UCC Document Community

Great resolution! For anyone else reading this thread, the key is always matching the EXACT format in the Secretary of State database, not what's on the articles. The SOS system is very literal about punctuation and spacing.

This thread is gold! I'm new to UCC filings and was wondering - is there a standard process you all follow to avoid these name mismatch issues from the start? It sounds like doing the entity search first is key, but are there other best practices for getting the debtor name right the first time?

Update us on what you decide to do! I have a similar situation coming up next month and would love to know how this plays out for you.

As someone who's dealt with this exact scenario multiple times, I'd strongly recommend filing new UCC-1s given that your security agreement was modified and you added new collateral categories. The fact that your loan amount increased from $2.8M to $3.4M combined with the security agreement changes makes this feel more like a novation than a simple modification. I've seen too many lenders get burned by assuming their old filings would hold up when the underlying agreements changed substantially. The conservative approach of filing new UCC-1s while keeping the old ones active until the new filings are accepted is definitely the way to go here. The filing fees are minimal compared to the potential loss of your secured position on a $3.4M loan.

Update us when you get it sorted! I'm dealing with a similar Illinois UCC issue and want to see if the certificate of good standing approach works.

I've been through this exact nightmare with Illinois UCC filings! One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet - check if there are any special characters or apostrophes in the LLC name that might be causing issues. Illinois is super picky about punctuation marks. Also, I've found that sometimes the online business entity search shows the name slightly differently than what's in their internal UCC database. If the certificate of good standing approach doesn't work, try requesting the "exact legal name for UCC purposes" directly from the Illinois SOS UCC division - they have a specific format they prefer that isn't always obvious from the public records.

Just to wrap this up with a checklist approach - here's what I always verify in security agreements: ✓ Debtor properly identified (exact legal name) ✓ Secured party properly identified ✓ Clear grant language ('grants a security interest in') ✓ Collateral adequately described ✓ Debtor signature/authentication ✓ Consideration mentioned ✓ After-acquired property clause (if needed) ✓ Proceeds coverage Everything else is deal-specific, but these are the fundamentals.

This thread has been incredibly helpful! As someone new to UCC documentation, I was getting overwhelmed by all the different requirements and variations I've seen in practice. One follow-up question - for equipment financing deals where we're taking a security interest in both the original equipment and any replacements or additions the debtor might make later, what's the best way to describe that collateral in the security agreement? I want to make sure we're covered if they upgrade or replace equipment during the loan term. Also, should the collateral description in the security agreement be more specific than what goes on the UCC-1, or is it okay to use similar broad language in both documents?

Final thought - consider whether you need to file in multiple states. If the media company has operations in different states or if the copyrighted works were created in different jurisdictions, you might need additional filings.

Thanks everyone for the detailed responses! This has been incredibly helpful. Based on the feedback, I'm going with the legal entity name "Creative Content Solutions, LLC" on the UCC-1 and including reference to the DBA in the collateral description. We're also moving forward with dual state filings (Delaware and California) and doing both UCC-1 and Copyright Office recordings for the registered works. The IP audit has been eye-opening - found several issues that could have been problematic down the line. Really appreciate this community's expertise on these complex copyright security deals!