Sorry, Readability was unable to parse this page for content.
Source: http://www.facebook.com/MuskogeePhoenix/posts/117854928388528
paula abdul cinnamon challenge lou dobbs rock salt david letterman march of dimes james randi
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Foreclosure Homes For Sale Pleasanton CA December 2012 ...
?2013 Bay East. ?2013 CCAR. ?2013 EBRD. All rights reserved. Information deemed reliable but not guaranteed. This information is provided from three separate sources: Bay East, CCAR and EBRD. The listings presented here may or may not be listed by the Broker/Agent operating this website. Information last updated on 1/15/13 5:48 PM PST.This IDX solution is (c) Diverse Solutions 2013.
christine christine will ferrell double fine adventure turbo tax katharine mcphee cold mountain
Sunday, January 13, 2013
How to Choose a Reliable and Trustworthy Auto Mechanic ...
The time to find a good mechanic is not when your car breaks down, or after an accident. In those cases, you'll be pressed for time and may be too stressed out to do the research and make a good decision.
So the time is now, to think about searching for someone you can trust with your car.
Start by asking friends and neighbors for their input. Where do they take their cars for service and repairs? How long have they gone there? What type of relationship do they have with the mechanics there? Would they recommend them? Why or why not? If the same business is mentioned more than once, give that one serious consideration.
You can also check Mechanics Files on the Car Talk forums for mechanics recommendations. The database includes over 30,000 mechanics reviewed by Car Talk listeners.
Do a drive-by. Does the location look professional? You can get a pretty good feel for the type of business by scoping the place out. Does the lot have a lot of cars parked haphazardly, or does it seem neat and orderly?
Check credentials. If you have a service station in mind, consult the Better Business Bureau or AAA for their ratings and certifications, and to look for complaints. Also check to see whether mechanics are ASE certified (National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence). AAA also has an Approved Auto Repair Network to help you narrow down the field.
Read reviews. Check Merchant Circle, Yelp, or another ratings and reviews site to read about other customers' experiences. You can also search for a mechanic in your area on these sites.
Don't be shy about interviewing prospective mechanics. Wondering what questions to ask? Find out about labor rates, pricing policies, the source of parts used, and whether parts and labor are warrantied.
If you've narrowed it down to two or three mechanics, call each to get a quote on the same repair, and compare their prices.
Before you have a major repair done at a new service station, have a small repair or scheduled maintenance done. When you see how they handle your oil change or tire rotation, you'll get a feel for their skill and professionalism.
And you should always feel comfortable getting a second opinion, especially when considering major work or repairs. Ask the mechanic to call you with the diagnosis is before he performs the work, and how much the work would cost. Then take the car to another shop, ask them whether they can confirm the diagnosis, and find out what they would charge.
Source: http://abington.patch.com/articles/how-to-choose-a-reliable-and-trustworthy-auto-mechanic
nfl live saints vs 49ers vanessa marcil 49 ers frank gore frank gore nfl games
Plantronics lays off engineers, moves operations jobs to Mexico
SANTA CRUZ -- Headset-maker Plantronics is making staff changes that affect 41 employees in Santa Cruz, including layoffs in engineering, vice president of global communications Genevieve Haldeman said Friday.
"The majority of those impacted were in operations or back office roles, although there were a handful in engineering," she said.
The operations roles are being moved to Plantronics' existing facility in Mexico, which has about 2,000 employees, she added.
About 550 people work in the Santa Cruz office.
Employees got the news as Plantronics made an appearance at the Consumer Electronics Show, the world's largest consumer technology trade show, which wrapped up Friday in Las Vegas.
Plantronics' Voyager Legend headset, Blackwire 720 headset, Calisto 620 speakerphone, M55 headset and Find MyHeadset application were named International CES Innovations 2013 Honorees.
Follow Sentinel reporter Jondi Gumz on Twitter at Twitter.com/jondigumz
south carolina primary squirrel appreciation day billy beane road conditions newt gingrich wives at last al green
Saturday, January 12, 2013
Automaker Ford to add 2,200 white collar jobs in US
Last updated at 6:09 pm
Hello, '+data+'
'); //session extend only for non protected pages $(".ldap_iframe").html(""); } else { //get remember cookie var ldap_remember = getCookie("ldap_remember"); if(ldap_remember == "enable") { //check if user logout sucessfully before. if no counter found, proceed var ldap_remember_counter = getCookie("ldap_remember_counter"); if(typeof ldap_remember_counter === "undefined") { //once redirect create counter cookies to prevent for infinite looping createCookie("ldap_remember_counter","enable",24); window.top.location.href = "http://www.straitstimes.com/ldap/regen.php?goto=/breaking-news/money/story/automaker-ford-add-2200-white-collar-jobs-us-20130111"; } else { //logout not clean up eraseCookie("ldap_remember"); eraseCookie("ldap_remember_counter"); $('#header_ajax').html('Friday, 11 January 2013
Last updated at 6:09 pm
'); } } else { $('#header_ajax').html('Friday, 11 January 2013
Last updated at 6:09 pm
'); } } }, error:function(xhr, status, error) { var ldap_remember = getCookie("ldap_remember"); if(ldap_remember == "enable") { var ldap_remember_counter = getCookie("ldap_remember_counter"); if(typeof ldap_remember_counter === "undefined") { createCookie("ldap_remember_counter","enable",24); window.top.location.href = "http://www.straitstimes.com/ldap/regen.php?goto=/breaking-news/money/story/automaker-ford-add-2200-white-collar-jobs-us-20130111"; } else { eraseCookie("ldap_remember"); eraseCookie("ldap_remember_counter"); $('#header_ajax').html('Friday, 11 January 2013
Last updated at 6:09 pm
'); } } else { $('#header_ajax').html('Friday, 11 January 2013
Last updated at 6:09 pm
'); } } }); }); function eraseCookie(name) { createCookie(name,"",-1); } function createCookie(name,value,days) { if (days) { var date = new Date(); date.setTime(date.getTime()+(days*24*60*60*1000)); var expires = "; expires="+date.toGMTString(); } else var expires = ""; document.cookie = name+"="+value+expires+"; path=/"; } function getCookie(c_name) { var i,x,y,ARRcookies=document.cookie.split(";"); for (i=0;iElection Election results 2012 exit polls Presidential Polls California Propositions Electoral College chuck pagano
Neon Red
Fifty years since Humanity fell against Zombies, mutations occur, and a group of unnatural humans are sent together to help survivors, and exterminate zombies.
Owner:
Game Masters:
This topic is an Out Of Character part of the roleplay, ?Neon Red?. Anything posted here will also show up there.Topic Tags:
Forum for completely Out of Character (OOC) discussion, based around whatever is happening In Character (IC). Discuss plans, storylines, and events; Recruit for your roleplaying game, or find a GM for your playergroup.This is the auto-generated OOC topic for the roleplay "Neon Red"
You may edit this first post as you see fit.
-
snowwinter486 - Member for 3 years
Post a reply
-
RolePlayGateway is a site built by a couple roleplayers who wanted to give a little something back to the roleplay community. The site has no intention of earning any profit, and is paid for out of their own pockets.
If you appreciate what they do, feel free to donate your spare change to help feed them on the weekends. After selecting the amount you want to donate from the menu, you can continue by clicking on PayPal logo.
Who is online
Registered users: Adantas, Aftershock, AHewlett, Akantha*, Alexa [Bot], AliceTheDark*, allimagination*, Arceius, Areomancer*, Armageddon*, awesomeskaterdude*, bandgeek*, Binsetsu*, Blackfridayrule, bluebirds -- bb*, Calvazara, ChaoticMarin*, Chuckles*, code6435, Colonel_Masters*, CptxMorgan*, cucumbersome*, Digital_Muse*, EarthWanderer08, Eddy V. Sovorov*, ElegyNote*, Exabot [Bot], Free_Polity, Frozen Soul, Ghost_Scar*, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, GotDraggedIntoThis*, Half-Dragon*, Hoga, Horseygirl*, ichigomew*, Jakuri-chan, Jingles, Kaizoku Gari no Zoro, Khorudan*, KiraArsenic, Kravos*, KrazyTigger*, KryptonLion*, KulasLightShadow*, Lady Inali*, legacy14, Lerke, Liberator600*, Loxley, macheteshark*, MaliceInWonderland, Marcus, Mela*, Merchant*, Midnightclub*, Mr. Baneling Squishy*, Nekohina, nltniko, OurStars*, Patcharoo*, Porecomesis*, Princess Awinita*, PsychicBastard, Pyramids*, RacoonMoon()*, Raidose*, ReaperGirl4, Rem?us*, rpannier*, S1mon*, Saxious, SerenityMist, Seveneleven*, Sicariius*, Sil*, SlowlyCrazyIAmGoing, SmartyPants*, Stark Contrast, supernovastorm, Surfergirl*, SylphofSpace*, TaniaSoulEater, Tanman*, TemplarWarden*, thebagel264*, TheUnnamedOne, Thundergod1020, TnevdaNai*, TurtleSoup, umbra Alastor, Valor, WakkaWakka, WhatsUpWazza, Wing06Twilight*, wolfoftheage*, XanatosMink*, XianEvermor*, Xiiver*, xoxMissClairexox*, xXRawrDarkWolfXx, Yahoo [Bot], Yin-YangAngel, Zero Reaper*, Zitacamron95
Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/RolePlayGateway/~3/i7Ne1LJ3xSM/viewtopic.php
shipwreck jose aldo vs chad mendes lana del rey john 3 16 alex smith 49ers miss america 2012 hgtv dream home
Friday, January 11, 2013
Supreme Court Addresses Covenants Not To Sue In Already, LLC v ...
On January 9, 2013, in Already LLC v. Nike, Inc., No. 11-982, 2013 WL 85300 (U.S. Jan. 9, 2013), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a broadly-crafted covenant not to enforce a trademark against a competitor?s existing products and any future ?colorable imitations? moots the competitor?s counterclaim to have the trademark declared invalid. Noting that Nike, Inc.?s (?Nike?s?) covenant not to sue was unconditional and irrevocable, covered not only current and previous shoe designs but also any future ?colorable imitations,? and extended to Already, LLC (?Already?), its distributors, and its customers, the Court ruled that the covenant was sufficiently broad to satisfy Nike?s burden of showing that it ?could not reasonably be expected to resume its enforcement efforts? against Already. The case is significant primarily for what the Court did not do ? by rejecting Already?s argument for a species of ?competitor standing? that would have provided an independently sufficient ground for Article III standing in cases involving intellectual property, the Court shielded federal courts from what would likely have been a flood of declaratory judgment claims and counterclaims involving IP assets.
In the underlying district court action, Nike filed suit against Already for trademark infringement, false designation of origin, unfair competition, and trademark dilution in violation of 15 U.S.C. ?? 1141(1), 1125(a), 1125(c), and related claims under New York law, based on Already?s allegedly infringing shoe design. Nike claimed that Already?s shoe designs infringed and diluted Nike?s ?Air Force 1? trademark. In response, Already filed a counterclaim contending that the Air Force 1 trademark was invalid.
Nike subsequently delivered a covenant providing in relevant part:
[Nike] unconditionally and irrevocably covenants to refrain from making any claim(s) or demand(s) . . . against Already or any of its . . . related business entities . . . [including] distributors . . . and employees of such entities and all customers . . . on account of any possible cause of action based on or involving trademark infringement, unfair competition, or dilution, under state or federal law . . . relating to the NIKE Mark based on the appearance of any of Already?s current and/or previous footwear product designs, and any colorable imitations thereof, regardless of whether that footwear is produced . . . or otherwise used in commerce before or after the Effective Date of this Covenant.
Already, 2013 WL 85300 at *6. Nike then dismissed its own claims against Already and moved to dismiss without prejudice Already?s counterclaims on the basis that the district court did not have subject matter jurisdiction over the counterclaims because there was no longer a case or controversy concerning Nike?s trademark due to Nike?s covenant not to sue. The district court dismissed Already?s counterclaims, determining that there was no longer a ?substantial controversy, between the parties having adverse legal interests, of sufficient immediacy and reality to warrant the issuance of a declaratory judgment.? Nike, Inc. v. Already, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9626, at *6-23 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed. Nike, Inc. v. Already, LLC, 663 F.3d 89, 91 (2nd Cir. 2011).
The Court first elucidated the standard applicable to determining whether a party may render a case moot voluntarily ending its allegedly unlawful conduct after suit is filed. The Court noted that ??a defendant claiming that its voluntary compliance moots a case bears the formidable burden of showing that it is absolutely clear the allegedly wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to recur.?? Already, 2013 WL 85300 at *5 (quoting Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc., 528 U. S. 167, 190 (2000)). Here, the Court held, Nike?s delivery of a broad, unconditional, irrevocable covenant that covered Already, its distributors and its customers, and that prohibited suit not just for current or previous designs but also any colorable imitations of those designs, sufficed to meet this burden. Id. at *6.
Given that Nike had met its burden, the Court held that ?it was incumbent on Already to indicate that it engages in or has sufficiently concrete plans to engage in activities not covered by the covenant.? Id. However, Already failed to do so. The only evidence produced by Already of its plans was a declaration by its president stating that Already had plans to introduce new shoe lines and make modifications to existing shoe lines, but failed to state that any of these new shoe lines or modifications would potentially infringe Nike?s trademark. Thus, given the breadth of Nike?s covenant and Already?s failure to proffer any evidence that intended to market a shoe that would expose it to any prospect of infringement liability, the Court held that the case was moot because the challenged conduct could not reasonably be expected to recur. Id.
The Court also rejected Already?s various arguments as to why Nike?s covenant failed to moot the case. Already argued it was injured due to investors? apprehension about investing with Already due to Nike?s ability to assert its trademark, and that it was injured because it could no longer operate its shoe business as if there was no risk of being sued. The Court reasoned that these injuries failed to confer Article III jurisdiction for the same reason ? there was no reasonable risk that Nike would sue Already again. Once it was clear that Nike?s lawsuit was not reasonably likely to recur, the ?fact that some individuals may base decisions on ?conjectural or hypothetical? speculation does not give rise to the sort of ?concrete? and ?actual? injury necessary to establish Article III standing.? Id. at *8 (citing Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992)). Thus, the Court rejected these arguments as well.
Similarly, the Court rejected Already?s sweeping proposition that Already, simply as one of Nike?s competitors, inherently has standing to challenge Nike?s intellectual property. The Court reasoned that Already needed to point to an injury more concrete than ?the mere assertion that something unlawful benefited the plaintiff?s competitor.? Id. at *9. The Court thereby kept the door firmly closed on what could otherwise have been a wave of declaratory judgment actions challenging the validity of IP assets.
The Court also pointed out that while granting a covenant not to sue may serve a tactical purpose under some circumstances, it comes with long-term costs. For instance, a trademark owner that permits third parties to use marks similar to its own may impair the commercial strength of its mark and may even risk invalidating its mark as a result of ?naked licensing.? Id. at *10. In the patent litigation context, a patentee that grants a covenant not to sue may find that its ability in future litigation to obtain damages based on lost profits may be impaired, and that it may be limited to recovery of a reasonable royalty for third party use of its patented inventions. While this may not deter non-practicing entities, which tend to seek a reasonable royalty recovery in any event, it may be a significant consideration for companies that seek to monetize their patents through sales of covered product.
Source: http://www.swiplit.com/2013/01/already-llc-v-nike-inc/
my sisters keeper kirby sarah palin cbi the shins atomic clock daylight savings time
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)