Enterprise mobility determines the steps taken by different companies to improve their business operations, develop or deliver service through mobile-based solutions, also the mobile products that launched for the clients. It also refers to things like mobile applications transformation management and developers and another initiative which taken for digital transformations.
It has influenced the world of business due to its "Bring your own device" concept, because of BYOD concept most of the employees get to access the data of their organization using their mobile devices nevertheless, only a few organizations follow this BYOD management technique.
Enterprise mobility management is highly requisite for an organization; mainly if an organization is investing a right amount of mobility to make it work, also an organization should analyse the best practices of this technology from building apps users prefer using to funding for mobile applications.
Security of app and data - Since the mobile devices have increased in an organization, it also increases the security and privacy risks as well. For instance, using personal devices can also make your networks accessible towards virus attacks, data leaking, and illegal access.
According to the research by Gartner, it's about 75% of mobile security conflict the misconfigured mobile apps. Where developers who launch the mobile apps they mainly concentrate on its functionality more than security and as the results app building practice sometimes lacks best and mature procedure to prevent mobile threats. Mostly organization depending on mobile security policies which combine EMM or MDM solutions for controlling exploits.
Insecure Wi-Fi - Insecure Wi-Fi networks may need separate provisions in a BYOD policy because their security measures are limited. For example, some Wi-Fi networks are identified as off-limits by security alerts also the devices used in an organization should be protected against the possible loss of data along with that the organization has to make sure that all the devices are in line with all the security standards.
User's credentials - User's credentials such as usernames and passwords need to be created with the utmost care. Credentials which may be adequate for certain kinds of applications may not be suitable for the application which need more security. For example, short number strings may be appropriate authentication for a user on game leaderboards and scoreboards; they won't be enough for social networking application.
Augmented reality - Augmented reality used to be quite popular in the consumer space back then, now it has entered in the enterprise mobile space too. AR application has the potential to overlap virtual worlds over the real, along with that offer a simulative and immersive experience to the end users, integrating AR in a business, many industry verticals such as retail, service, supply chain, real estate, education and more have improved the process of effectiveness as well as customer experiences.
So, for summing up, it's proved that mobile app development company or enterprise solutions are essential for organizations if they followed, build and applied correctly. Hence business should consider these trends and create unique solutions which produce a better return of interest.


text:
West Brom continue tear, become first team to open scoring vs Arsenal
By fulhamsfinestOct 6, 2013, 11:56 AM EDT
West Bromwich Albion have scored just before halftime to take a 1-0 lead over Arsenal at the Hawthornes.
Following a failed corner, Claudio Yacob headed home a pinpoint cross from Morgan Amalfitano to give the home side the lead.
Arsenal have opened the scoring in each of their first six Premier League matches.
The Baggies suddenly have taken command of a game that has provided little else for fans in the first half.
All of a sudden, the Gunners have a lot of work to do to return their chance at going top of the table. They could do so with a win or draw.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


ecstasy escalted, and momentary bliss experienced.
I see you. I see your face.
to a love that's true.
I was in love, yes.
I see you dance, happy.
You see me, and your face change.
The pleasure was turned to anger.
you move away, inch by inch.
The music surges; my heart races.
"Can I talk to you?" I ask through the thunder of songs.
"I am leaving soon," I say, holding your shoulders.
You inch away from me, throwing off my touch.
"What made you think I care?" You ask.
The music fades; the lights dim.
I walk away as you dance with the other guy.
"I just wanted us to be friends again," I whisper to myself.
I look back, and you are gone.


The community came to the Grand Theatre open house July 24, 2018, to meet Jesse Hindle and partner Laura Alveysee from Hindle Architects. It was an incredible opportunity for the community to see the architects' visions for the Theatre. The architects who are providing services to the Grand Theatre free of charge used input provided by the community through a public survey to inform their 'Grand' vision.
CBC Saskatchewan covered the event interviewing a number of key project members including Bruce Neill, Board Chair and Jesse Hindle, lead architect. Jesse Hindle said, "If we can be a part in the revitalization and the continuity of this place and the town, we find that incredibly satisfying," he said. "We hope one day, someone will do the same for the buildings we create, whether they're new or old." Read the whole story at CBC online.
The CBC's Afternoon Edition spoke with Jesse Hindle and Laura Alverysee about their commitment to the restoration of the Grand Theatre and their roots within the community. Listen to CBC's Live Stream to hear the interview.
Watch Hindle Architect's computer-generated presentation featuring their proposed concepts for the renovation and building updates that will restore the building and make the Grand Theatre into a community hub for the creative arts.


text:
31 years on the assassination of three Palestinian leaders A...| MENAFN.COM
31 years on the assassination of three Palestinian leaders Abu Iyad, Abu Al-Hol and Al-Amri…
(MENAFN- Palestine News Network )
Bethlehem / PNN /Maram Daraghma
Today, fourteenth of January, marks the 31st anniversary of the assassination of the three leaders, Salah Khalaf, Abu Iyad, member of the Central Fatah Committee, and Haile Abdulhamid Abu Al-Haul, member of the Central Fatah Committee, Fakhri Al-Omari, and Abu Muhammad, close aide to Abu Iyad in the unified security service, while attending a meeting at Abu Al-Haul House in the city of Carthage, Tunisia, in 1991
With the martyrdom of the leaders, the PLO, the Palestinian Revolution and the Hamas movement lost three of its most sincere and prestigious leaders who had a record of sacrifice, redemption and struggle against the Israeli occupation throughout the conflict until their martyrdom.
The martyr, Salah Khalf
The martyr, Commander Salah Khalaf, Abu Iyad, was born in the city of Yafa in 1933. He lived the first years of his life even before the Israeli entity in 1948 took one day. He was forcibly forced and his family had to leave the city of Yafa and went to Gaza by sea and settled in it with his family. He completed his secondary studies in 1951 and then joined the Faculty of Science of Cairo University. In the same year, he met Yaser Arafat, A student at the Faculty of Engineering at the time and the relationship between them was strengthened through the establishment of the General Union of Palestine Students.
Salah Khalaf graduated from Sciences/Department of Philosophy College in 1957, obtained a diploma in education and psychology and returned to the Gaza Strip to teach, and began his secret work in recruiting and organizing groups of militants in Gaza.
In 1959, Abu Iyad moved to Kuwait to serve as a teacher, an opportunity for him and his fellow leaders: Yasser Arafat, Khaled Al-Hassan, Saleem Al-Zannoun, Farouk al-Qadomi, and other militants in various countries, the most prominent of whom were Abu Yosuf al-Najjar, Kamal Adwan and President Mahmoud Abbas residing in Qatar, to unite their efforts to establish the Palestinian National Liberation Movement, Fatah and bring the Palestinians back to their land and rights.
Abu Iyad began to stand out as a member of the central committee of Fatah, then a commissioner of its security apparatus, and then led the special organs of the organization. Since 1970, Abu Iyad was subjected to more assassination.
Martyr Haile Abdul Hamid
Known as Abu al-Hawl, in 1937 in the city of Safad, was abandoned with his family in 1948 to Syria, attended school in Damascus and was active in demonstrations and gatherings at national events.
In its early youth, it began to seek the formation of an organizational gathering of Palestinian refugees in Syria, and established an organization of Arab and Palestinian leaders in harmony with the national trends prevailing at that time. Political organizations were banned at that time in Syria.
In 1957, he led a Palestinian movement to demand that Palestine refugees be granted the same civil rights as Syrian citizens, with the exception of citizenship and passport, in order to preserve Palestinian national identity and dignity. The Syrian Parliament, headed by Akram Al-Horani, then endorsed the Palestinian demand. The organization Arabs of Palestine, established in Syria by Haile Abdul Hamid in 1960, joined the organizational framework of the Fatah al-Rubayi movement, which was prepared to announce its launching as an armed faction.
Abu al-Hol also assumed responsibility for the security and information of Fatah along with Salah Khalaf Abu Iyad and served as Commissioner of the occupying Power following the martyrdom of Khalil al-Wazir Abu Jihad, in addition to his responsibilities in the security apparatus, and continued until the date of his martyrdom.
Abu al-Hol was one of the founders of the arms of the Fatah movement in Germany and Austria—and he also co-founded the movement of Fatah, Cairo in 1964, and occupied the site of the secretary of organization in Cairo. In 1972, he became an authorized movement of Fatah in Lebanon.
Martyr Fakhri al-Omari, born in the city of Jaffa in 1936, who was one of the first to work in the Palestinian revolution, participated in the first security session of the Fatah movement to Cairo, co-founded the security and monitoring apparatus in Jordan with the martyr Abu Iyad, led the security apparatus of the Palestinian revolution and co-led a number of special and qualitative operations.
The martyr Salah Khalaf in Fakhri al-Amri has had a significant impacted. Abu Iyad contributed greatly to the dissemination of national thought in preparation for the establishment of the Fatah movement, and also lobbied the national youth as the foundation nucleus of an exclusively Palestinian national movement Fatah.
During this period, the revolutionary thought of Al-Amri, who was also fond of sports, was crystallized, enabling him to organize several national freedom-seeking youth, through sports clubs, who then became the nucleus of the Fatah military cells in the occupied territories.
The Omari martyr served as a high security official, the second man was in the unified security service headed by Abu Iyad, and he was assassinated after receiving about thirty bullets while trying to catch the murderous criminal in his endeavours to protect the martyr Abu Iyad.
Angelina Jolie calls her 'Eternals' character a troubled soul...
ICCIMA head disapproves Iran's national budget bill for next year ...
Post AUKUS, Japan and France build bridges to balance China in the Ind...
Himansh Kohli, Heli Daruwala recall shooting in Rajasthan for latest t...
Qatar squad reaches Saudi Arabia for Asian Handball Championship...
Vishal Furia is glad Indian audiences becoming more receptive to horro...
CommScope Announces New Senior Leadership for Venue and Campus Networks...
World bank shifts Saudi's economic expansion prediction to 4.9 percent ...
Turkish budget balance registers USD21.6B deficit ...
CBI arrests Jammu-based patwari in bribe case...
IMD predicts moderate rain over coastal areas of TN...
China's population continued to grow in 2021...
Qatar - Cold-case investigation leads to surprise suspect in Anne Frank's...
Shovana Narayan relives her best moments with Pandit Birju Maharaj...
Lashkar-e-Mustafa created by Pak to take responsibility of Pulwama attack...
Union Minister Balyan meets BKU president Naresh Tikait, sparks buzz...
Saudi - SCAI Begins Operations in Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Te...
Turkish major stock index opens week on high note ...


Le Grenier Numérique is an accelerator located in Guer and in La Gacilly (Morbihan, France), land of Yves Rocher cosmetics company. We explore it with Gwenaël Duclos from the startup Wipsea which is being incubated there.
Follow it on Twitter (#TechOf) !


Are you looking for Free Online Criminal Records Check? We have Arrest Records Maryland Wyoming and criminal background check, criminal record check, fbi criminal background check, federal background check and more. Do a Search Click Form Here!
Reason 1. Occupation scenery checks meliorate employers avoid charges of remiss hiring.
The employer has the licit of providing commonsensical indorsement to each and every employee while they are at manipulate. Disturbance checks meliorate to conscious employers to group who acquire the potentiality to alteration his or her colleagues. In cases where band transaction need instrumentation of artefact or department fix, employers may be compelled to bring a wrong record explore as location of an accentuate change. A thorough control can aid the employer in making the hand decisions during the process. A pre-employment emphasise inactiveness verifies the identities of applicants and checks the 's references, which helps to the human unexcelled suited for the job. When an employer decides to forego a pre-employment environment defect and finds out too dead that a misstatement has been prefabricated in hiring an employee, it could do scathe to the work environs or damage other employees, as symptomless as destruct the associate's estimation. The substance contained in panorama break should also be full and close, necessitating the use of a screen explore .
Reason 2. State checks are finished to follow with refer and northerner laws.
Companies providing services to children, juveniles, and the preserved are required to convey business punctuate checks. The self process applies to those employed with unfit persons. and employees of wellbeing institutions are also required to support noise checks. Governance jobs requiring warranty clearances also take pre-employment screen checks. Say agencies and governance officials can channel environment checks finished the Nationalistic Move of the FBI and obtain collection that may not be visible to cloistered citizens.
Reason 3. Engagement stress checks are through to prove the message supplied by employees or job applicants.
Inflating and enhancing educational as rise as grownup histories are sometimes celebrated to pass, especially when there is yob contention. The engagement modify can endanger these practices. Disturbance checks can also provide clues to the employee or job soul's personality and exploit, aiding in the determination of their suitableness for the job. For admonition, an employer hiring cashiers would be attentive if a backcloth examine reveals the person to be intemperately indebted, indicating financial painfulness.
Reason 4. The alternative of terrorism and organized guile also increases the pauperization for job background break.
Employers requisite to be assured that the they contract do not posture risks to nationalistic guarantee, making pre-employment scope checks are a essential activity before hiring somebody who faculty be secret to responsive aggregation. The exposure of the fraudulent practices of several joint executives also any companies to include interference checks in the treat.
Reason 5: The availability of people records online and the availability of desktop stop assist providers hold prefabricated the line scope account an soft to do.
Though pre-employment panorama checks can be through by the employer himself, soliciting adult assist is solace the individual way to go. This is because pro providers of prospect stay tranquilize the quality and completeness of the reports they cater by using all useable overt info.


Patrick J. Buchanan: Did Putin Order The Salisbury Hit?
"Unforgivable," says Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov of the charge, which also defies "common sense." On Sunday, Putin echoed Peskov: "It is just sheer nonsense, complete rubbish, to think that anyone in Russia could do anything like that in the run-up to the presidential election and the World Cup. ... It's simply unthinkable."
"We gave the Russians every opportunity to come up with an alternative hypothesis ... and they haven't," said Johnson. "We actually have evidence ... that Russia has not only been investigating the delivery of nerve agents for the purposes of assassination but has also been creating and stockpiling Novichok," the poison used in Salisbury.


Who Do You Keep Close or Enclosed?
Hope everyone is managing to stay cool. It is so hot outside even the mosquitoes are staying indoors and they had me for breakfast!
Last weekend Thomas Mann's studioFLUX hosted Richard Salley. What a great surprise when I found out Richard was going to be here in NOLA! I have been wanting to take a workshop with him since FOREVER. It was a two day workshop about making a locket cuff. So what did I do?
and make new ones... and made a couple of tools. Which was totally cool! I like making tools but I think you guys know that already. Mr. Pointy was a scribe and then there is the bezel pusher/burnisher. Fun to have your own tools that you make to work with.
Here is my messy bench. Everything had been etched, textured, punched, and hinged. Putting it together is all that was left.
It was a locket for the man who had inspired me from the get go of my artist life and continues to do so.
Lately I have been thinking about making a belt buckle for myself. I do not know why. It is not like I wear my shirts tucked in or anything! But it would be nice to have a REALLY cool buckle!
So when I saw this fantastic piece by artist Jesse Bert I just HAD to share! Come on...take a close look! Check out those pointy ends. Have you ever seen anything like it? I mean the boots that is. I hear it is the trend in northern Mexico and started in Dallas of all places! The boots are known as botas vaqueras exóticas. Apparently these are worn at night clubs and anywhere one wants to make a statement.
In NOLA June is the start of hurricane season, kids, snowballs, kids, summer rain, kids, festivals, and KIDS!!! Kids are everywhere! Even in my house! Hey...how did they get there?
Better yet...how did I get here? Ha!
June has been the month of change for me. So many different things to accept and to let go. Needless to say I have not been able to do a thing in the studio. Which is making me pretty crabby. Argh!!!
I was able to be alone in the studio this past weekend and had no idea what to do. So I just sat there looking at stuff. Moving things from here to there not accomplishing much of anything.
Ahh...June...the days of summer has begun. It is pretty hot here in New Orleans but I am sure it can be hotter and not to worry because it will be in August. And that IS the hottest month of the summer. hehe!
Lately I have not been able to work in the studio but ideas are running around inside my brain. They need to get out and soon!
Well...I have been teaching a couple of leather wrap bracelet workshops here in New Orleans at The Bead Shop.
My latest workshop involved (to my surprise) four VERY young ladies. They must of been my youngest students yet!
I was pretty impressed on their abilities to pick their own color of beads, leather, and end bead. The colors came out so beautifully! I think they are designers in the making.
While teaching them they mentioned something pretty interesting. They told me about receiving bead kits as gifts but what to do with them? Then they said what they NEED is gift certificates to take classes! HA!


text:
touchtennis: The accessible tennis format with founder, Rashid Ahmed
touchtennis was founded by Rashid Ahmad in 2002 and his initial vision was simple – to create a sport that works for every age and every ability, can be played anywhere, will foster fun and connection above all, as well as, of course, getting people fit, energized and moving.
Today, touchtennis is a growing global phenomenon, shown on major TV outlets, and played by many around the world.
We caught up with founder, Rashid Ahmad, to chat about his story and that of touchtennis.
Zushan Hashmi: Let's start off with a little bit about yourself, away from the tennis world. What do you get up to?
Rashid Ahmad: I find the word "consulting" covers a rather broad range of activities and suits me just fine!
It also masks a series of deficiencies in my professional qualifications!
However, most of the time, I am on the board of a few companies and "consult" for a few others in the e-commerce payments world!
How about your own journey within tennis prior to the creation of touchtennis?
I fell in love with tennis because of Boris Becker.
It broke my heart watching him lose to Sampras again and again! But eventually, I became a die-hard fan of this quiet kid from California.
His Laveresque classy approach to the sport and a competitive fire that burned so brightly.
I loved the game so much that I began writing about it and was published in a few magazines that were clearly desperate for content!
I even commentated for Eurosport for a few years! Then touchtennis took over and I never looked back!
Where does the moniker 'Certified GOAT' come from?
Some kid named James Laing was studying graphic design and he took the Starbucks logo and just stuck "certified GOAT" on it! It stuck! For me anyway!
What has it been like to see the growth of touchtennis, with it now shown on Sky Sports and the likes and televised/played around the world?
I never feel like I'm anywhere near done. I never look at these milestones and feel proud or accomplished.
I always feel like we are a million miles away from where I want our tribe to be!
Tell me a little bit about the rules of touchtennis, and how they differ from an ordinary game? For the full details, of course, our readers can visit your website.
The main thing I wanted from the rules was to emulate Texas Hold'em! I wanted people to always feel like they had a chance.
READ Sports Alliance: Nuno Mena talks digital sports experiences
No matter who they were playing. So we took out the first serve and made it one serve only.
Now one could argue we removed the second serve, but I feel we removed the first because I had a better second serve in those days and I was sick of getting aced by taller players!
Most of the rules were designed to make luck feel planned, and net cords to be celebrated not apologized for!
Can you share a little bit about the process of getting recognized/accredited by the ATP? What was the sort of hurdles you had to overcome?
We are not accredited nor recognized by them. They take our videos and play them, but man alive they don't take too kindly to anyone sharing theirs!
This format of the game obviously has a lot to do with the reason behind why the game has grown so much, what do you think has enabled touchtennis to stand out from other versions of tennis?
I think because it can be played by different tennis abilities and feel a lot more like a mental game than just physical.
In tennis, if someone is 10% more athletic than you and hits the ball 10% bigger off every shot, you cannot win.
Well, you might win one in a thousand, but not enough to write home about.
Our version really does level the playing field a great deal more. Not entirely, but a fair amount. It's also rewarding to hit winners.
The problem with Squash like adaptations of tennis is that you hardly ever see a point won by a winner. It's 99% forced or unforced errors!
touchtennis is very much a grassroots version of an, arguably, very elitist sport. Does this drive the vision and mission of the organization ie. accessible to the masses, open to the vulnerable members of our community, and the likes?
That's the ultimate driving force for touchtennis.
I want to have courts straddling the borders of India and Pakistan, Palestine and Israel.
We can and must always strive to reach all people.
And then, having reached them, use sport as the vehicle to communicate kindness and fairness.
You can compete and be kind.
READ: Thirty30 Tennis: The evolution of tennis with founder, Mark Milne
I'm assuming this has impacted the vision of the game in some shape or form too?
I guess so. I'm from the wrong side of the tracks so touchtennis is a way of connecting with kids who are a lot like I once was.
READ Geoff Hunt on Jahangir Khan, squash in the 70s, Egypt and coaching in Qatar
What have been some of the challenges of running and growing the game?
Is this a 48-page article?! Most of the challenges have been snooty tennis players! But we're happy for tennis clubs to keep those people!
It's open-minded and carefree that we want and appeal to.
People who don't have any desire to take themselves seriously.
When we spoke for the first time, you mentioned that you are the kind of person who is willing to almost try anything once. This was an interesting statement, and I wanted to ask if this is the sort of mentality that enabled you to grow touchtennis and whether it has impacted the vision of the game?
Yeah, I'll try most things! Not sure about anything! I tried to diving in a shark tank last year but they wouldn't let me because I'm a diabetic!
I literally begged! They said, "this is normally the time that people are begging to NOT go in the tank!"
What are some of the countries that host touchtennis tournaments and have venues to play?
India, South Korea, Spain, Italy, France and England for now. It'll be in a few more by the end of this year!
What are your aims for the growth of the game in the future?
I always maintain the following: Don't tell people your dreams. Show them your dreams! Watch this space! We are growing tenfold per annum!
A touchtennis match (Source: Supplied)
Although the game attracts a lot of youngsters and new starters, it is also played by professionals. Why do you think this is?
Maybe just a bit of fun? I don't know!
We don't have the budget for a market researcher to ask them! The game also attracts a huge number of over 60's!
And who are some of the professionals (current and former) who have supported and enjoy the game?
Fernando Gonzalez, Tracy Austin, Marcus Willis to name a few who love and have played touchtennis! I just need to play Sampras one day!
None that spring to mind buddy!
For more Tennis, visit Sportageous.
You can check out touchtennis here and find Rashid Ahmad on Twitter.
Noor Shafiq assisted in the curation of this article. You can follow him here on LinkedIn.


text:
FOX CITIES CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: KerberRose Announces New Shareholders
By Donalyn Corporal | Jan 10, 2020
Employees are shareholders committed to service and making this locally owned bank successful. provided by First National Bank of Bastrop
Fox Cities Chamber of Commerce issued the following announcement on January 6.
KerberRose is pleased to announce several new Shareholders, effective Jan. 1, 2020. New Shareholders are: Krisztina Dommer, CPA, governmental accounting and auditing; Mary Horton, CPA, small business and individual tax and accounting; Melissa Olsen, PHR/SHRM-CP, human resources; Greg Pitel, CPA, state and local government auditing; Anthony Powers, AIF/CFP/CRPS, wealth management; and Mike Stratman, CPA, tax and business advising.
Krisztina Dommer, CPA, will transition from Senior Manager in the Shawano office to Shareholder. Dommer has more than 15 years of governmental accounting and auditing experience and has been with KerberRose for one year.
Dommer credits her decision to partner with KerberRose to the company's culture: "KerberRose's culture and core values mirror my personal values, making this opportunity a good match. I am committed to ensuring the core values of KerberRose are upheld as I interact with all KerberRose team members and clients. I am thrilled for this next chapter in my professional career!"
Mary Horton, CPA, will be promoted to Shareholder from Senior Manager in the Sister Bay location. Horton specializes in providing tax and accounting services for small businesses and individuals, and has been part of the KerberRose team for 10 years.
"KerberRose's family-like culture and team environment make my partnership with the firm feel like home. In my years with KerberRose, I have been given the opportunity to increase my involvement in my community, which I have found very rewarding. As a member of the KerberRose team, I have been given the ability to learn and grow professionally in many ways," said Horton.
Previously the Human Resources Manager of KerberRose, Melissa Olsen, PHR/SHRM-CP, will become KerberRose's Shareholder-in-Charge of Human Resources. During her five years with KerberRose, Olsen has empowered employees to rise within their profession and engage in company culture, while also providing human resource-focused consulting services to local businesses.
Olsen views the inclusion of a Human Resources Professional on the Shareholder team as "a testament to KerberRose's commitment to firm culture and employee experience."
"KerberRose strives to create a work environment of open communication, support and trust. A place where teamwork is encouraged, hard work rewarded and every employee makes a difference," Olsen commented on KerberRose's culture.
Also joining KerberRose as Shareholder in Shawano is Greg Pitel, CPA. Pitel has 15 years of state and local government audit and advisory experience, and specializes in providing services to governmental entities.
"I am excited to join KerberRose as our commitment to people — both within our Firm and in our client relationships — aligns with what I believe is a recipe for success," Pitel said.
Anthony Powers, AIF/CFP/CRPS, president of KerberRose Wealth Management, will also become a Shareholder. Powers has more than 20 years of experience in finance and tax and has a long relationship with the firm. He said, "Something unique is that I started working for the firm when I was 7 or 8 years old. I cleaned the Shawano office in high school, and worked for the Firm doing tax preparation after college.
"I chose to partner with KerberRose because I believe that investments and taxes can't be looked at individually and clients are best served coordinating their investment and tax strategies; an investment firm partnering with an accounting firm allows experts from both aspects of a client's financial life to work together, which makes their life easier," Powers said of expanding his partnership with KerberRose.
Lastly, Mike Stratman, CPA, will transition from his current position as Senior Manager in Green Bay to Shareholder. A member of the KerberRose team for the last three years, Stratman has worked in public accounting for more than 20 years.
Throughout his career, Stratman says he has enjoyed his opportunity to work with closely held businesses from a variety of industries as a consultant on tax, accounting, payroll, and business planning.
Stratman stated, "I found KerberRose to be filled with welcoming, helpful colleagues dedicated to helping clients thrive. I am proud to be a part of the team and look forward to continuing to uphold KerberRose's values of integrity, honesty, and community involvement."
KerberRose is a Wisconsin certified public accounting firm specializing in auditing, accounting, business strategy and human resource consulting, wealth management and technology consulting. KerberRose was listed on Inside Public Accounting's Top 300 Firms in 2019. With more than 160 professional staff members and offices in Antigo, Clintonville, Fox Cities, Green Bay, Oshkosh, Rhinelander, Shawano, Sister Bay, Stevens Point, and Wausau; KerberRose is a trusted business advisor, combining the expertise of a leading regional firm with the convenience, familiarity and passion of a local provider.
Original source can be found here.
Want to get notified whenever we write about Fox Cities Chamber of Commerce ?
Sign-up Next time we write about Fox Cities Chamber of Commerce, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.
Fox Cities Chamber of Commerce


text:
Diplomatic impetus
By Costas Iordanidis
Political foes and commentators have often accused Greek Foreign Minister Petros Molyviatis of dragging his feet on crucial diplomatic and foreign policy issues. A series of recent developments, however, have proved them wrong. First, we seem to be edging closer to a final settlement on the name dispute with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Second, Turkey is apparently considering ditching its decade-old policy of viewing any extension by Greece of its territorial waters in the Aegean as a cause for war, as Turkish Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc, in a surprise move, recently proposed scrapping his country's «casus belli» policy against Greece. Greece has suddenly been catapulted from a state of apparent inertia to one of heightened expectation. No country likes to be faced with too many foreign relations problems, but settling outstanding issues can sometimes create a sense of uncertainty as compromise does not always ensure stability. Athens believes that, in its effort to meet European Union norms and standards, Ankara is revising some of its policies that are out of line with the EU acquis communautaire. No doubt this argument makes sense. But the more interesting aspect of Ankara's latest move was the manner in which Arinc signaled Turkey's change of course. Arinc suggested that Turkish legislators had never really voted the «casus belli» policy against Greece. Rather, a group of Turkish deputies during Tansu Ciller's tenure as prime minister read out a text in Parliament which was then applauded by their colleagues; but there was never an official vote count. Given that the policy was never brought to a formal vote in Turkey's Parliament, there is arguably no reason for a new parliamentary decision to remove the threat against Athens. Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul is said to have disagreed with Arinc's comments and a lot of uncertainty surrounds the whole issue. In any case, Arinc's sudden intervention creates a more positive mood in advance of Molyviatis's two-day visit to Turkey tomorrow. Regarding the FYROM name dispute, UN special envoy and mediator Matthew Nimetz proposed that the name «Republika Makedonjia-Skopje» be used in the United Nations and other international organizations. With all due respect for the decade-long diplomatic campaign, the proposed solution is a nonsensical one, while the problem itself has emerged because of absurd moves by successive Greek governments. The FYROM name issue would carry little importance for Greece today if Athens had been confident enough following the breakup of Yugoslavia to push its influence northward in order to confirm its leverage beyond narrow national borders. Rather, successive governments wasted their energy in a lengthy diplomatic marathon that brought no rewards. Given that virtually all Greek political parties would like to see a compromise solution, New Democracy's conservative government was right to back the Nimetz proposal. We have yet to see FYROM's reaction. Should the compromise name be adopted, Prime Minister Costas Karamanlis should brace for domestic reactions, particularly in northern Greece. The only consolation is that just when the government seemed to have lost its footing, something seems to be moving in foreign policy. It remains to be seen what is in store for us.
Letter from Mystras
More deregulation
Political tug-of-war


Rain or Shine. Tickets are non-refundable and non-transferable.
WINE CLUB MEMBER- PLEASE ADD YOUR COMPLIMENTARY TICKET TO YOUR CART IN ORDER TO BE PART OF OUR ANNUAL WINE CLUB MEMBERS ONLY EVENT!
Best wine I've ever had!


text:
Box Office Collection: Dhanush's 'VIP' Ahead of Salman Khan's 'Kick' in Malaysia
Dhanush's Tamil release "Velai Illa Pattathari"has performed better business than Salman Khan's "Kick" in Malaysia.
By : Sangeetha Seshagiri
Aug 8, 2014 16:50 IST
'Kick' new poster released on Friday night.Facebook/Kick
Salman Khan's "Kick" might be doing roaring business in India as well as overseas markets, but the film has fared poorly than Dhanush's Tamil release "Velai Illa Pattathari" ("VIP") at the Malaysian box office.
Malaysia is one of the key overseas markets, where Indian films (particularly Tamil films) perform well at the box office. Dhanush's "VIP" has grossed ₹2.14 crore (1,125,794 Malaysian Ringgit) at the end of the third weekend (till 3 August) in Malaysia, according to Bollywood Hungama.
The action comedy entertainer "Kick" has grossed only ₹18.98 lakh (99,878 Malaysian Ringgit) at the end of its second weekend. "Kick" collections are far behind "VIP" figures from Malaysia. The number of screen count varies for these films. While the Dhanush starrer is being screened in 13 screens, "Kick" is just shown in three screens owing to limited Hindi-speaking audience. Tamil films, generally, perform better business over other Indian films in Malaysia, as Tamils reportedly constitute the largest percentage of Indian minority there.
However, "Kick" has been performing exceptionally well in other key overseas markets. The Salman starrer is much ahead of "VIP" in the US, UK and Australia. The film has also been doing an extraordinary business in the Indian markets. It has earned over ₹215 crore nett at the Indian box office, according to film critic and trade analyst Taran Adarsh. The action entertainer is all set to surpass Shah Rukh Khan's "Chennai Express" collections in another few days.
"Kick" has turned out to be the biggest blockbuster in Salman's career. The film is the highest grossing entertainer of 2014 till now. It will be interesting to see if the upcoming biggies like "Happy New Year", "Bang Bang" and "P.K." will be able to surpass the collections of "Kick."
Directed by Sajid Nadiadwala, "Kick" has Jacqueline Fernandez, Randeep Hooda, Nawazuddin Siddqui and Saurabh Shukla in supporting roles.
"VIP" - Blockbuster
"Velai Illa Pattathari"Facebook/VIP
The romantic action entertainer, which hit the screens on 18 July, has also turned out to be a blockbuster flick. "VIP" is the highest grossing Tamil film of the year so far. It is one of the biggest hits in Dhanush's career.
The film has minted more than ₹25 crore at the Tamil Nadu box office. It is all set to successfully complete 25-day run on Monday (11 August) in several theatres.
Directed by Velraj, "VIP" has Amala Paul, Amitesh, Samuthirakani, Saranya Ponvannan and Vivek in supporting roles. The film is produced by Dhanush's Wunderbar films and its music is composed by Anirudh.
Kangana Ranaut on Rangoli's acid attack: I did tacky films for my sister's 54 surgeries
Darbar box office collection: Rajinikanth-starrer outperforms Pattas, Ala Vaikunthapurramuloo
Ala Vaikunthapurramuloo 8-day box office collection: Allu Arjun scores his first double century


Forget Bates, Lecter, Tony, Bateman, WW or Chigurh, Damon's Gardner is THE most insidious, brutal and cruel of all Coen Bros-written villains. Clooney might just win three Oscars in a single edition and make Award(s) history. Deservedly so. Triple threat indeed (review in the making).


text:
Corruption Ethics Public School This Weeks News
NO PERFORMANCE EVALUATION IN 12 YEARS – SHHHHH IT'S A SECRET
ByLinda Sutter
By Linda Sutter, Investigative Reporter – October 7, 2021
Recently, and within Social Media, we have been told that a survey is being conducted to see if we the people would support another school bond of 47 million dollars. I believe our children and their education is the most important aspect in their life to pursue their future dreams.
Currently, The Del Norte County Voters in 2008 voted for a $25 million dollar bond. The bonds are listed under the Proposition 39 School Bond laws. And DNUSD has bonds A-E. Along with the bonds came an oversight committee consisting of 7 members.
As an Citizens Oversight Committee (COC) for School Bonds there are 5 main things the oversight committee must assure.
Did the District spend money on authorized purposes?
Were expenditures made on projects specifically authorized by the voters?
Were there annual Audits?
Were there Annual Performance Audits?
Annual Reports required and Regular Reports encouraged?
Beginning July 5, 2021 through August 5, 2021, a series of emails between Jeff Napier Assistant Superintendent and Steve Lyons Chair of the Oversight Committee Occurred. On July 5th, 2021 Oversight Chair Steve Lyons writes:
Page 2 Section "Measure A Bond Authorization", 5th paragraph, 1st sentence–states, "According to the District the $24,985,655.70 issued to date will require property taxpayers to repay the sum of $44,330,696.48;
On July 9, 2021 Assistant Superintendent, Jeff Napier suggests the following; Auditors letter will need to somehow officially amend their report. Also the referenced amount indicated on page 2 has yet to be revised.
Steve Lyons responds; "I suggest we get rid of the $44 million number. While technically it is accurate, it is hard to understand as the figure includes the payment to refund the bonds as taxpayer debt."
Jeff Napier responds, "I agree."
Another conversation was brought up regarding the number of board members. According to School Bond Laws there must be 7 members serving on the oversight committee.
Education Code Section 15278(a) requires The Committee shall consist of at least seven (7) members (and may be larger) to serve for a term of two (2) years, without compensation, and for no more than two (2) consecutive terms. The Committee may not include any employer or official of the school district or any vendor, contractor, or consultant of the school district. The Committee must include all of the following:
(a) One member who is active in a business organization representing the business community located within the school district;
(b) One member active in a senior citizen's organization;
(c) One member active in a bona fide taxpayer association;
(d) For a school district, one member shall be the parent or guardian of a child enrolled in the district.
(e) For a school district, one member shall be both a parent or guardian of a child enrolled in the district and active in a parent-teacher organization, such as the Parent Teacher Association or school site council.
In an email sent from Jeff Napier to Steve Lyons July 22, 2021
The school board retroactively appointed prior members to the COC for those members who had been attending and agreed to be reappointed. I will research which members were reappointed and which dates. If any of them had an appointment during that fiscal year, they would qualify as being a member counted. (Jeff)
You're going to have to explain this a lot better to me. I am really confused with this explanation. (Steve)
Jeff Napier replied, "I sent you the board minutes. The past practice of the district was an initial appointment of the committee and then if they chose to serve another term, they were allowed. There was no formal reappointment. Upon legal advice, the school board retroactively appointed members who had been serving on the COC with their consent. All of the members consented for 16-19 and two of the members consented for 19-21. Board minutes delineate. Auditor making corrections."
On July 27, 2021 Steve Lyons Chair of COC writes "Awaiting correction of the Auditor's Report, and said sections of Page 2 and Page 4 of the Annual Report, i.e. there were only two COC 'appointed' members during FY 2019/2020, and COC was inactive."
Jess Napier writes on July 29th, 2021, "Corrections made. Have draft audit I will send you. The auditor should be sending final with corrections ASAP."
On July 27, 2021 Steve Lyons writes; "eff, based on the 12-12-2019 District Board Meeting Minutes that you supplied me, and what you have explained to me in the interim, there were only two members, Haley Allen and Sandy Moreno, who were officially reappointed to the Citizens Oversight Committee for the term of 7-1-2019 to 6-30-2021, and neither of these were officially "acting" during FY 2019/2020, as no COC meetings convened during said period; and, according to you, both of these resigned when the current 2020/2021 COC was formed. Therefore, to more accurately convey what actually transpired in FY 2019/2020, I suggest that this paragraph be revised as follows: "During the time covered by this Report, the Citizens Oversight Committee was comprised only two members, and no active oversight occurred. These both resigned when the 2020-21 COC was appointed by the DNCUSD Board of Education on ______, 2020."
There will be more emails to follow in the days ahead. California Public Request for information have been sent. In the meantime go to DNUSD.Org. scroll down the page until you find the oversight committee. Some of the oversight committee folks have had training most have not, The newer members were talked into stating they had been on the board with a date "retroactively" when no board existed.
In the meantime, this School District and Board members have hired a consultant to conduct a survey to see if we, the people, will vote for another school Bond to the tune of $47 million. Keep in mind we still owe $44 million from a $25 million dollar bond, and we have been paying on this bond for 13 years.
By Linda Sutter
One thought on "NO PERFORMANCE EVALUATION IN 12 YEARS – SHHHHH IT'S A SECRET"
mendoza says:
Sounds like some people should go to jail for deliberately violating laws and informing public of other things. What's next?


text:
Four Methods to Drive a Successful First Oil Licensing Round in Ghana
Edna Osei, Ishmael Ackah
Beneficial ownership, Contract transparency and monitoring, Legislation and regulation, Licensing and negotiation, Revenue management
Ghana, Mexico
Civil society actors, Government officials, Journalists and media, Parliaments and political parties, Private sector
Since Ghana discovered commercial quantities of petroleum in 2007 and started production in 2010, there has been a strong government focus on sector and extractives revenues management. This focus intensified after the passage of the Exploration and Production Law in 2016. Indeed, since 2017, there has been special emphasis on issues such as licencing processes, contract transparency, transfer pricing and beneficial ownership in public policy discussions.
According to the Exploration and Production Law, the country's Petroleum Commission must keep a public register of all petroleum licenses, agreements, authorizations and permits and make this information open to all. The commission is required by the local content regulations to provide public access to such information. Per the regulations, local content refers to the percentage of Ghanaian produced materials, personnel, financing, goods and services rendered to the petroleum industry and which can be measured in monetary terms.
A separate government upstream strategy—currently in a draft stage and unavailable online—targets creating an environment for sustainable development and ensuring facilitation and promotion of women's participation in oil and gas exploration and production.
Another important element of the law is that it makes provisions for open and competitive bidding processes.
Having established a bid and licensing rounds committee in May, the country's preparation for the bid round began last month. This development makes other countries' bidding round experience particularly relevant to Ghanaians.
A recent workshop led by NRGI and Open Contracting Partnership aimed to help Ghana's Ministry of Energy conduct a transparent and successful bid round, homing in on the recent experiences of Mexican and Lebanese petroleum regulatory authorities to determine how can Ghana make the most out of the process. There were four clear pointers for Ghana.
Invest in quality technical data. Ghana needs to know its own geology better than any company that wants to invest, Westwood Global Energy Group president and NRGI advisory council member Keith Meyers said. Meyers pointed to additional ideal bid round conditions like easy access to technical data, clear and simple bidding criteria, fair, reasonable and stable contracts, and competitive fiscal terms. Apart from strengthening the country's negotiating position, it can also help to plan the licencing round. The data around the projects should also be accessible. Ghana's current physical data room can be housed on a dedicated website or the Petroleum Commission website to allow companies to pay and access information on the blocks.
Level the playing field. There should be transparent, clear and simple regulations, and bidding criteria and licencing processes known to all potential parties. Ghana can follow examples of best practices by publishing specific criteria and other relevant information on the website of the Ministry of Energy or create a dedicated website that integrates petroleum and environmental regulations and other relevant information. This reduces the abuse of authority and favoritism by public officials since all stakeholders will have access to the same information at the same time.
Build and construct transparency measures. In preparing for the first licencing process, the country needs to build investor and public trust. Information that is important to investors and public should be published and easily readable and accessible. Information on beneficial owners of companies, information on all pre-qualified companies, reasons for selecting one company over the other, and the decision-making process—along with the actors making those decisions—should be known. The publication of this information should be timely and easily understandable. Apart from building investor and public trust, transparency also has the power to attract competent companies.
At the workshop, Lebanon's delegation focused on the fiscal regime, transparency measures and local content. For instance, a portal has been created to exchange information and receive feedback from stakeholders. The winning bid is declared through press conference. In addition, there is a draft law to empower citizens to sue officials suspected of corruption or abuse of the system.
Mexico's presentation centred on major transparency initiatives such as integrating fiscal, environmental, energy and other relevant data on one website and livestreaming the bid openings and announcements of the winners for public consumption and transparency.
Engage with civil society. Mexico's presentation emphasized continual consultation with civil society. Ghana's Ministry of Energy promised to share information on the timelines and deliverables on the licencing round, receive stakeholder input into the upstream strategy and forge a sustainable partnership with civil society to ensure maximum transparency of the licencing process. These commitments should be holistic and should cover the entire upstream sector. After the workshop, the ministry updated civil society on the bid round process, sought input on the draft petroleum upstream sector strategy, and also responded to questions.
Read more about NRGI's contract transparency work in Mexico.
Edna Osei is an Africa Associate with the Natural Resource Governance Institute (NRGI). Ishmael Ackah is a technical advisor at Ghana's Ministry of Planning.
NRGI's Top 10 Blog Posts in 2016
Max Brett
Resource Governance Index: Sub-Saharan Africa Highlights
13th Latin American Forum on Extractive Industries
Monday, March 6, 2017 - 08:30 to Tuesday, March 7, 2017 - 17:30
Ghana's Election: Seven Extractives Governance Recommendations for the Next Government
Samuel Bekoe, Mark Evans, Emmanuel Kuyole, Rushaiya Ibrahim-Tanko, Adams Fusheini
Twelve Red Flags: Corruption Risks in the Award of Extractive Sector Licenses and Contracts
Aaron Sayne, Alexandra Gillies, Andrew Watkins
4 hours 8 min ago.


text:
Sealers Corner ( für Robbenjägerwinkel) ist ein Strand auf der Insel Heard im südlichen Indischen Ozean. Er nimmt das nordwestliche Ufer der Corinthian Bay auf der Ostseite der Basis der Azorella-Halbinsel ein.

Namensgebend sind eine Schutzhütte und andere Hinterlassenschaften von Robbenjägern des 19. Jahrhunderts an diesem Strand.

Weblinks
 Sealers Corner im Verzeichnis des Australian Antarctic Data Centre (englisch)

Strand auf Heard und den McDonaldinseln

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
TSCA Implementation is Proving to be Target Rich
Posted on January 30, 2019 by Lynn L. Bergeson
EPA has maintained a frantic pace implementing the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, the 2016 amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Less publicized, but as significant, are the spate of judicial challenges occasioned by new TSCA. There are, as reported previously in this space, the ongoing challenges to the foundational TSCA "framework rules," federal appellate challenges to the core TSCA rules brought under TSCA Section 19(a). Newer actions under other TSCA provisions have been brought more recently.
On January 14, 2019, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont, the Vermont Public Interest Group and others sued EPA under TSCA Section 20(a) to compel it to perform its "mandatory duty" to address the alleged imminent threat to human health posed by paint removal products containing methylene chloride. This is the first test of the scope of EPA's mandatory duties under TSCA Sections 6(a) and 7. Section 20(a) provides that "any person may commence a civil action … against the Administrator to compel the Administrator to perform any act or duty under this Act which is not discretionary." Plaintiffs allege that EPA has not performed its mandatory duty under TSCA Sections 6(a) (authorizing EPA to regulate substances that present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment) and TSCA Section 7 (authorizing EPA to commence civil actions for seizure and/or relief of imminent hazards). EPA proposed a rule in 2017 under TSCA Section 6 to prohibit the manufacture, processing, and distribution of methylene chloride for consumer and most types of commercial paint and coating removal. Except for extending the comment period multiple times, no further action has been taken to issue the rule in final.
In another regulatory action, on December 21, 2018, EPA denied a TSCA Section 21 petition requesting that EPA amend the TSCA Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule to increase asbestos reporting, exclude asbestos from certain exemptions, and lift Confidential Business Information claims on asbestos information reported under the CDR rule. Due to the government shutdown, the notice has not yet been published in the Federal Register, but EPA has posted a prepublication version. It is unclear whether petitioners will appeal EPA's decision, but chances are they will.
In another TSCA Section 21 denial action, litigation did follow. In 2017, EPA denied a Section 21 petition requesting that EPA regulate under TSCA Section 6 the fluoridation of drinking water based on petitioners' concern that ingestion of fluoride poses an unreasonable risk to humans. EPA denied the petition and petitioners appealed. On December 21, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled that EPA had wrongly dismissed the petition based on EPA's argument that petitioners were required to demonstrate under Section 21 that all conditions of use of fluoride posed an unreasonable risk, not just the fluoridation of drinking water.
For TSCA aficionados, the two Section 21 petitions raise a host of interesting TSCA issues beyond the scope of this blog. These include, among others, EPA's interpretation of "conditions of use," a term new to TSCA since Lautenberg, and what standard of review applies under Section 21, whether de novo or review of the administrative record. The key take-away here is that these actions reflect the commitment of EPA detractors to use TSCA Sections 19, 20, and 21, the courts, and every other means available to oppose the Administration's TSCA implementation efforts. When and how the courts will respond is unclear. These cases will be closely watched, and more are expected.
Tags: Section 21 petition, judicial review
Toxic Substances
Is You Is Or Is You Ain't Transformative?
Posted on October 4, 2016 by Andrea Field
More about that title later, but first let me set the stage. On September 27, 2016, the D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, heard argument in West Virginia v. EPA, in which state, industry, and labor petitioners challenge EPA's Clean Power Plan (CPP, the Plan, or the Rule). The Plan regulates carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants under Clean Air Act (CAA) §111(d). I will refrain from addressing issues on which the trade and mainstream press have opined at length (e.g., the judges' frustration at being asked to make policy decisions because Congress has failed to act and that participants – judges, lawyers, parties, reporters, the public – had to sit through almost 7 hours of argument in one day, in addition to the hours many spent waiting in line). Instead, I offer an ACOEL-centric tour, in non-chronological order, of the five "segments" of the September 27 argument.
Argument Segment #2: The Battle Between CAA §§112 and 111(d). Aficionados of the College's 2014 white paper on EPA's §111(d) regulatory authority will recall the difference of opinion over whether – under the 1990 Amendments to the CAA – EPA is prohibited from regulating power plants under CAA §111(d) if EPA already regulates power plants under CAA §112. Plan challengers point to the plain meaning of §111(d)(1)(A) as it appears in the U.S. Code. Plan supporters point to the existence of a "conforming amendment" to §111(d)(1)(A) found in the Statutes at Large but omitted from the U.S. Code, and they argue that EPA's approach is a valid attempt to reconcile that amendment with the U.S. Code. After listening to the judges express frustration at not being able to satisfyingly reconcile the two versions, I recalled D.C. Circuit Judge Leventhal's concurring opinion in Citizens to Save Spencer County v. EPA, in which he concluded that contradictory CAA provisions should be viewed as "countermanding." Quoting from Eugene Field's poem "The Duel" – about the fight between the gingham dog and the calico cat – he summed up the irreconcilable differences as follows: "The tension between the two animals culminates in these final lines of doggerel: 'The truth about the cat and pup is this, They ate each other up.' "
Argument Segment #3: Constitutional Issues. If forced at knife-point to articulate the first portion of this argument, which began at 2:35 p.m., right after the lunch break, I would be unable to do so, other than to say that the word "commandeering" cropped up a lot. More interesting was how the second advocate for petitioners on this point – Professor Laurence Tribe of Constitutional law fame – was able to expand his separation-of-powers argument into a further analysis of issues argued during the morning session.
Argument Segments #4 and #5: Notice and Record-Based Issues. At the end of a very long day, the panel heard arguments on (a) whether EPA's standards are "achievable" and whether parts of the Plan's approach have been "adequately demonstrated" under §111; and (b) whether the final rule is so different from what was proposed that the public lacked notice and an opportunity to comment. Petitioners arguing the former point (the unachievability of program requirements) faced a weary panel, which pondered what the options for state and source relief would be if the Rule is upheld but later turns out to be a train wreck.
A colleague describes as follows the situation that gives rise to parties complaining that they had no notice of what a final rule would require because EPA's proposal was so different: "EPA may propose an apple and finalize an orange. That's OK; they're both fruits. What EPA may not do (and what petitioners argue EPA has done here) is to propose an apple and finalize a pork chop." Dick Stoll passionately argued – in his June 7, 2016 post for ACOEL – that previous 3-judge panels in the D.C. Circuit have not properly dealt with this lack-of-notice issue. Those panels refused challengers' attempts to overturn pork chops, saying challengers of pork chops must first file administrative petitions for review under CAA §307(d)(7)(B) and then wait (for what could be years, if ever) for EPA to act on those petitions. Dick argued that the only way the previous 3-judge panel decisions would ever be overturned was by action of the entire court, sitting en banc. I cannot promise Dick the entire court will overturn the previous panels' reading of §307(d)(7)(B), but I can say that Tom Lorenzen teed up the issue. When asked by Judge Griffith whether this argument appeared in petitioners' briefs, Lorenzen said it did not because when petitioners wrote their briefs, the case was going to be heard by a 3-judge panel. But said Lorenzen, looking up at Judge Griffith, "Now we are here." To which Judge Griffith replied, "And who else to ask but an en banc court?" "Exactly," said Lorenzen.
Argument Segment #1: Core Legal Issues. Although I visit Argument Segment #1 last, the fate of the Clean Power Plan may well rest on how the panel addresses the issue raised at the very beginning of the day: whether or not the Plan is "transformative." The Supreme Court, in UARG v. EPA, held that EPA cannot engage in a "transformative expansion" of its regulatory authority absent "clear congressional authorization" to do so. Petitioners argue that EPA's Clean Power Plan amounts to a transformative expansion of EPA's explicit regulatory authority and thus is illegal. EPA argues the program is not "transformative"; indeed, says EPA, the Rule is very similar to other CAA programs that the D.C. Circuit has upheld. So, is the Rule "business as usual" or is it "transformative"?
And so we return to the title of this post. I cannot predict what the D.C. Circuit will decide, but I think its determination will revolve around how the en banc panel answers the following question about the Clean Power Plan: Is You Is or Is You Ain't Transformative? And that question prompts me to offer these final lines of doggerel in memory (and honor) of Judge Leventhal:
To predict the end here, it's informative
To know if C-P-P is transformative.
To prevail in this Court,
One must prove that the sort
Of change caused by that Rule is enormative.
Tags: Clean Power Plan, D.C. Circuit, Judicial Review
Chevron | Clean Air Act | Climate Change | Environmental Protection Agency | Litigation
Viva La Deference—Chevron deference that is
Posted on July 5, 2016 by Jeff Civins
Administrative lawyers, especially environmental lawyers, are well familiar with the doctrine of Chevron deference as applied to agency interpretations of statutes. In the 1984 Clean Air Act case of Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, the U.S. Supreme Court announced a 2-step approach: (1) the court must determine whether Congress has directly spoken to the precise question at issue and, if so, that ends the matter—the Court, as well the agency, must give effect to that intent; and (2) if not, the court must defer to the agency's interpretation if it is "reasonable," the presumption being that Congress intended to leave its resolution to the agency. In a more recent Clean Air Act case, Michigan v. EPA, the Court, although determining EPA acted unreasonably in failing to consider costs in its regulation of hazardous air pollutants from power plants, applied the Chevron doctrine, but Justice Thomas, in his concurring opinion, challenged the doctrine's legal underpinnings, causing some to question the continued vitality of the doctrine. In Encino Motorcars v, Navarro, decided on June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court, although deciding that the agency's interpretation was not entitled to deference, provided assurance that the Chevron doctrine is alive and well.
The case involved the issue of whether service advisors at car dealerships were exempt from overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. In 2008, the Department of Labor had proposed a rule confirming a long-standing practice that they were exempt, but in its final rulemaking--in 2011--it reversed course, without explanation. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had applied Chevron deference in upholding the rule, but the Supreme Court reversed. It held that, although the Department could change its policy, its interpretation was not entitled to Chevron deference because it did not provide a reasoned explanation for doing so. The Court therefore remanded to the Ninth Circuit to determine the rule's validity in the first instance. In her concurring opinion, Justice Ginsburg, joined by Justice Sotomayor, noted: "'[U]nexplained inconsistency' in agency policy is 'a reason for holding an interpretation to be an arbitrary and capricious change from agency practice.'" In his dissent, Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Alito, agreed with the majority--that the Court "need not wade into the murky waters of Chevron deference," but disagreed that the Court should have reversed and argued that the rule change was simply invalid.
So, Chevron deference lives, but it does not apply to unexplained rule changes.
Tags: judicial review, agency deference, Chevron deference, regulation, rulemaking
D.C. Circuit: Save Us Sinners Who Fail to Object When There Is Nothing to Object To!
Posted on June 7, 2016 by Dick Stoll
Clean Power Plan (CPP) groupies are beside themselves over the D.C. Circuit's surprise "straight-to-en banc" move for CPP judicial review. The buzz is mostly over the survivability of the CPP's interpretations of Clean Air Act (CAA) §111(d) in light of the nine judges' dispositions.
I won't weigh in on that issue here. My target is another issue, one that has been lurking in the background and has bugged me greatly for the last couple of years. Now that the issue is before an en banc panel, I am fervently hoping the Court will do what only en banc panels can do: declare that a few recent D.C. Circuit rulings are wrong.
The issue involves garden variety adlaw: should the CPP be vacated because EPA failed to propose or adequately foreshadow key elements of the final rule? Parties attacking the CPP have advanced this argument, and EPA has defended on numerous grounds that its notice was adequate.
I won't opine here on whether EPA's notice was adequate. My beef is with EPA's fall-back defense: EPA's argument that even if there were wholly insufficient notice of the CPP's final provisions, the Court has no authority to vacate the CPP on those grounds.
EPA's theory is that since CAA §307(d)(7)(B) provides that only an issue raised in public comments can be raised on judicial review, a final rule that was never proposed cannot be challenged on judicial review because there were no public comments on that provision. Yep, read on.
EPA argues that parties claiming a final rule was never proposed must instead file administrative petitions for review under CAA §307(d)(7)(B) and wait (usually for a few years, if ever) for EPA to act on those petitions. In the meantime, under EPA's position, regulatory provisions that were never proposed or foreshadowed must go into full force and effect.
This means that EPA can get away with murder, at least in the adlaw context. Just forget the bedrock principle that an agency can impose and enforce only those rules that have first been proposed. Under EPA's position, the bedrock is blown away by a Richter 8.8 otherwise known as CAA §307(d)(7)(B).
In the last two years, EPA has managed to convince D.C. Circuit panels to accede to this unfair and baseless approach. See my 2015 ACOEL post discussing these opinions. In a piece I published in Bloomberg BNA in 2014, I showed how the D.C. Circuit had never previously interpreted CAA §307(d)(7)(B) in this fashion , and had on many occasions vacated final rule provisions that had never been proposed.
As explained in the above-cited pieces, the absurdity of EPA's position is that final rules will go into full force and effect against parties because they failed to object to something they could not object to. This just can't be right. The en banc CPP panel should do the right thing and declare the three most recent decisions to be wrong.
[Mr. Stoll is not representing any party in the pending D.C. Circuit CPP judicial review proceedings.]
Tags: Administrative Law, Clean Power Plan, Judicial Review, Notice, CAA §307(d)(7)(B)
Clean Air Act | Environmental Protection Agency | Litigation
Judicial Review When a New Administration Changes Course: The Surprising Supreme Court Decision that Saved Countless Lives
Posted on January 27, 2016 by Robert Percival
In an excellent December 21st blog post ("Are Obama's Climate Pledges Really that 'Legally Durable'?") Richard Stoll questions two of the premises behind my assessment of the legal durability of U.S pledges at the recent Paris climate conference. In particular he challenges my conclusions that EPA's Clean Power Plan is likely to survive judicial review and that its repeal by a new president would require a lengthy rulemaking process that could be rejected on judicial review.
First, he correctly notes that "EPA's authority to regulate GHG emissions is not at issue in the challenges now pending in the D.C. Circuit." But my belief that the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan ultimately will be upheld in the Supreme Court is not founded principally on the Court's repeated affirmation of Massachusetts v. EPA. My reasons for believing the Clean Power Plan ultimately will be upheld are discussed in detail here. I agree that it will be close, probably 5-4, with Justice Kennedy likely casting the deciding vote.
Second, Stoll argues that a new administration is free to reverse course and that there is no heightened scrutiny from reviewing courts when it seeks to do so. I agree entirely. In fact, that is precisely what the Supreme Court held in Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Ass'n v. State Farm, the case cited in my initial posting. In fact, State Farm is the very case the D.C. Circuit relied on when it applied those long-settled principles in National Association of Home Builders v. EPA, the case Stoll cites.
But the State Farm case also provides a powerful lesson that a new administration must have a good reason for changing course beyond knee-jerk opposition to federal regulation. In State Farm the new Reagan administration sought to rescind a regulation by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) that required passive restraints in new automobiles. Like the Clean Power Plan, the regulation had been the subject of considerable political controversy and it was bitterly opposed by the auto industry. Chrysler CEO Lee Iacocca had famously endorsed the notion that air bags were more suited to serve as a method of capital punishment than as safety devices. The Supreme Court later observed that "the automobile industry waged the regulatory equivalent of war against the airbag and lost."
Less than one month after taking office, the Reagan administration reopened the passive restraint rulemaking. Two months later it postponed the effective date of the passive restraint regulation and proposed its rescission. The White House Press Office announced the decision, describing it as part of a package of "economic recovery" measures. After a six-month rulemaking, NHTSA rescinded the passive restrain regulation, despite the agency's previous estimate that it would save 12,000 lives per year and prevent more than 100,000 serious injuries annually.
When NHTSA's decision was challenged in the D.C. Circuit, the prevailing assumption was that "arbitrary and capricious" review was so toothless that it rarely could be used to overturn an agency's decision. Instead, the D.C. Circuit panel struck down the rescission decision by announcing a new standard of judicial review – that sudden reversals of course by an agency required heightened judicial scrutiny. [State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Department of Transportation, 680 F.2d 206 (D.C. Cir. 1982), affirmed on other grounds 463 U.S. 29 (1983)].
The Supreme Court then granted review. The Justices unanimously rejected the D.C. Circuit's conclusion that a new administration's sudden change of course required heightened judiciary scrutiny. But the Court surprised most observers by declaring NHTSA's rescission of the rule to be arbitrary and capricious. In an opinion by Justice White, the Court held that NHTSA had "failed to present an adequate basis and explanation for rescinding the passive restraint requirement . . ."
What State Farm powerfully illustrates is that a new administration cannot simply impose its ideological preference for less regulation to quickly rescind a rule as the Reagan administration tried to do to eliminate passive restraint requirements. The auto industry then was as vehement in its opposition to air bags as states opposing EPA's Clean Power Plan are now. But because the record supported the extraordinary life-saving potential of airbags, the Court held that the regulation could not be repealed without the agency coming up with a new record or a better explanation for doing so. Due to this surprising Supreme Court decision hundreds of thousands of lives have been saved and millions of serious injuries prevented.
To be sure, the Supreme Court did not order that air bags be required. Rather it required the agency to offer more than ideological opposition to regulation as a justification for repealing the rule. Archival research I conducted in the papers of the late Justice Thurgood Marshall revealed a memorandum from Justice White stating that for at least one aspect of its decision he doubted that NHTSA on remand "would find it too difficult to cover its tracks based on the present record." I agree with Stoll that a new administration could repeal the Clean Power Plan. But State Farm cautions that it should not act too hastily if it wishes such a decision to withstand judicial review.
In the wake of the State Farm decision both President Reagan and Lee Iacocca eventually changed their minds about the merits of air bags. The fascinating story of how Transportation Secretary Elizabeth Dole helped persuade President Reagan that air bags should be required is told in Michael R. Lemov, Car Safety Wars: One Hundred Years of Technology, Politics and Death (2015). Perhaps today's fierce opponents of EPA's Clean Power Plan ultimately will have a similar epiphany concerning the merits of the Clean Power Plan and the transition to a greener energy infrastructure.
Tags: Judicial Review, Clean Power Plan, Paris Climate Agreement
Shallow Victory In Sackett Highlights Morass Caused by Murky Jurisdictional Waters
Posted on March 29, 2012 by Zach C. Miller
As Ted Garrett reported in his recent blog, the Supreme Court has issued its long-awaited decision in Sackett v. EPA. Not surprisingly (based on the questions asked at oral argument), the Court unanimously reversed the Ninth Circuit and ruled that the recipient of an administrative compliance order to restore wetlands under Section 404 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) can challenge that order in court under the APA. The Court soundly rejected the Government's argument and the Ninth Circuit's conclusion that the CWA implicitly precludes "pre enforcement" judicial review of such orders.
In addition to that important ruling, this decision is noteworthy for what it did not do. Even more pointedly, the decision highlights the enormous underlying problem of uncertainty about the scope of waters regulated by the CWA, which remains untouched and unfixed by this opinion.
One of the important issues not addressed by the Sackett decision is the constitutional due process argument made by the plaintiffs that precluding judicial review of such orders is unfair and unlawful. The decision simply says that the CWA itself does not preclude judicial review, so the right to review of this final agency action is presumed under the APA. As a result, it left for another day whether other statutes (like CERCLA § 113(h)) that expressly preclude pre-enforcement judicial review would pass constitutional muster.
Second, it did not expressly address whether a party can judicially challenge any aspect of an administrative order, or can only make the basic "jurisdictional challenge" regarding whether the agency in fact has regulatory authority over the subject property or persons. Justice Ginsburg, in her concurring opinion, states that the decision only addresses the jurisdictional issue and leaves the question of whether other types of challenges can be brought "open for another day and case." It remains to be seen whether EPA and the lower courts will adopt this narrow reading of the decision.
Third, the opinion emphasizes the clear finality of the administrative order at issue in the Sackett case as a basis for APA judicial review. It remains to be seen whether an agency order or ruling subject to some additional agency appeal, review or deliberative process, no matter how futile or fore-ordained, would be considered a "final agency action". It also remains to be seen whether EPA and other agencies will attempt to address and undercut this "finality" factor by creating post-order administrative processes that delay or frustrate judicial review.
Finally, while some will trumpet this as a great victory for the regulated community, Justice Alito's concurring opinion got it right in saying that this "decision provides a modest measure of relief", but the huge underlying problem reflected by this dispute is the "hopelessly indeterminate" scope of "waters of the United States" regulated under the CWA, which this decision does nothing to alleviate or address. As a result, while a tiny fraction of regulated persons may now choose to challenge an administrative compliance order in court, the very significant cost of doing so, and the low chance of success combined with the draconian and mounting penalties resulting from a failed challenge, will still leave nearly all regulated persons (in Justice Alito's words) "with little practical alternative but to dance to the EPA's tune."
The bottom-line is that allowing regulated persons to sue in these circumstances (again in Justice Alito's words) is "better than nothing," but the underlying regulatory morass will not be fixed unless and until Congress or EPA and the Corps develop a clear, appropriate and formal delineation of waters regulated by the CWA. The informal "Jurisdictional Guidance" floated last year by EPA and reportedly now parked at the White House, if adopted, would worsen rather than resolve this uncertainty. After 40 years, it's time to fix this mess and pass a clear law or rule on the reach of the Clean Water Act.
Tags: Sackett v. EPA, Clean Water Act, judicial review, administrative order
Sackett v. EPA: Parties May Sue To Challenge Clean Water Act Compliance Orders
Posted on March 22, 2012 by Theodore Garrett
The Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Sackett v. EPA. In a unanimous decision, the Court held that the Sacketts may bring a civil action under the Administrative Procedure Act to challenge EPA's compliance order. The court rejected the government's argument that EPA is less likely to use orders if they are subject to judicial review, saying that "[t]he APA's presumption of judicial review is a repudiation of the principle that efficiency of regulation conquers all." It will be important to see how EPA responds and what if any changes are made to EPA's practice and procedure for issuing orders in wetlands and perhaps other matters. See link to the Sackett opinion.
EPA had issued a compliance order charging the Sacketts with filling in a wetland during construction of their home, in violation of the Clean Water Act, and requiring them to restore their property. The Sacketts argued that they were entitled to prompt judicial review because they faced severe penalties for noncompliance and disputed that their property is a wetland. The United States argued that the Sacketts could comply with the EPA order and submit an application for a wetlands permit or defend if EPA brings an enforcement action, but may not seek judicial review of EPA's order. The tenor of the oral argument did not bode well for the United States, as previously reported. The Court's unanimous opinion, reversing the Ninth Circuit, bears that out.
The court's opinion, written by Justice Scalia, starts with the proposition that the APA provides for judicial review of "final agency action for which there is no other adequate remedy in a court." 5 U.S.C. §704. The court concludes that EPA's compliance order has all the hallmarks of APA finality: it required the Sacketts to restore their property according to an agency-approved plan, exposed the Sacketts to double penalties in future enforcement proceedings, and severely limits their ability to obtain a Section 404 permit from the Army Corps of Engineers. See 33 U. S. C. §1344; 33 CFR§326.3(e)(1)(iv). Rejecting the government's argument, the court held that applying to the Corps of Engineers for a permit and then filing suit under the APA if that permit is denied does not provide an adequate remedy.
The Court also had little difficulty in disposing of the government's argument that the Clean Water Act should be read as precluding judicial review under the APA, 5 U. S. C. §701(a)(1). The APA creates a presumption favoring judicial review of administrative action, and the Court concluded that nothing in the Clean Water Act's statutory scheme precludes APA review. The court was similarly not persuaded that the issuance of a compliance order is simply a step in the deliberative process, given that EPA rejected the Sackett's attempt to obtain a hearing, and the next step will involve judicial and not administrative deliberation. Justice Scalia's opinion concludes that "there is no reason to think the Clean Water Act was uniquely designed to enable the strong-arming of regulated parties into 'voluntary compliance' without the opportunity for judicial review -- even judicial review of the question whether the regulated party is within the EPA's jurisdiction."
Justice Alito's concurring opinion is of interest because of its emphasis on the fact that the "reach of the Clean Water Act is notoriously unclear." Citing an amicus brief filed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Justice Alito cites EPA's guidance advising property owners that jurisdictional determinations concerning wetlands will be made on a case-by-case basis. His opinion concludes that allowing property owners to sue under the APA is "better than nothing," but only clarification of the reach of the Clean Water Act can rectify the underlying problem.
It will be important to see how EPA responds and what if any changes are made to EPA's practice and procedure for issuing orders in wetlands and perhaps other matters. The Sackett decision will be relied upon by parties who are subject to orders under other statutes that EPA administers. For some of the reasons cited by Justice Alito, the Sackett decision also underscores the need for clarification of the reach of the Clean Water Act. Stay tuned.
Tags: EPA, Clean Water Act, judicial review, compliance, Sackett v. EPA
Environmental Protection Agency | Water
WHAT'S IN A LIST? Judicial Review of Agency Decisions Identifying Impaired Water Bodies
Posted on February 1, 2012 by Allan Gates
Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires each state to identify all water body segments within the state that do not meet water quality standards. The statute requires the states to submit a list of their impaired water body segments to EPA every two years for review and approval. The decision to list as stream segment as impaired is important because it usually triggers a chain of regulatory consequences, beginning with the preparation of a Total Maximum Daily Load ("TMDL") study and typically ending with significantly more stringent permit limits for point sources and more robust regulation of non-point sources.
Although the decision to add a stream segment to a state's 303(d) list is undeniably important, there is significant uncertainty whether the decision is subject to judicial review. An ACOEL blog entry reported in December 2011 on a Pennsylvania decision which questioned whether Pennsylvania's issuance of its 303(d) list was an appealable agency action under state law. Chester Babst, Beware of "Impaired" Surface Water Designations, posted December 10, 2010.
The federal courts of appeals are split on whether EPA's decisions in reviewing a state 303(d) list are subject to judicial review. The 8th Circuit has held that a private stakeholder challenge to EPA's approval of a Missouri 303(d) list was premature and not justiciable because the addition of a segment to a 303(d) list, by itself, did not have any impact on the rights, duties, or property of private parties. On the other hand, the 9th Circuit has held that a private party had alleged sufficient claims of present injury to have standing to challenge EPA's approval of California's 303(d) list. Even after the 9th Circuit's decision, EPA argued on remand that the scope of judicial review should be narrow because EPA's role in reviewing California's 303(d) list was supposedly only one of limited oversight ("[EPA] note[s] that the 30-day limitation on [its] review process demonstrates that [its] 'role is one of mere oversight'." The district court accepted this argument and rejected the challenge to EPA's review on remand.
It must have been amusing for knowledgeable stakeholders and state water quality regulators to read EPA's claim that its role is one of "mere oversight" that is strictly circumscribed by a 30-day time limit. The practical experience of most states has been quite different. In fact, EPA routinely runs months and even years past the 30-day limit on its review of state 303(d) lists, and it is not at all unusual for EPA to significantly alter the state's submission, frequently with a supplemental factual record and the imposition of new impairment decisions generated out of whole cloth.
Normally one might think that identifying impaired stream segments would be a simple task of comparing the numbers in the monitoring results for a given stream segment to the relevant numeric water quality standards, and therefore questions of judicial review would rarely be relevant. In practice, however, the decision to list a segment as impaired frequently can be problematic or even controversial. To begin with, monitoring results are sometimes subject to questions regarding the adequacy and accuracy of the sampling and analysis. In many instances the relevant water quality standard is expressed in a narrative rather than numeric form, and therefore the simple comparison of two numbers is replaced by an exercise in subjective judgment. Even when the basic identification of an impaired segment has been made, there are still choices of priority and timing that can make a great deal of difference in how the impairment decision affects stakeholders.
Given the potential uncertainties that can attend a listing decision, and the gravity of the regulatory consequences that are set in motion by such a decision, it is unfortunate that EPA and some state agencies have displayed such resistance to any form of independent accountability for their decisions.
Tags: water quality, Clean Water Act, section 303(d), judicial review
Water | Water Quality Standards
<< Previous posts


Learn about the current and upcoming employment trends and discover the future of job matching. Delve deeper into the Hackathon challenges and discuss the issues with the experts. Finally, find out what you can expect at the Hackathon!
Discuss the human aspects of job matching and recap the challenges before diving into the Hackathon. Pitch your idea and find a team (or more members for your team)!
Start work as a team to build your prototype. Get expert advice from subject matter, tech, and other mentors!
Practise your presentation, fine-tune your prototype, and pitch to the judging panel!


For 30 years, Turning Point has operated community-based mental health programs in Ventura County. These programs address the full range of human needs, including: a homeless shelter to meet basic physical and safety needs; supported housing to provide decent, affordable housing; and rehabilitation and socialization centers to provide meaningful, productive activities, companionship and a sense of purpose.
The nation's largest grassroots mental health organization dedicated to improving the lives of persons living with serious mental illness and their families.
The Behavioral Health Department provides a system of coordinated services to meet the mental health and substance abuse treatment needs of the Ventura County.


text:
IP Osgoode Speaks Series Presents The Reasonable Robot: Artificial Intelligence and the Law
February 3, 2020 in Uncategorized0by Olha Senyshyn
Monday, 3 February 2020, 4:30 pm to 5:30pm
Osgoode Hall Law School, Ignat Kaneff Building, Room 2027
Ryan Abbott
Professor of Law and Health Sciences at University of Surrey School of Law, Assistant Professor of Medicine, UCLA .
AI and people do not compete on a level-playing field. From a safety perspective, AI may be the best choice for driving a vehicle, but laws often prohibit driverless vehicles. At the same time, a person may be better at providing customer service, but a business may automate because it saves on taxes. AI may be better at helping companies to innovate, but using AI may keep these companies from obtaining intellectual property rights. In The Reasonable Robot, Ryan Abbott argues that the law should not discriminate between people and AI when they are performing the same tasks, a legal standard that will ultimately improve human wellbeing.
Ryan Abbott is Professor of Law and Health Sciences at the School of Law, University of Surrey and Assistant Professor of Medicine at UCLA. A physician and patent attorney, Abbott's research on law and technology has helped shape the international dialogue on these topics. He has served as an expert for the World Health Organization, World Intellectual Property Organization, the European Commission, and the UK Parliament. Abbott also spearheaded the first patent applications to disclose inventions made autonomously by an AI. In 2019, he was named one of the 50 most influential people in intellectual property by Managing IP magazine.
All are invited to attend. Light refreshments will be provided.
RSVP: https://webform.osgoode.yorku.ca/view.php?id=610596
Previous PostThe Curse of Iconic Fashion: When Social Media Marketing and Copyright Protection Collide
Next PostIn Memoriam: Peter Hogg