Katherine Jeffery focuses her practice information technology, business outsourcing agreements, systems integration, software as a service (SaaS) transactions, technology licensing, and other technology and commercial transactions.
Prior to joining the firm, Katherine was Counsel and then Senior Counsel at a global fintech and payments solutions company in its Alpharetta, Georgia office where she provided legal support for financial technology software products with a focus on negotiating client contracts. Previously, Katherine was a technology transactions associate in the New York City office of an international law firm.
While attending Cornell Law School, Katherine served as a judicial intern for the Honorable Consuelo Callahan in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. She was Online Editor of the Cornell Law Review.
Before attending law school, Katherine was a teaching assistant in Orléans, France. She also served as an intern in the U.S. Senate. Katherine has basic knowledge of French.
Cornell Law School J.D. cum laude, Dean’s List
University of Southern California B.A., Political Science and Government cum laude, Dean’s List
New York (2018)
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.