Spinning circle Big letter B

Patrick Guida is chair of the firm’s banking and finance practice. He has been providing legal services to institutional banking clients throughout New England for more than three decades. He previously served as in-house counsel for two major banks.

He is known for his precision in complex financing transactions, often representing institutional lenders and borrowers – including major banks – in deals involving historic redevelopment, economic development bonds, and private business acquisition and expansion. He has established a special expertise in financing of healthcare transactions. He is experienced in multi-million dollar syndicated and participated deals.

Patrick also represents major real estate developers in their project development, permitting, borrowing and leasing transactions, including major development projects within the Capital Center District in downtown Providence. Patrick brings to the table a wealth of alternative financing options that help divergent parties reach mutually beneficial accord and compromise during the negotiation process.

Patrick has represented several national and regional lending institutions in the structuring, documenting and implementation of numerous financing transactions including:

  • Major commercial and industrial development projects.
  • Federal and State historic tax credit redevelopments of several major, commercial and multifamily residential projects.
  • State and state agency issue industrial development bond transactions.
  • State and state agency issue health and educational institution bond transactions.

Contact & Links

Location

  • 321 South Main Street, Suite 400
    Providence, RI 02903

Education

  • Union College, graduated 1973

Bar Admissions

  • Rhode Island, Admitted to practice in Rhode Island
  • Massachusetts, Admitted to practice in Massachusetts
  • Ohio, Admitted to practice in Ohio

Affiliations

  • American Bar Foundation - Chair of Rhode Island Fellow
  • American College of Commercial Finance Lawyers - Regent and Fellow
  • Barrington Building Committee - Co-Chair Middle School Project
  • National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws - Commissioner
  • Rhode Island Bar Foundation - Fellow

Lawyer of the Year Badge - 2019 - Banking and Finance Law

Named "Lawyer of the Year" by Best Lawyers® for:

  • Banking and Finance Law, Providence (2019)

Recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® 2022 for work in:

  • Banking and Finance Law
  • Commercial Finance Law

Awards:

  • Patrick was honored in 2014 as a Distinguished Service Award winner by the National Association of State Boards of Education; it is the highest honor the NASBE can bestow on a state board of education member.
  • Patrick was elected as a Fellow to the American College of Commercial Finance Lawyers in 2011 and became the first member from Rhode Island. Election to the ACCFL is based on commercial finance law focus; preeminence in the field; and substantial contribu

Spinning circle Big letter B

New Guidelines for IP in Commercial Finance Benefit both Lenders and Businesses

June 2017 from the Duffy & Sweeney blog:

By Patrick A. Guida | A new model agreement for documenting transactions secured by intellectual property clarifies much of the process for both lenders and business owners in financial transactions involving intellectual property as collateral. The new Model Intellectual Property Security Agreement (“MIPSA”) addresses copyrights, patents, trademarks, licenses and various other sub-categories of IP assets.

According to the ABA’s article in its publication The Business Lawyer (Summer 2016), this Model Agreement (prepared by an ABA Task Force I served on) “attempts to bridge the gap between UCC and IP lawyers by offering—and explaining—provisions the lawyers should consider in documenting a secured loan when the collateral includes intellectual property.

“Prior to this effort, there weren’t any standard models for documenting intellectual property security interests and every law firm gave it their best shot. Some turned out better than others. After years of different approaches, the new model provides confidence for both banks and borrowers that a legally enforceable security interest can be done right. It gives a higher level of assurance to bankers that the deal is effectively documented and to principals of borrower entities that they are less likely to be pursued for payments as guarantors because of defective underlying security agreements.

In one instance, a firm client who was entitled to a security interest in a trademark that had substantial value requested that we review an agreement prepared by another law firm to be filed with the US Patent and Trademark Office. As it turned out, the documentation was defective and, without our intervention, could have created unanticipated risk of liability for both our secured party client and the debtor.

In the process of creating the new agreement and explanatory memo, we sought to elucidate what needs to be done for different categories of IP. Rules are different even for patents and trademarks. For instance, the covenants accompanying a security agreement describing patents are different from those accompanying a security agreement describing trademarks.

For the last five years, our ABA Task Force and committees of the American Bar Association Business Law Section dedicated themselves to drafting and perfecting this model agreement. It has been a long road with an excellent resolution. I recently presented a program explaining the law behind MIPSA and highlighting how the new model agreement can leverage the value. The program was part of the American Law Institute-CLE’s annual Commercial Lending Today conference, held in San Francisco in April.

Your browser is not fully compatible with our automatic printer friendly formatting.

Please use the print button to print this profile page.

Spinning circle Big letter B