Because the services of bankruptcy petition preparers are "`strictly limited to typing bankruptcy forms,'" courts have considered bankruptcy petition preparation fees to be excessive when they are "greater than the usual charge for typing services." In re Kangarloo, 250 B.R. at 123 n. 3 (quoting In re Kaitangian, 218 B.R. 102, 113 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1998)). Courts look to both fixed fees and hourly rates to assess the reasonable value of bankruptcy petition preparation services.

" The use of the word "paralegal," coupled with the representation that USPS is "able to handle your bankruptcy" creates the impression that USPS personnel can provide legal advice, but at a lower cost than a lawyer.In re Kaitangian, 218 B.R. 102, 107-08 (Bankr.S.D.Cal. 1998). See also, Hobbs, 213 B.R. at 215 (term "paralegal" fosters consumer confusion); In re Calzadilla, 151 B.R. 622, 626 (Bankr.S.D.Fla. 1993) (typing service may not advertise in a fashion which leads reasonable lay person to believe the typing service offers the public legal services, legal advice or legal assistance regarding bankruptcy services).

See, e.g., In re Rojero, 399 B.R. at 920; Springs, 358 B.R. at 245; In re Bush, 275 B.R. at 83; Dunkle, 272 B.R. 450, 455-56 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2002); In re Gomez, 259 B.R. 379, 387 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2001); Guttierez, 248 B.R. at 296; Farness, 244 B.R. at 471; Kaitangian, 218 B.R. 102, 110 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1998). As one court has noted, "advising of available exemptions from which to choose, or actually choosing an exemption for the debtor with no explanation, requires the exercise of legal judgment beyond the capacity and knowledge of lay persons." Kaitangian, 218 B.R. at 110; see also McDow v. Mayton, 379 B.R. 601, 607 (E.D. Va. 2007).

Giving prospective customers an information sheet explaining the differences between Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 constitutes the practice of law. In re Kaitangian, 218 B.R. 102, 110 (Bankr.S.D.Col. 1998); see also In re Moore, 232 B.R. 1, 8 (Bankr.D.Maine 1999). Several courts have determined that the use of practice aids such as computer programs by petition preparers constitutes the unauthorized practice of law.

Giving prospective customers an information sheet explaining the differences between Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 constitutes the practice of law. In re Kaitangion, 218 B.R. 102, 110 (Bankr.S.D.Col. 1998); see also In re Moore, 232 B.R. 1, 8 (Bankr.D.Maine 1999). Several courts have determined that the use of practice aids such as computer programs by petition preparers constitutes the unauthorized practice of law.

In the instant case, Arotionians violated § 110(f)(1) by holding himself out as someone permitted to offer legal services by (1) providing Ray Kangarloo with a business card identifying himself as connected with the Law Offices of Brian W. Kellogg, (2) meeting with the Kangarloos at premises containing signage identifying the premises as a law office, and (3) holding himself out as an attorney. SeeIn re Kaitangian, 218 B.R. 102, 108 (Bankr. S.D. Calif. 1998) (finding a violation of § 110(f)(1) where the petition preparer created the impression that he could offer legal advice); In re Moore, 232 B.R. 1, 10, 12 (Bankr. D. Me. 1999) (finding a violation of § 110(f)(1) where the advertisement misled consumers into thinking they were purchasing far more than the allowed document preparation services). Section 110(g)(1) states that "[a] bankruptcy petition preparer shall not collect or receive any payment from the debtor or on behalf of the debtor for the court fees in connection with filing the petition."

Additionally, the defendants are required to disgorge fees because it is well established that courts may order the disgorgement of the fruits of illegal conduct. See United States v. Ursery, 518 U.S. 267, 284, 116 S.Ct. 2135, 135 L.Ed.2d 549 (1996); In re Kaitangian, 218 B.R. 102, 115 (Bankr.S.D.Cal. 1998); In re Gavin, 181 B.R. 814, 820-21, 823 (Bankr.E.D.Pa.), adopted, 184 B.R. 670 (E.D.Pa. 1995). The unauthorized practice of law is illegal in the State of New Jersey.

Id.; cf. In re Kaitangian, 218 B.R. 102, 117 (Bankr. S.D.Cal.1998) (holding that a bankruptcy petition preparer's failure to disclose all fees constituted an unfair and deceptive act). We conclude that this finding was supported by sufficient evidence and was proper.

Bankruptcy courts have also confronted the intersection of law with humans' use of technology, particularly in the context of bankruptcy petition preparers' use of software to prepare bankruptcy papers. Several debtors in In re Kaitangian, 218 B.R. 102 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1998), received assistance from U.S. Paralegal Services in preparing their bankruptcy documents. Id. at 105, 109.

Bankruptcy courts typically look to state law for guidance on whether a bankruptcy petition preparer has violated § 110 by engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. Farness, 244 B.R. at 470; In re Ellingson, 230 B.R. 426, 433 (Bankr. D. Mont. 1999); In re Kaitangian, 218 B.R. 102, 108 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1998); In re Stacy, 193 B.R. 31, 38 (Bankr. D. Or. 1996); Lawrence P. King, Collier Bankruptcy Manual ¶ 110.12. (3d ed. 2004). Only a few Iowa cases deal with this topic, but Iowa Supreme Court Comm'n on Unauthorized Practice of Law v. Sturgeon, 635 N.W.2d 679 (Iowa 2001), provides substantial guidance.