices. Legal outsourcing firms now take on everything from document review to brief and motion writing. But when it comes to patent drafting, firms must be diligent about making sure they don’t run afoul of export laws, the USPTO said. “

The USPTO Notice also states unequivocally that a foreign filing license from the USPTO does not authorize exporting of subject matter abroad for the preparation of patent applications to be filed in the United States.

Of course, the USPTO hasn’t laid down any new law here, but merely clarified the import of already existing Export Administration Regulations (EAR) drafted by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) at the Department of Commerce. These regulations govern the export of certain kinds of “technical data”. Needless to state, patent applications and invention disclosure statements that are shipped overseas might contain some of this regulated “technical data”.

The first question that springs to mind is: what is the likely impact of such regulations? To what extent would it impact LPO’s in India? In this regard, it bears noting that these regulations are not outright prohibitions on the outsourcing of legal work, but usher in a kind of “licence raj” governing the “export” of patent related “data”. At least one commentator opines that since the regulations hit at all possible patent outsourcing activities (patent searches, patent drafting etc), the EAR sounds the death knell for LPO’s!

Yet another patent outsourcing unit in the US (with operations in India), LawScribe Inc makes light of this notice and states that their clients have anyway been complying with these requirements and the licenses are relatively easy to procure.

Given that the above commentators represent two opposite camps, the truth may lie somewhere in between. At this stage, one is not certain as to how narrowly or widely the regulations are likely to be interpreted. What kind of “technical data” would be covered? Would the regulations catch most forms of patent outsourcing or just a minor portion of it? The chief patent counsel of a major American corporation that a friend of mine spoke with suggests that only 10% of the applications outsourced are likely to be hit by these new licensing requirements.

And if licenses are required to be taken, how much time and money would this inovlve? In other words, if LPO’s now deliver a cost advantage of 60-70%, would they sustain this in the face of increased costs from procuring licenses (my guess is that unlike LawScribe Inc, quoted above, a great majority of the Indian law firms may not have been aware of the EAR till the notice recently issued by the USPTO).

Most importantly perhaps, we need to ask: what kind of “liability” do companies incur by transgressing these rules. Let’s assume that a Pfizer patent covering a major drug was drafted in India without taking the requisite Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) clearance/license. Upon being sued by Pfizer for violating its patent, can Ranbaxy argue that the patent is not enforceable, since BIS permission hadn’t been procured prior to shipping out patent data to India? If so, do these regulations that add on one more layer of patentability criteria (in a very loose way of course) implicate TRIPS? Will they implicate GATS commitments that the US has undertaken? And most importantly, do they sit well within the current US constitutional framework? I’m sure that US experts will offer us answers to these perplexing issues in the days to come.

Notwithstanding our inability to predict the amount of damage that such regulations are likely to unleash on the LPO industry in India, one cannot help but feel that these regulations embody some level of “trade protectionism” aimed at keeping patent drafting work within the US. The USPTO may have been pushed to issue this clarification in the face of intense lobbying by conservative law firms that have been opposed to the word “outsourcing” from the word go. Incidentally I consulted for a couple of Indian LPO’s in the past (see this interview here) and found that the patent bar was heavily opposed to any kind of outsourcing of patent drafting work. It was mainly the corporations that were pushing this, as they were interested in keeping their costs down.

A US commentator who is clearly hostile to patent outsourcing (not least because it makes significant inroads into his bread and butter) notes:

“I believe there is more US protectionism in this new stance on export regulations than anything else. With this being an election year and the economy being such a big issue and with outsourcing taking more and more jobs away from the US, I suspect this surfacing now is not a coincidence. This new stance will certainly kill all patent outsourcing, but likely will also kill a lot of technical development outsourcing as well, which will bring jobs back to the US. Thus, I don’t expect that there will be any loosening of the regulations in the near future. It is about time that our government does something about all the jobs that are going overseas, particularly when many of these jobs have left the US in clear violation of already existing export regulations!”

How then should India react to such regulations (assuming that they are interpreted very broadly to impact a number of patent outsourcing transactions)?

India may be at a loss to take any principled objection to such rules, given that it resorts to protectionist measures frequently–most noteably in its patent regime (a compulsory license can issue if the patent is not worked in India!). However, some suggestions below:

i) Perhaps India ought to resort to the age old “tit for tat” remedy that is now wired into the very fabric of the WTO (the WTO permits trade ‘retaliation” against scofflaw states that fail to abide by WTO rulings, an aspect that we covered in a previous post here). India could therefore come up with its own set of export regulations (EAR’s) aimed at catching every “Indian” application that is drafted in the US. But then, given the relatively low numbers of such applications (when compared with the amount of US applications drafted in India), this may not seem an attractive proposition.

Interestingly, India already has a set of rules that impact the export of patent applications to the US. A government notification under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 lists out certain technology items that cannot be exported without a license. Some patent applications are likely to fall within this notification, popularly referred to as SCOMET (Special Chemicals, Organisms, Materials, Equipment and Technologies).

Apparently, another legislation interestingly titled the “Weapons of Mass Destruction and their Delivery Systems and (Prohibition of unlawful activities) Act” 2005 (and here I thought that this term was exclusive to the US!) might also cover some patent applications that are exported out to the US. In particular, Section 13 of the WMD Act provides for controls on export, transfer and retransfer as well as transit of any technology notified under this act.

The above regulations however capture only certain kinds of “technology” and patent applications: for an effective “retaliation”, the government ought to expand the licensing scheme to include every kind of “Indian” patent application drafted in the US.

I have to admit however that I’m not a great fan of such trade retaliatory measures. Given the number of US companies that offshore R&D to India, we may end up shooting ourselves in the foot by instituting excessively bureaucratic licensing regimes.

ii) The second option for India, and one which appears far more sensible is this:

The existence of US regulations that operate as trade barriers could be used by India as a bargaining chip during trade negotiations with the US. It could also be leveraged strategically in the face of increasing pressure to have India’s legal sector opened up to US firms.

ps: I wish to express my sincere gratitude to Raj Dave (Managing Partner, Darby and Darby), Rahul Das (Townsend and Townsend), Swati Sukumar and Archana Shanker (Anand and Anand) for valuable discussions that threw more light on this knotty issue. Needless to state, none of them are to be held liable for any views contained herein.