In-House Impact Award: Patrick Bombach, Intel
Being a deal lawyer in-house at Intel Corp. means no shortage of work. This past year Patrick Bombach played central roles in the company's $16.7…
November 15, 2017 at 06:30 PM
4 minute read
Photo: Jason Doiy/ALM
Being a deal lawyer in-house at Intel Corp. means no shortage of work. This past year Patrick Bombach played central roles in the company's $16.7 billion acquisition of Altera, the $4.2 billion spinout Intel Security into the newly re-formed McAfee and, most recently, its $15.3 billion acquisition of Mobileye, signaling Intel as a serious player in the autonomous car race.
Bombach recently told The Recorder about Intel's “hands-on” approach to working with outside counsel on transactions.
Would you say there's an Intel way of approaching a transaction, or is each deal approached as a singular exercise? Each deal as a matter of course is unique, but our overall philosophy entering into a potential transaction is to think about what we want and why and how to accomplish our goals in a manner that is best for Intel and its stockholders.
My expectation for our M&A team is that each member fully understands each and every issue, both business and legal, to achieve optimal outcomes for Intel. We have to be much more than lawyers.
Do you have a philosophy on what sorts of matters should go to outside counsel and what should be handled internally on any given deal? Does the volume of deals the company has going at any given time change that mix? Our team is extremely “hands-on” … perhaps to the consternation of our outside counsel. In all seriousness, it is impossible for outside counsel to understand what is going on behind the curtain, and it is our team's responsibility to drive projects forward.
That being said, we work closely with our outside counsel and expect our firms to understand our business and approach. We work with a few firms and hold them to high standards, but we view them as valued, long-term business partners. We believe this approach allows our outside counsel to provide exceptional service and helps us achieve better results.
How would you describe your role personally on each of these three deals? What were your chief responsibilities on each? My principal role at Intel evolved over the course of these three transactions from associate director, acting as an individual contributor, to group counsel, managing M&A Legal, to managing director, managing all of Intel capital legal.
I went from being “in the weeds” day-to-day to advising our executives on strategic decisions (yet somehow still “in the weeds”). However, I've always viewed my chief responsibility as setting our team up for success. I try to empower them to make decisions, remove obstacles within the broader organization and take responsibility when things don't go as planned. Moreover, I strive to give my team credit and exposure for their hard work, and I would be remiss not to mention Benjamin Olson and David Miscia for their roles on McAfee and Mobileye, respectively. In my eyes, this is a team award.
What were the key legal challenges to disentangling Intel Security from the large company and rolling it out into its own business while still maintaining a significant stake in the new McAfee? As you can imagine, it is incredibly difficult to separate a fully-integrated, global, billion-dollar business from a corporation such as Intel. The challenges ran the gamut—IP, tax, employment, IT, supply-chain, finance, contracts, corporate, jurisdictional, compliance, regulatory. But in the end, the team was able to pull together the people and technology on time and on target to help create one of the largest pure-play, cybersecurity companies in the industry.
The Mobileye transaction clearly signaled to the market that Intel will be a serious player in the autonomous vehicle space. How much does the regulatory and competitive environment in that nascent industry affect the work M&A lawyers do on a deal like this one? The Mobileye transaction is exciting for all of Intel. Not only is it a tremendous growth opportunity for our business, but autonomous vehicles have the potential to transform society and save countless lives.
Because the industry is still in its infancy, we understood that there would be risks that are not easily quantified and that we would need to look beyond the standard due diligence checklist. Completing the deal required us to see the world 10 to 15 years out and understand Intel's place in that world. It goes back to what I mentioned before—at Intel Capital Legal, we believe that we have to be much more than lawyers to succeed.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow the Deal Got Done: Sidley Austin and NWSL Angel City Football Club/Iger
O'Melveny Secures Global Clearances for Korean Air-Asiana Merger
Delaware Supreme Court Asked If Ellison's Plans Affected Oracle's NetSuite Acquisition
3 minute readCo-Founder and Startup Divorce: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250