# US 2014/0195415 A1 · System and method for facilitating the amending of syndicated loans

> Agents: this data is available as JSON from the patentgrep API and MCP server — see https://patentgrep.com/llms.txt

- Number: US 2014/0195415 A1
- Document ID: US20140195415A1
- Status: Published application
- Kind: A1
- Application number: 14/055,708
- Filed: 2013-10-16
- Published: 2014-07-10
- Earliest claimed: 2011-06-10
- Assignees: LendAmend LLC
- Applicants: LendAmend LLC
- Inventors: Tejs Broberg; Ron Silverton; Matt Cornue; Brian Bentow
- Web page: https://patentgrep.com/patent/US20140195415A1

## CPC

- G06Q 40/03: Credit; Loans; Processing thereof
- G06Q: INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR

## Abstract

A system and method are provided for facilitating the amending of syndicated loans. Authorized users are registered in connection with their respective funds invested in the loan. Fund registration data is received for each fund and includes the fund holding amount and whether the fund is of the single or dual signature type. Authorized users may vote supporting, opposing or conditional with regard to the proposed amendment. A calculation is performed to anticipate the voting outcome before the amendment deadline. If the amendment is anticipated to pass, the conditional votes are converted to supporting votes. Typical embodiments provide for an Internet-enabled interface through which authorized users may enter or change their vote while monitoring the real-time status of the amendment. Agents may be automatically provided fund consents for each fund ending up with a supporting vote in a passing amendment. Funds may be automatically notified of the consent fee earned.

## Claims

### Claim 1

A method for facilitating the amending of loan terms, the method comprising the steps of:
identifying a proposed amendment to terms of a loan, the loan having a loan amount, at least one borrower and a multiplicity of lenders, the multiplicity of lenders having respective funds invested in the loan, the proposed amendment having an agent and an amendment deadline;
determining a voting threshold required to approve the proposed amendment, the voting threshold being expressed in the same units as, or as a percentage of, the loan amount;
receiving fund registration data for one or more of the funds, the fund registration data for each fund including a respective fund holding amount, the fund holding amount for each respective fund being an amount invested in the loan by the respective fund;
registering, in machine readable memory, a plurality of authorized users;
recording, in machine readable memory, a user vote from one or more of the authorized users with regard to a respective fund, wherein each user vote is at least supporting, opposing or conditional;
logging, in machine readable memory, a fund vote for each of a multiplicity of the funds for which fund registration data is received, wherein the fund vote for each respective fund is supporting, opposing, conditional or undecided with respect to the proposed amendment;
making a vote count dataset electronically accessible to at least a subset of the registered authorized users, the vote count dataset including one or more of:
(i) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which an undecided fund vote has been logged,
(ii) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which a supporting fund vote has been logged,
(iii) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which an opposing fund vote has been logged, and
(iv) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which a conditional vote has been logged; and
calculating, by a processor element, an anticipated voting outcome for the proposed amendment, wherein the step of calculating
(i) is based upon at least the loan amount, the voting threshold, and the fund holding amounts corresponding to logged fund votes, and
(ii) results in an indication as to whether the proposed amendment is likely to pass or likely not to pass;
converting all logged conditional fund votes to logged supporting fund votes if the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass; and
providing the agent a fund consent for each fund having a logged supporting fund vote with regard to the proposed amendment.

### Claim 2 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 further comprising the step of:
preliminarily assessing, by the processor element, the anticipated voting outcome for the proposed amendment, wherein the step of preliminarily assessing
(i) is performed for each time a fund vote is logged prior to the step of calculating,
(ii) is based upon at least the loan amount, the voting threshold, and the fund holding amounts corresponding to logged fund votes, and
(iii) results in an indication as to whether the proposed amendment is likely to pass or likely not to pass, the indication being electronically accessible to at least a subset of the registered authorized users.

### Claim 3 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 further comprising the step of
selecting a calculation deadline to be at or within one day prior to the amendment deadline, wherein the step of converting occurs no earlier than the calculation deadline.

### Claim 4 (depends on 3)

A method as defined in claim 3 wherein, after the calculation deadline:
the steps of calculating and converting are performed for each time
(i) a fund vote is logged,
(ii) a logged fund vote is changed to supporting, or
(iii) a fund holding amount is changed.

### Claim 5 (depends on 3)

A method as defined in claim 3 wherein the calculation deadline precedes the amendment deadline by one hour or less.

### Claim 6 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 further comprising the step of:
updating the vote count dataset for each time a fund vote is logged or converted.

### Claim 7 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein the agent is defined at least in part as an intermediary between the multiplicity of lenders and the at least one borrower.

### Claim 8 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein the fund registration data for each fund includes whether the respective fund is a single signature fund or a dual signature fund.

### Claim 9 (depends on 8)

A method as defined in claim 8 wherein
for each single signature fund, a supporting fund vote is logged only if
(i) at least one supporting user vote is recorded in connection with the respective fund, or
(ii) at least one conditional user vote is recorded in connection with the respective fund and the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass; and
for each dual signature fund, a supporting fund vote is logged only if
(i) at least two supporting user votes are recorded in connection with the respective fund, or
(ii) at least two either supporting or conditional user votes are recorded in connection with the respective fund and the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass.

### Claim 10 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 further comprising the step of:
verifying a personal identification number received from at least one of the authorized users prior to recording a user vote from the respective authorized user.

### Claim 11 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed in the same units as the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to the logged opposing fund votes and logged conditional fund votes total less than the loan amount minus the voting threshold.

### Claim 12 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed as a percentage of the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged opposing fund votes and logged conditional fund votes total less than the loan amount times a difference between 100% and the voting threshold.

### Claim 13 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed in the same units as the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged opposing fund votes and logged conditional fund votes total less than or equal to the loan amount minus the voting threshold.

### Claim 14 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed as a percentage of the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged opposing fund votes and logged conditional fund votes total less than or equal to the loan amount times a difference between 100% and the voting threshold.

### Claim 15 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed in the same units as the loan amount;
an unregistered amount is defined by the loan amount minus the fund holding amounts that correspond to all logged fund votes; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged supporting and undecided fund votes and the unregistered amount total greater than or equal to the voting threshold.

### Claim 16 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed as a percentage of the loan amount;
an unregistered amount is defined by the loan amount minus the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged fund votes; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged supporting and undecided fund votes and the unregistered amount total greater than or equal to the loan amount times the voting threshold.

### Claim 17 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed in the same units as the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in
(i) an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to the logged opposing votes and logged conditional votes total less than the loan amount minus the voting threshold; and
(ii) an indication that the proposed amendment is likely not to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to the logged opposing votes and logged conditional votes total more than the loan amount minus the voting threshold.

### Claim 18 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed as a percentage of the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in
(i) an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to the logged opposing votes and logged conditional votes total less than the loan amount times the difference between 100% and the voting threshold; and
(ii) an indication that the proposed amendment is likely not to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to the logged opposing votes and logged conditional votes total more than the loan amount times the difference between 100% and the voting threshold.

### Claim 19 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 further comprising the steps of:
making a dashboard dataset electronically accessible to at least the subset of registered authorized users, the dashboard dataset including one or more of:
(i) the loan amount,
(ii) the voting threshold, wherein the voting threshold is expressed in the same units as the loan amount,
(iii) the vote count dataset,
(iv) an unregistered amount defined by the loan amount minus the fund holding amounts that correspond to all logged fund votes, and
(v) the indication as to whether the proposed amendment is likely to pass or likely not to pass; and
revising the dashboard dataset for each time a fund vote is logged or converted.

### Claim 20 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein the loan has a credit agreement, the credit agreement has a consent form, and the fund consents each conform to the consent form.

### Claim 21 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein the agent is either an administrative agent of the loan or a counsel of an administrative agent of the loan.

### Claim 22 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 wherein the fund consents are provided to the agent at least in electronic form.

### Claim 23 (depends on 1)

A method as defined in claim 1 further comprising the step of:
computing a potential consent fee for each fund, the potential consent fee being an amount payable to the respective fund if the respective fund is associated with a logged supporting fund vote and the proposed amendment is approved.

### Claim 24 (depends on 23)

A method as defined in claim 23 further comprising the step of:
sending an electronic notification to at least one registered authorized user associated with each fund for which a consent fee is payable, the electronic notification specifying the respective amount payable.

### Claim 25

A system for facilitating the amending of loan terms, the system comprising:
machine-readable memory configured for storage of loan data, amendment data, fund registration data, authorized user data, user vote data and fund vote data, wherein
(i) the loan data includes a loan identifier, a loan amount, at least one borrower, a multiplicity of lenders having respective funds invested in the loan, and the funds invested in the loan
(ii) the amendment data includes an amendment identifier for a proposed amendment, an agent of the proposed amendment, an amendment deadline and the voting threshold required to approve the proposed amendment, the voting threshold being expressed in the same units as, or as a percentage of, the loan amount;
(iii) the fund registration data corresponds to one or more of the funds, the fund registration data for each respective fund including a respective fund holding amount, the fund holding amount for each respective fund being an amount invested in the loan by the respective fund;
(iv) the authorized user data corresponds to a plurality of registered authorized users;
(v) the user vote data includes a recorded user vote from one or more of the authorized users with regard to a respective fund, wherein each recorded user vote is at least supporting, opposing or conditional;
(vi) the fund vote data includes a logged fund vote for each of a multiplicity of the funds, wherein the logged fund vote for each respective fund is supporting, opposing, conditional or undecided with respect to the proposed amendment;
a processor element configured to communicate with the machine-readable memory;
one or more logic applications executable by the processor element and containing instructions which, when executed by the processor element, configure processor element to:
generate a vote count dataset;
perform a step of calculating; and
perform a step of converting;
wherein the vote count dataset is electronically accessible to at least a subset of the registered authorized users and includes one or more of:
(i) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which an undecided fund vote has been logged,
(ii) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which a supporting fund vote has been logged,
(iii) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which an opposing fund vote has been logged, and
(iv) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which a conditional vote has been logged;
wherein for the step of calculating, the processor element is configured to calculate an anticipated voting outcome for the proposed amendment
(i) based upon at least the loan amount, the voting threshold, and the fund holding amounts corresponding to logged fund votes, and
(ii) resulting in an indication as to whether the proposed amendment is likely to pass or likely not to pass; and
wherein for the step of converting, the processor element is configured to convert all logged conditional fund votes to logged supporting fund votes if the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass; and
a means for providing the agent a fund consent for each fund having a logged supporting fund vote with regard to the proposed amendment.

### Claim 26 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 further comprising an Internet-enabled interface, each user vote being received by way of the Internet-enabled interface for the recording of the user vote in the machine-readable memory, and the electronic accessibility is by way of the Internet-enabled interface.

### Claim 27 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 further comprising an Internet-enabled interface by which a dashboard dataset is electronically accessible to at least the subset of registered authorized users, the dashboard dataset including one or more of:
(i) the loan amount,
(ii) the voting threshold, wherein the voting threshold is expressed in the same units as the loan amount,
(iii) the vote count dataset,
(iv) an unregistered amount defined by the loan amount minus the fund holding amounts that correspond to all logged fund votes, and
(v) the indication as to whether the proposed amendment is likely to pass or likely not to pass.

### Claim 28 (depends on 27)

A system as defined in claim 27 in which the processor element is further configured to revise the dashboard dataset for each time a fund vote is logged or converted.

### Claim 29 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 in which the processor element is further configured to preliminarily assess the anticipated voting outcome for the proposed amendment, wherein the preliminary assessment:
(i) is performed for each time a fund vote is logged prior to the step of calculating,
(ii) is based upon at least the loan amount, the voting threshold, and the fund holding amounts corresponding to logged fund votes, and
(iii) results in an indication as to whether the proposed amendment is likely to pass or likely not to pass, the indication being electronically accessible to at least a subset of the registered authorized users.

### Claim 30 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 in which the machine-readable memory is further configured for storage of a calculation deadline selected to be at or within one day prior to the amendment deadline, and wherein processor element is configured to perform the step of converting no earlier than the calculation deadline.

### Claim 31 (depends on 30)

A system as defined in claim 30 wherein the processor element is further configured to perform the steps of calculating and converting for each time, after the calculation deadline:
a fund vote is logged,
a logged fund vote is changed to supporting, or
a fund holding amount is changed.

### Claim 32 (depends on 31)

A system as defined in claim 31 wherein the calculation deadline precedes the amendment deadline by one hour or less.

### Claim 33 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein the processor element is further configured to update the vote count dataset for each time a fund vote is logged or converted.

### Claim 34 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein the fund registration data for each fund includes whether the respective fund is a single signature fund or a dual signature fund.

### Claim 35 (depends on 34)

A system as defined in claim 34 wherein the processor element is further configured to ensure that:
for each single signature fund, a supporting fund vote is logged only if
(i) at least one supporting user vote is recorded in connection with the respective fund, or
(ii) at least one conditional user vote is recorded in connection with the respective fund and the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass; and
for each dual signature fund, a supporting fund vote is logged only if
(i) at least two supporting user votes are recorded in connection with the respective fund, or
(ii) at least two either supporting or conditional user votes are recorded in connection with the respective fund and the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass.

### Claim 36 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 in which the processor element is further configured to verify a personal identification number received from at least one of the authorized users prior to a user vote being recorded from the respective authorized user.

### Claim 37 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed in the same units as the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to the logged opposing fund votes and logged conditional fund votes total less than the loan amount minus the voting threshold.

### Claim 38 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed as a percentage of the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged opposing fund votes and logged conditional fund votes total less than the loan amount times a difference between 100% and the voting threshold.

### Claim 39 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed in the same units as the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged opposing fund votes and logged conditional fund votes total less than or equal to the loan amount minus the voting threshold.

### Claim 40 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed as a percentage of the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged opposing fund votes and logged conditional fund votes total less than or equal to the loan amount times a difference between 100% and the voting threshold.

### Claim 41 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed in the same units as the loan amount;
an unregistered amount is defined by the loan amount minus the fund holding amounts that correspond to all logged fund votes; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged supporting and undecided fund votes and the unregistered amount total greater than or equal to the voting threshold.

### Claim 42 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed as a percentage of the loan amount;
an unregistered amount is defined by the loan amount minus the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged fund votes; and
the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to logged supporting and undecided fund votes and the unregistered amount total greater than or equal to the loan amount times the voting threshold.

### Claim 43 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed in the same units as the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in
(i) an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to the logged opposing votes and logged conditional votes total less than the loan amount minus the voting threshold; and
(ii) an indication that the proposed amendment is likely not to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to the logged opposing votes and logged conditional votes total more than the loan amount minus the voting threshold.

### Claim 44 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein
the voting threshold is expressed as a percentage of the loan amount; and
the step of calculating results in
(i) an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to the logged opposing votes and logged conditional votes total less than the loan amount times the difference between 100% and the voting threshold; and
(ii) an indication that the proposed amendment is likely not to pass if the fund holding amounts that correspond to the logged opposing votes and logged conditional votes total more than the loan amount times the difference between 100% and the voting threshold.

### Claim 45 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein the loan has a credit agreement, the credit agreement has a consent form, and the fund consents each conform to the consent form.

### Claim 46 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 configured to provide the fund consents to the agent at least in electronic form.

### Claim 47 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 in which the processor element is further configured to compute a potential consent fee for each fund, the potential consent fee being an amount payable to the respective fund if the respective fund is associated with a logged supporting fund vote and the proposed amendment is approved.

### Claim 48 (depends on 47)

A system as defined in claim 47 further comprising a means for sending an electronic notification to at least one registered authorized user associated with each fund for which a consent fee is payable, the electronic notification specifying the respective amount payable.

### Claim 49 (depends on 25)

A system as defined in claim 25 wherein the processor element is comprised of a one or more computer processors and the machine-readable memory is comprised of one or more data storage devices.

### Claim 50

A method for facilitating the amending of loan terms, the method comprising the steps of:
identifying a proposed amendment to terms of a loan, the loan having a loan amount, at least one borrower and a multiplicity of lenders, the multiplicity of lenders having respective funds invested in the loan, the proposed amendment having an agent and an amendment deadline;
determining a voting threshold required to approve the proposed amendment, the voting threshold being expressed in the same units as, or as a percentage of, the loan amount;
receiving fund registration data for one or more of the funds, the fund registration data for each fund including a respective fund holding amount and whether the respective fund is a single signature fund or a dual signature fund, the fund holding amount for each respective fund being an amount invested in the loan by the respective fund;
registering a plurality of authorized users;
recording a user vote from one or more of the authorized users with regard to a respective fund, wherein each user vote is at least supporting, opposing or conditional;
logging a fund vote for each of a multiplicity of the funds for which fund registration data is received, wherein the fund vote for each respective fund is supporting, opposing, conditional or undecided with respect to the proposed amendment;
making a vote count dataset electronically accessible to at least a subset of the registered authorized users, the vote count dataset including one or more of:
(i) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which an undecided fund vote has been logged,
(ii) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which a supporting fund vote has been logged,
(iii) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which an opposing fund vote has been logged, and
(iv) the total of fund holding amounts corresponding to funds for which a conditional vote has been logged;
calculating an anticipated voting outcome for the proposed amendment, wherein the step of calculating
(i) is based upon at least the loan amount, the voting threshold, and the fund holding amounts corresponding to logged fund votes, and
(ii) results in an indication as to whether the proposed amendment is likely to pass or likely not to pass;
converting all logged conditional fund votes to logged supporting fund votes if the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass;
selecting a calculation deadline to be at or within one day prior to the amendment deadline, wherein the step of converting occurs no earlier than the calculation deadline;
updating the vote count dataset for each time a fund vote is logged or converted; and
providing the agent a fund consent for each fund having a logged supporting fund vote with regard to the proposed amendment;
wherein for each single signature fund, a supporting fund vote is logged only if
(i) at least one supporting user vote is recorded in connection with the respective fund, or
(ii) at least one conditional user vote is recorded in connection with the respective fund and the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass; and
wherein for each dual signature fund, a supporting fund vote is logged only if
(i) at least two supporting user votes are recorded in connection with the respective fund, or
(ii) at least two either supporting or conditional user votes are recorded in connection with the respective fund and the step of calculating results in an indication that the proposed amendment is likely to pass.