UCC Document Community

Update: I ended up doing searches under 5 different name variations and found two existing UCC-1 filings I would have missed. One was under the company's old name before they changed it, and another was under an abbreviation. Both are still active. Thanks for all the advice - definitely saved me from a major headache!

This thread is incredibly valuable for anyone doing UCC searches! I'm relatively new to this and just wanted to add that NY also allows for wildcard searches using the asterisk (*) symbol, which can help catch variations you might not think of. For example, searching "ABC Company*" would find "ABC Company Inc", "ABC Company LLC", "ABC Company Incorporated", etc. Just be prepared for a lot of results to sort through, but it's another tool in the toolkit for comprehensive searches.

For what it's worth, I think you're overthinking this. Mobile construction equipment is pretty straightforward UCC-1 territory unless there are titles involved. File the UCC-1 with a good collateral description and you should be fine. The non UCC filings are for different types of property altogether.

One thing I haven't seen mentioned yet is timing - UCC filings are generally effective immediately upon filing, but some non-UCC filings have different effective dates or require additional steps. For your construction equipment deal, once you file the UCC-1 it should show up in searches within a day or two (depending on your Secretary of State's processing time). That might help answer your client's question about when the lien will be visible. Also, make sure you're prepared for continuation filings down the road - UCC-1s need to be continued every 5 years or they lapse.

I used Certana.ai's verification tool when I had a similar situation with multiple filings to amend. It was really helpful because I could upload all the original UCC-1s and the proposed amendments together, and it flagged that I had missed updating the collateral description on one of them to match the others. Saved me from having an inconsistent filing that might have caused issues later.

Just wanted to follow up on this thread with some additional practical tips based on my experience handling name change amendments. First, when you're preparing the UCC-3, double-check that you're using the exact legal name from the merger documents - not just what the company is calling themselves in their communications. I've seen filings rejected because of slight variations in punctuation or entity designations. Second, if you're in a state that allows electronic filing, do it electronically rather than paper - it's faster and you get immediate confirmation. Finally, once you file the amendment, run a UCC search to make sure it shows up correctly in the system. I had one case where the amendment was accepted but didn't properly link to the original filing due to a data entry error at the filing office, and we had to file a corrective amendment. Better to catch these issues right away than discover them later during a closing or audit.

Thanks everyone for the help! I'm going with UCC-1 for this new loan filing. Really appreciate all the explanations about the difference between UCC 1 vs UCC 3 - it's much clearer now. I'll definitely be extra careful with the debtor name and collateral description.

One thing to add that might help - make sure you check which state to file in! For equipment financing, you typically file where the debtor is organized (incorporated/formed), not where the equipment is located. This catches a lot of people off guard. Also, some states have different fees for online vs paper filing, so it's worth checking the secretary of state website for your state's specific requirements and fee schedule.

One more consideration - if any of these patents are part of licensing agreements or joint ventures, you might need consent from other parties before your security interest can attach. Patent licensing deals often have change of control or encumbrance restrictions. Might be worth reviewing the major licensing agreements before finalizing your security documentation.

This is a great discussion on patent security structures. One thing I'd add from recent experience - make sure you're also considering the USPTO assignment database when doing your due diligence. Sometimes patent assignments get recorded there but not reflected in the company's internal records, which can create gaps between what you think the entity owns versus what's actually on file. Also, for a $2.8M facility, you might want to consider getting patent insurance to protect against title defects or prior undisclosed encumbrances. The premium is usually worth it for larger IP-backed deals, especially when you're dealing with complex subsidiary structures like this. The dual filing approach sounds right given your structure, but definitely run those entity names through multiple verification sources before filing. Patent holding entities sometimes have slight name variations across different jurisdictions that could trip you up.