Maha Khalaj focuses her practice on technology transactions, outsourcing and other complex commercial agreements.
Maha's experience includes assisting clients on a variety of business transactions, including IT and business process outsourcing, cloud computing, data analytics, strategic alliances, research and development, intellectual property/technology license, managed services, and other similar transactions.
Maha was recognized in 2022 and 2023 as one of the "Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch" for Technology Law by The Best Lawyers in America®. She was recognized as a “Rising Star” in 2022 for Technology Transactions by Super Lawyers magazine.
Maha is fluent in Farsi (Persian).
Represented a global data and records management company in connection with IT outsourcing of certain cloud services and related information technology systems.
Represented a leading producer of certain industrial products in connection with negotiating master services agreements for the procurement of various software solutions and related implementation and support services.
Represented a global telecommunications provider in connection with structuring license agreements and advising on privacy matters relating to the commercialization of a managed, cloud-hosted IoT service.
Represented a global telecommunications provider in connection with the renegotiation of an agreement for the sale of a white-labeled IoT analytics and data science solution.
Represented an electronic wearable systems provider in connection with drafting terms of service for certain sensor technologies used in medicine, industry and sport applications.
Represented a multinational delivery services company in connection with the negotiation of an agreement for the development and deployment of custom autonomous vehicles.
Represented a leading agriculture and manufacturing company in connection with the negotiation of an agreement with SAP for the development of a digitized production crop forecasting and management platform and the ongoing provision of related services.
Represented various startup companies in connection with structuring and negotiating patent and technology licenses with universities.
Represented a leading provider in the maritime telecommunications industry in connection with reviewing and drafting commercial agreements.
Represented numerous companies in connection with negotiating technology licenses and professional services agreements for various types of products.
Represented a leading laboratory services company in conducting IP due diligence in connection with several acquisitions involving large patent portfolios and other intellectual property assets, joint ventures, collaborative research agreements, and patent licenses.
Insights View All
Mercer University Walter F. George School of Law J.D. (2013) CALI Award IP Licensing
Georgia State University M.S. (2008) Biology
Georgia State University B.S. (2005) Biology
Supreme Court of Georgia
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (2016)
Georgia Lawyers for the Arts, Board Member
Atlanta IP Inn of Court, Member
State Bar of Georgia, Intellectual Property Section, Member
MedShare, Volunteer (2013-2017)
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.