text:
Home » Forums » ARCHIVE » ARCHIVE - Game Creation » Game Design » Game Mechanics?
Game Mechanics?
20 replies [Last post]
I have an idea for a game that is based off of several other games. I was wondering do companies copyright or patent their game mechanics or can anybody use them?
zaiga
Game mechanics cannot be copyrighted or patented. Certain images, symbols and terms from games might be protected in someway. For example, Magic's mana symbols, the tapping symbol and terms such as "library" for the draw deck and "graveyard" for the discard pile may not be used in other games (or at least, they might give you some legal trouble).
Blatantly ripping off mechanics from a single game is considered "not done" in the gaming world, but it is not legally forbidden. However, using several different mechanics from different games and combining them to make a new game is perfectly acceptable and even common practice. For example, Puerto Rico doesn't have a single mechanic that hasn't been used in other games before, but the combination and the fine-tuning of those mechanics create a totally new and unique gaming experience.
Then again, it's a lot cooler to come up with a new twist on an existing mechanic or even a totally new mechanic. For me, that's the fun of designing games.
- René Wiersma
daem0n_faust
I have a question: If I make a rule for a mixed ccg game, do I breach any copyright? Even if I give away the rules for free and just for fun? I mean, I do not use names that are directly from the CCGs that may be used, and I am not limiting the usable ccgs to any specific products.
And if I mention a specific game anyway, at least as a vital part of the game, is that wrong?
FastLearner
zaiga wrote:
Game mechanics cannot be copyrighted or patented.
I think it might be more accurate to say that "Game mechanics probably cannot be protected by patent, and definitely cannot be copyrighted."
There have been some mechanics that have been granted patents, including the tapping action in MtG, but it's unclear as to whether actual protection exists.
-- Matthew
FastLearner wrote:
I don't think that is correct. As far as I know you are allowed to use a mechanic that basically says: "when you use a card's ability turn it 90 degrees". However, you cannot call that mechanic "tapping".
WotC patented the term "tapping" and the accompanying symbol in combination with the physical action of turning cards 90 degrees, but not the actual mechanic.
You can see the whole patent claim here:
http://tinyurl.com/yu7qv
The key parts are:
4. The method of claim 3, wherein said step of designating one or more of the cards comprises rotating the one or more cards on the playing surface from an original orientation to a second orientation.
5. The method of claim 3, wherein said second orientation is 90 degrees from the first orientation.
6. The method of claim 3, wherein said step of executing a turn comprises the initial step of rotating the player's cards previously designated in a prior turn from the second orientation to the original orientation.
It's also worded as:
In accordance with another aspect of the before-mentioned invention, the steps of executing a turn comprise the steps of tapping an element in play by flagging it so all players can see the element is presently in use and untapping the element by unflagging the element so that all players can see the element is available for use.
In accordance with another aspect of the present invention, the steps of executing a turn include the steps of first untapping all previously-tapped elements and using any elements permitted during this phase; drawing an element from the library of elements; entering one or more elements into play to effectuate a state-altering effect associated with the element that enables a player to attack other elements and any player, to defend against such attack, and to modify the effect of any element and rules of play, and alter the state of any element and any player; tapping all elements used to bring the effect into play; discarding elements as necessary until the level of predetermined number of elements is reached; and announcing to all players that a turn is over.
I have looked up that patent as well. I believe that the patent tries to protect the concept of a trading card game that uses a deck, a hand, and "tapping" (e.g., any rule for indicating that a card has been activated or inactivated once in play).
What you have quoted is just the explanation of the tapping mechanic. This mechanic is only a part of the patent. The tapping mechanic is not patented when it is taken out of it's trading card concept.
At least, that's what I make of it. Then again, I'm certainly no legal expert! :)
And anti-infringement benefits of a patent are only as good as the effort a company puts into finding and litigating any cases of infringement. I know of at least one game (7th Sea) that uses an identical technique, only they call it "tacking" instead of tapping.
That being said,
sd1115 wrote:
I have an idea for a game that is based off of several other games.
Do you mean that you have created something that will dovetail with other games (like a new set of cards for MtG) or a standalone game that uses mechanics from another game? For that matter, are the games you're borrowing from more recent or more historical (like chess or checkers)?
However, using several different mechanics from different games and combining them to make a new game is perfectly acceptable and even common practice. For example, Puerto Rico doesn't have a single mechanic that hasn't been used in other games before, but the combination and the fine-tuning of those mechanics create a totally new and unique gaming experience.
I couldn't agree more. I would rather see one or two familiar mechanics used in new and clever ways than a game that is more of a copy of another game (or games) with little or no creativity. I'm sure that's not what you meant by your original post, I'm just emphasizing the minimum level of creativity to which I would hope you aspire.
I've always thought that you could happily place a stone (or other marker) on a card to flag it, and then remove it, thus getting an identical game mechanic without rotating cards. Indeed, it could be more versatile as certain cards may be permitted more than one stone on them: that's how they handle exertion in Decipher's "Lord of the Rings" TCG.
I find the idea that you can protect the concept of rotating a card offensive. Imagine where we'd be if dice rolling, or hex boards, or fake paper money, or a game-in-a-box was protectable!
Zaiga, you may be right that because it's only a part of the patent that it isn't separately protected.
More to the point, though, is that I don't believe there's any case law involving game mechanic patents, so even though the patent office granted it, the patent may still be meaningless.
Someone would have to go up against Hasbro, though, to prove it.
On other companies using the stuff in the patent, we don't know that there isn't some kind of legal agreement in place, right? For all we know the 7th Sea folks (and others) may well be paying a small license fee.
Scurra
Richard_Huzzey wrote:
There are inherent problems with marking a card using a stone, counter or other device that don't exist with rotating a card through 90 degrees. (Try accidentally knocking the table some time :)
OTOH tapping only allows two game states for a card, whereas markers allow for a whole variety of different things (which is why Magic has to use counters as well as tapping!)
GamesOnTheBrain
"Tapping" by it's strict definition may only allow for 2 game states, but a more broad definition would allow for 4 states - 1 state for each 90 degrees of a circle.
One excellent use of this technique can be found in The Settlers of Catan Card Game. Each side of the card is marked with a certain quantity of resources - 3 on one side, 2 on a side next to it, 1 on the side next to the 2, and 0 on the final side between the 1 and the 3.
Thus by rotating the card one direction, you can add to your total resources. By rotating the card the other way, you can subtract from your resources.
Ok because of a little high level math class in college, let me be annoying and state it is possible to have an infinite number of states(points) based on degrees of a circle, when using a real number system.
Now I wont go into proving this, but basically for any two degree values you can state, there is a way to prove that another value exists between the original two values. So for a quick example, inital two values degree 0 and degree 90, value degree 45 exists between the two.(And so on, for 89 and 90, there is 89.5, for 89.5 and 89.6 there is 89.55 and so on).
With that stated, I will confess that being able to "show" this infinite numer of states with respect to a card game would be hard, if not impossible.
One possibility might be to create an additional game component, such as a "modified spinner" that would lay under a card. Maybe then you would mark one side of the card and when using the card in different states, you would turn the mark towards some specific part of the "modified spinner".
I keep thinking about a game mat for each player with N different "clock-like" circles. It would contain 12(or N) different states to turn the card. The card would lay in the middle of the "clock-like" circle.
Anyways.... sorry for being annoying...
Look, I know you can have several positions for a card (and the Catan example is a good one, albeit one that requires the card to be square) but it's about being able to distinguish between positions easily, and with a rectangular card you can only really have two that can be easily indicated...
Scurra I agree with you that a rectangle card results in problems for number of positions, but I still believe there can be over 2 different distinguishable positions.
A third option, such as used by MTG, a state when turning a rectangle card over indicates a card that has phased out.
And I think most people could also distinguish a rectangle card set at a 45 degree angle, so that a 4th state.
Going on with that, you could also do the 180 degree, basically upside down. I wouldn't recommend 45, 135, or the other degrees since i knew lots of magic players which would do the "half tap" (45 degrees) when tapping.
I guess the 270 would work as well (basically tapped towards the left)
This discussion has talked mostly about Wizards (now Hasbro) patenting the tap symbol and it's action. They also patented (at least I believe) some of the other stuff that makes the game unique so that it wouldn't be copied almost completely and rethemed (which was happening at the time.) This did not effect the other games out there, in fact it was better for the market because it effectively killed the Magic clones (actually probably the fact that they weren't selling probably killed them.)
Games that I remember not sold by Wizards that had tapping was Shadowfist, Legend of the Five Rings, the original Middle Earth, Doomtrooper, Shadowrun, Warlords, 7th Sea, and probably more I can't think of (what's really sad is that I actually owned some of these games, or more correct, still own them.)
The game that no one on this board will probably never want to play or hear about again, Pokemon, was probably the first Wizards CCG game that didn't have tapping. And another useless tidbit of info: Middle Earth didn't use a tap symbol or come up with a new word, they actually used tapping in the card's wording (There was a time that Magic used the word as well, back when I started playing it. I never owned any of the expensive cards but I saw them all, some of them used in real decks without protectors.)
Now that I've successfully wasted most of your time, I'll let you get back to the subject at hand, whatever that was....
Yes, I agree that 4 positions may not be as distinguishable as using just 2.
However, I do think there's more to making the positions distinguishable than just the positions themselves.
The card design itself would make a big difference in my opinion. If one designs the cards themselves to look significantly different in each position (by using different colors, textures, designs, etc. on the "top" edge), I think the problems can be overcome.
I may be in trouble! I have a fairly well finished CCG that I have been working on for a long time (over 3 years now) that uses CARD ROTATION!! (dramatic music)... Actually I'm not too worried since the rotation doesn't indicate the same thing as it does in Magic.
Interestingly enough, I do use the various rotation angles to indicate different affects on the card in question. Actually 5 in all (normal, 90 CW, 90 CCW, upside down and face down) to indicate various game states (arrested, captured, dishonored, etc.).
SiskNY dont lose sleep about it, I think that people would understand a multiple position card game, just think about the thought process put into MTG just to figure out the "ultimate deck".
hi, I just want to ask you which mechanics can use for a card game.
how i make i card game for middle-age ? i project the game with poll on www.ludoland.org , italian portal.(on 'INVENTORI' forum - inventors ) NO combat , but only management of the resources.help :P


text:
Fringford is a village and civil parish in Oxfordshire, about  northeast of Bicester. The parish is bounded to the east by the Roman road that linked Alchester Roman Town with Roman Towcester, to the south by a brook that joins the River Bure, to the north mostly by a brook that is a tributary of the River Great Ouse, and to the west by field boundaries. Fringford village is in the north of the parish, surrounded on two sides by a bend in the tributary of the Great Ouse.

The 2011 Census recorded the parish's population as 602.

Archaeology
At the southern edge of the parish, beside the tributary of the River Bure, there may have been a Roman villa. The site is only about  west of the Roman road. It is now occupied by Fringford Lodge.

Manor
Fringford's toponym is derived from an Old English tribal or family name Ferring or Fcaring and the ford that formed the only crossing-point of the narrow stream that flows around three sides of the village. An earlier form of the name would have been Ferringas-ford.

After the Norman conquest of England in 1066, William of Normandy gave his half-brother Odo, Bishop of Bayeux, manors that included Fringford. Later the Crown deposed Odo and granted the manor of Fringford to Baron William de Arsic of Cogges.

Parish church
By the early part of the 12th century William's son Baron Manasses Arsic had built a stone church. It was dedicated to Saint Michael and All Angels and granted to the Benedictine Priory founded at Cogges by Baron William. The south aisle may have been rebuilt in the 14th century.

The west tower has three bells. Robert Atton of Buckingham cast the second bell in 1617. Richard III Chandler of Drayton Parslow cast the treble and tenor bells in 1702. The church has also a Sanctus bell that Robert I Wells of Aldbourne, Wiltshire cast in about 1780.

The only maintenance recorded before the 19th century is in 1788, when £18.4.3d. was spent on general repairs.

In 1815 Henry Dawson Roundell was appointed Rector. He is described as "possessed of ample means and genial temerament". He started letting parts of the parish glebe as allotments for labourers in the parish and, throughout his incumbency, he promoted the restoration of the church. After his incumbency the north aisle was rebuilt in 1905 and the roof was restored in 1909.

The Church of England parish of Fringford is now a member of the Benefice of Shelswell, which includes also the parishes of Cottisford, Finmere, Fringford, Godington, Hardwick, Hethe, Mixbury, Newton Purcell, Stoke Lyne and Stratton Audley. The Rector for Shelswell parishes lives in Finmere. Associate ministers live in Fringford and Bicester, and a further Licensed Lay Minister lives in Fringford.

The ten parishes are part of the Deanery of Bicester and Islip, and the Dorchester Episcopal Area of the Diocese of Oxford.

Social and economic history

Fringford in the 19th century is associated with Flora Thompson's Lark Rise to Candleford trilogy, in which Fringford is the prototype for Candleford Green. In 1844 the Oxford Chronicle noted "there aren't enough dwellings to shelter the poor". In 1851 the population was 357. During this time the parish had only a few good farm-houses. The population peaked at 479 in 1871, its highest number until the 1990s.

Fringford had five blacksmiths, three carpenters, three sawyers, three brickmakers, a stonemason, a shoemaker, three decorators, a carrier, a coal haulier, two bakers, two grocers and a butcher. Also two grooms, two footmen, six gardeners and a coachman from Fringford were employed at Shelswell House, Tusmore Park and Swift House.

Mains electricity was not supplied until after the Second World War and mains water until 1960.

Amenities
Fringford Church of England Primary School had, as of 2021, 101 pupils. In 2020, the school won an award from the Woodland Trust for its environmental work. Fringford has one public house, the Butchers Arms. Shelswell Women's Institute meets in Fringford.

References

Sources and further reading

External links

Fringford Village
Fringford C of E Primary School

Civil parishes in Oxfordshire
Villages in Oxfordshire

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
IN RE: Katherine Elizabeth BARNET
United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit.
IN RE: Katherine Elizabeth BARNET, Drawbridge Special Opportunities Fund LP, Appellant, v. Katherine Elizabeth Barnet, Foreign Representative, William John Fletcher, Foreign Representative, Appellees.
Docket No. 13–612.
Before JACOBS, STRAUB, Circuit Judges, and KUNTZ,* District Judge. David F. Heroy (Jacob Kaplan, Baker & McKenzie LLP, New York, NY; Erin Elizabeth Broderick, Baker & McKenzie LLP, Chicago, IL, on the brief), Baker & McKenzie LLP, New York, NY, for Appellant. Howard Seife (Madlyn Gleich Primoff, Kaye Scholer LLP, New York, on the brief), Chadbourne & Parke LLP, New York, NY, for Appellees.
Drawbridge Special Opportunities Fund LP ("Drawbridge") appeals from a September 6, 2012 order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Shelley C. Chapman, Bankruptcy Judge ) granting recognition of a foreign main proceeding ("Recognition Order"). Because we find that 11 U.S.C. § 109(a) applies to the debtor in a foreign main proceeding under Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code, we VACATE and REMAND to the Bankruptcy Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Foreign Representatives are the liquidators of Octaviar Administration Pty Ltd. ("OA"), a company incorporated in Queensland, Australia. OA was placed into "external administration" in Australia on October 3, 2008. On July 31, 2009, the Supreme Court of Queensland ordered that OA be liquidated. As part of the investigation into OA's affairs, various Australian affiliates of Drawbridge have been investigated and, on April 3, 2012, a lawsuit was commenced in Australia against certain of those affiliates seeking AUD 210,000,000.
On August 13, 2012, Foreign Representatives petitioned the Bankruptcy Court for an order recognizing the Australian OA liquidation proceeding as a foreign main proceeding pursuant to 11 U .S.C. § 1515. Drawbridge appeared and filed an objection on August 30, 2012. On September 6, 2012, the Bankruptcy Court entered the Recognition Order, and Drawbridge filed a notice of appeal to the District Court on September 20. On October 5, 2012, Foreign Representatives filed a motion seeking discovery from Drawbridge and other parties. On October 9, 2012, Drawbridge sought a stay pending appeal.
On November 28, 2012, the Bankruptcy Court granted a joint application for certification of the Recognition Order for direct appeal to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(2)(A)(i), (A)(iii) and (B)(i). The same day, the court entered an opinion explaining its decision. The court determined that (1) there was no controlling precedent governing its holding "that a debtor within the meaning of chapter 15 is not required to have a domicile, residence, place of business or property in the United States"; (2) the same issue was "a matter of public importance" that would "dramatically impact the jurisdiction of the United States bankruptcy courts and the use of Chapter 15 to assist in the administration of cross-border insolvency cases and the legitimate investigation of claims and assets in the United States"; and (3) a direct appeal would "materially advance the progress of this Chapter 15 case." Mem. Op. in Supp. of Certification of Direct Appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit at 6, 9, In re Barnet, No. 12–13443, Dkt. No. 47 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y. Nov. 28, 2012).
The Bankruptcy Court denied Drawbridge's motion to stay discovery on December 10, 2012, and granted Foreign Representatives' discovery motion on December 12. The parties filed a joint application for direct appeal on December 21. On February 21, 2013, we granted the joint application and issued a stay of 17 discovery.
I. Appellate Standing
This case presents an unusual jurisdictional thicket. Foreign Representatives argue that Drawbridge lacks appellate standing because Drawbridge is not aggrieved by the Recognition Order—the order named in the parties' joint request for direct appeal. We agree that, under the facts of this case, Drawbridge may not appeal from the Recognition Order. However, that conclusion does not end our analysis. The Bankruptcy Court's subsequent discovery order cured the jurisdictional infirmity notwithstanding the parties' failure to discuss the discovery order in the joint request for direct appeal. In effect, we construe the appeal as being from the discovery order, which appeal brings up for review the non-final Recognition Order that was a necessary prerequisite to discovery.
A. The Recognition Order
We first consider whether Drawbridge is permitted to appeal from the Recognition Order. As this appeal is direct, the issue of appellate standing was not expressly addressed by any lower court opinion. Regardless, we review jurisdictional questions of law de novo. See Adams v. Zarnel (In re Zarnel ), 619 F.3d 156, 161 (2d Cir.2010) ("[W]e must first determine whether we have jurisdiction. ․ We review these legal issues [standing and mootness] de novo.").
"The current Bankruptcy Code prescribes no limits on standing beyond those implicit in Article III of the United States Constitution. Congress has given us jurisdiction over all final decisions, judgments, orders, and decrees of the district courts in bankruptcy cases․" DISH Network Corp. v. DBSD N. Am., Inc. (In re DBSD N. Am., Inc.), 634 F.3d 79, 88 (2d Cir.2011) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). Nonetheless, our precedents establish " 'that in order to have standing to appeal from a bankruptcy court ruling, an appellant must be a person aggrieved—a person directly and adversely affected pecuniarily by the challenged order of the bankruptcy court.' " Id. at 89 (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Int'l Trade Admin. v. Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst., 936 F.2d 744, 747 (2d Cir.1991)).1 This test is "stricter than Article III's 'injury in fact' test," and its "stringency ․ is rooted in a concern that freely granting open-ended appeals to those persons affected by bankruptcy court orders will sound the death knell of the orderly disposition of bankruptcy matters." Licensing by Paolo, Inc. v. Sinatra (In re Gucci ), 126 F.3d 380, 388 (2d Cir.1997); see In re DBSD N. Am., Inc., 634 F.3d at 110 (quoting In re Gucci, 126 F.3d at 388).
The Recognition Order neither names Drawbridge nor directs any relief against Drawbridge. Nor does Drawbridge argue that it is affected by the automatic relief provided for in 11 U.S.C. § 1520.2 See Morning Mist Holdings Ltd. v. Krys (In re Fairfield Sentry Ltd.), 714 F.3d 127 (2d Cir.2013) (considering an appeal from a recognition order by the party aggrieved by the automatic stay imposed by 11 U.S.C. § 1520(a)(1)). Instead, Drawbridge relies on the fact that at oral argument on the Recognition Order, Foreign Representatives stated their "intention ․ to take discovery" of the American "directors of the Drawbridge affiliates that were sued in Australia." Tr. of Record at 28:2–5, In re Octaviar Administration Pty Ltd., No. 12–13443 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y. Sept. 6, 2012).
Were we to accept this argument, however, it would undermine the pecuniary interest test and ignore our "concern that if appellate standing is not limited, bankruptcy litigation will become mired in endless appeals brought by the myriad of parties who are indirectly affected by every bankruptcy court order." Kabro Assocs. of W. Islip, LLC v. Colony Hills Assocs. (In re Colony Hill Assocs.), 111 F.3d 269, 273 (2d Cir.1997) (internal quotation marks omitted). It is not the intentions of a litigant that cause pecuniary harm but the relief directed by a Bankruptcy Court, and here the Recognition Order contained no relief that affected Drawbridge.
Indeed, we have explicitly stated that "potential harm" from a bankruptcy court order is insufficient to justify appellate standing. See Kane v. Johns–Manville Corp. (In re Johns–Manville Corp.), 843 F.2d 636, 642 n. 3 (2d Cir.1988) (noting that "potential harm incident to the bankruptcy court's orders" is insufficient to render a party "directly and pecuniarily affected by them"). Accord Nat'l Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford v. Thorpe Insulation Co. (In re Thorpe Insulation Co.), 393 F. App'x 467, 469 (9th Cir.2010) (summary order) ("Courts of appeal routinely deny standing 'to marginal parties involved in bankruptcy proceedings who, even though they may be exposed to some potential harm incident to the bankruptcy court's order, are not directly affected by that order.' " (quoting Travelers Ins. Co. v. H.K. Porter Co., 45 F.3d 737, 741 (3d Cir.1995))); Duckor Spradling & Metzger v. Baum Trust (In re P.R.T.C., Inc.), 177 F.3d 774, 778 (9th Cir.1999) (endorsing our distinction in In re Johns–Manville between a "creditor opposing a plan of reorganization," who has standing, and "marginal parties ․ who face potential harm," who do not).
Here, the Recognition Order subjected Drawbridge only to potential future harm. To hold otherwise would ignore the Bankruptcy Court's discretion to deny discovery under 11 U.S.C. § 1521. It follows that the Recognition Order was not appealable by Drawbridge when issued.
B. The Discovery Order
Although we conclude that a recognition order is not itself appealable by a party that is not directly affected by the relief that order provides, this conclusion does not end our standing analysis. Here, Drawbridge is aggrieved by an order of the Bankruptcy Court—the discovery order issued on December 12, 2012. We next consider whether that order is appealable and conclude that it is.
Because they are not final orders, the general rule is that discovery orders are not appealable unless the object of the discovery order refuses to comply and is held in contempt. See, e .g., Golan v. Am. Airlines, Inc. (In re Air Crash at Belle Harbor, N.Y. on Nov. 12, 2001 ), 490 F.3d 99, 104 (2d Cir.2007); Glotzer v. Stewart (In re S.E.C. ex rel. Glotzer ), 374 F.3d 184, 188 (2d Cir.2004) ("[G]enerally, a litigant who wants to challenge a discovery order must disobey the order, be held in contempt of court, then bring an appeal․").
This rule has an exception for discovery orders issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a), which provides for discovery "for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal." 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a); see Chevron Corp. v. Berlinger, 629 F.3d 297, 306 (2d Cir.2011). In Chevron Corp., we reasoned that the discovery order "constitutes the final resolution of a petition to take discovery in aid of a foreign proceeding" and is, therefore, "immediately appealable." 629 F.3d at 306. The same reasoning applies in this context. Chapter 15 proceedings, like Section 1782 proceedings, are ancillary to a "suit in another tribunal," id., such that there will never be a final resolution on the merits beyond the discovery relief itself. It follows that the discovery order entered by the Bankruptcy Court was appealable.
Moreover, we have previously entertained an appeal from a party aggrieved by the automatic relief imposed by Section 1520. See In re Fairfield Sentry Ltd., 714 F.3d at 131. Appellate standing was warranted in Fairfield precisely because once recognition is granted, the imposition of automatic relief requires no further action by the Bankruptcy Court. The discretionary relief permitted by Section 1521 requires an extra step, but once that step is taken and the Bankruptcy Court has chosen to exercise its discretion, a party aggrieved by Section 1521 stands in the same position as one aggrieved by Section 1520. If appellate review is available to one, therefore, it should be available to the other.
Having concluded that we would have jurisdiction over an appeal from the discovery order, two questions remain: (1) whether the discovery order grants us jurisdiction over a premature notice of appeal from the Recognition Order; and (2) if so, whether an appeal from the discovery order brings up for review the Recognition Order. We answer both questions in the affirmative.
The notice of appeal filed on September 20, 2012, was directed to the District Court, not to this Court. Before the District Court assumed jurisdiction, however, the Bankruptcy Court, sua sponte, suggested that the parties seek certification for direct appeal to this Court, giving as its reason that Drawbridge and its affiliates "really don't want to produce documents and [Foreign Representatives] really want the documents." Tr. of Record at 25:3–7, In re Octaviar Administration Pty Ltd., No. 12–13443 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y. Oct. 23, 2012). Earlier in the same proceeding, Foreign Representatives had already made their argument that Drawbridge lacked appellate standing. See id. at 6:1–14:11. The Bankruptcy Court's statement that appellate review should be sought to expedite discovery, therefore, did not occur in a vacuum. Rather, the Bankruptcy Court believed that our resolution of the validity of the Recognition Order would be dispositive of whether discovery was available. The parties then jointly petitioned the Bankruptcy Court for certification of direct appeal, which was granted on November 28, 2012. The Bankruptcy Court issued its discovery order on December 12, 2012, and the parties did not file their joint request for direct appeal to this Court until December 21, 2012. At no time, therefore, was any notice of appeal or request for direct appeal pending in this Court before the 17 discovery order had been issued.
"We have held that a premature notice of appeal from a nonfinal order may ripen into a valid notice of appeal if a final judgment has been entered by the time the appeal is heard and the appellee suffers no prejudice. This rule applies even if the final judgment was not itself appealed." Community Bank, N.A. v. Riffle, 617 F .3d 171, 174 (2d Cir.2010) (per curiam) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted); see Berlin v. Renaissance Rental Partners, LLC, 723 F.3d 119, 128 (2d Cir.2013) (same as first sentence of Riffle quote).
In Riffle, we exercised jurisdiction over an appeal from a non-final (and, hence, non-appealable) denial of a motion to dismiss because by the time the appeal reached us, the underlying bankruptcy proceeding was rendered final (and appealable) by a subsequent confirmation order. 617 F.3d at 173–74. As in this case, the notice of appeal in Riffle was filed after the order that rendered the lower court proceeding final. Id. at 173. The discovery order, therefore, caused the "premature notice of appeal from" the Recognition Order to "ripen into a valid notice of appeal." Id. at 174.
We would reach the same result applying the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. In Smith v. Barry, the Supreme Court ruled that "[i]f a document filed 18 within the time specified by Rule 4 gives the notice required by Rule 3, it is effective as a notice of appeal." Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 248–49 (1992); see id . ("[W]hen papers are technically at variance with the letter of Rule 3, a court may nonetheless find that the litigant has complied with the rule if the litigant's action is the functional equivalent of what the rule requires․ Although courts should construe Rule 3 liberally when determining whether it has been complied with, noncompliance is fatal to an appeal." (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted)). The year after Barry, the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure were amended to add what is now Rule 3(c)(4), providing that "[a]n appeal must not be dismissed for informality of form or title of the notice of appeal, or for failure to name a party whose intent to appeal is otherwise clear from the notice." Rule 3(c)(4), therefore, codifies Barry's instruction to "construe Rule 3 liberally" and to overlook technical variances.
Our precedents are in accord. Invoking Rule 3(c)(4), we interpreted a notice of appeal from a final judgment entered "on the 25th day of April, 2012, and from each part thereof" as also appealing from orders entered on five other days ranging from June 3, 2008, to April 24, 2012. L.I. Head Start Child Dev. Servs., Inc. v. Econ. Opportunity Comm'n of Nassau Cnty., Inc., 710 F.3d 57, 63 n. 3 (2d Cir.2013). We have similarly construed an appeal from the denial of a habeas petition as also appealing from a subsequent motion for reconsideration. See Marrero Pichardo v. Ashcroft, 374 F.3d 46, 54–55 (2d Cir.2004). In Marrero Pichardo, we noted that "[i]n determining whether to permit a defective notice of appeal, this court considers the notice of appeal so as to remain faithful to the intent of the appellant, fair to the appellee, and consistent with the jurisdictional authority of this court." Id. at 55 (internal quotation marks omitted).
In this case, there can be no argument that Foreign Representatives were in any way deprived of the "notice required by Rule 3" or otherwise suffered prejudice. The only legal issues raised on appeal concern the validity of the Recognition Order, which is mentioned in the joint request for direct appeal. Moreover, the Bankruptcy Court itself suggested that the purpose of direct appeal was to resolve the question of discovery by determining the validity of the Recognition Order. See Tr. of Record at 25:3–7, In re Octaviar Administration Pty Ltd., No. 12–13443 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y. Oct. 23, 2012). On the Bankruptcy Court's suggestion, the parties jointly pursued a direct appeal, which request was only filed with this Court after the appealable order had been issued by the Bankruptcy Court. The failure to specifically identify the December 12 discovery order, therefore, was a mistake of form for which the "appeal must not be dismissed." Fed. R.App. P. 3(c)(4).
Finally, a correctly noticed appeal from the discovery order would bring up for review the Recognition Order. Such an appeal, as with an appeal from any other final order, "opens the record and permits review of all rulings that led up to the judgment." 15A Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Edward H. Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure § 3905.1 (2d ed.); see Fielding v. Tollaksen, 510 F.3d 175, 179 (2d Cir.2007) ("[W]hen a district court enters a final judgment in a case, interlocutory orders rendered in the case typically merge with the judgment for purposes of appellate review." (internal quotation marks omitted)); Anobile v. Pelligrino, 303 F.3d 107, 115 (2d Cir.2001) ( "Generally, absent prejudice to the appellees, this Court interprets an appeal from a specific order disposing of the case as an appeal from the final judgment, which incorporates all previous interlocutory judgments in that case and permits their review on appeal."). Indeed, in this case, the Recognition Order was a necessary prerequisite to ordering discovery. See 11 U.S.C. § 1521(a)(4) (providing for discovery "[u]pon recognition"). The Recognition Order is properly before us, therefore, as it has merged with the subsequent discovery order.
Indeed, in our prior cases considering premature notices of appeal that ripen into valid notices of appeal we have considered the issues raised by the non-final orders appealed from. See Berlin, 723 F.3d at 127–28 (considering issues arising from the non-final attorneys' fees order); Riffle, 617 F.3d at 173–74 (considering issues arising from the non-final denial of a motion to dismiss). We see no reason not to do the same here.
II. The Recognition Order
Having determined that we have jurisdiction over this appeal, we now turn to the merits, i.e., whether Section 109(a) applies to a debtor in a Chapter 15 proceeding. We review a "bankruptcy court's legal conclusions de novo " "accepting the bankruptcy court's factual findings unless clearly erroneous." In re Fairfield Sentry, 714 F.3d at 132; accord Super Nova 330 LLC v. Gazes, 693 F.3d 138, 141 (2d Cir.2012) (applying the same standard). A lower court decision "interpreting the meaning of a statute" is also reviewed de novo. United States v. DiCristina, 726 F.3d 92, 96 (2d Cir.2013); see Kreisberg v. HealthBridge Mgmt ., LLC, 732 F.3d 131, 137 (2d Cir.2013) ("We review de novo the District Court's ․ interpretation of the Constitution and federal statutes and regulations.").
"Statutory construction must begin with the language employed by Congress and the assumption that the ordinary meaning of that language accurately expresses the legislative purpose." United States v. Kozeny, 541 F.3d 166, 171 (2d Cir.2008) (internal quotation marks omitted). " 'Where the statute's language is plain, the sole function of the courts is to enforce it according to its terms.' " DiCristina, 726 F.3d at 96 (quoting Kozeny, 541 F .3d at 171). Indeed, "[t]he preeminent canon of statutory interpretation requires us to 'presume that the legislature says in a statute what it means and means in a statute what it says there.' " BedRoc Ltd. v. United States, 541 U.S. 176, 183 (2004) (plurality op.) (internal brackets omitted) (quoting Ct. Nat'l Bank v. Germain, 503 U.S. 249, 253–54 (1992)); see Dodd v. United States, 545 U.S. 353, 357 (2005) (quoting Germain, 503 U.S. at 253–54).
"Statutory enactments should, moreover, be read so as 'to give effect, if possible, to every clause and word of a statute.' " DiCristina, 726 F.3d at 96 (quoting Duncan v. Walker, 533 U.S. 164, 174 (2001)); see Nwozuzu v. Holder, 726 F.3d 323, 328 (2d Cir.2013) ("[A] statute must be construed to give effect, if possible, to every clause and word ․" (internal quotation marks omitted)); Mary Jo C. v. N.Y. State & Local Ret. Sys., 707 F.3d 144, 156 (2d Cir.2013) ("One of the most basic interpretive canons is that a statute should be construed so that effect is given to all of its provisions, so that no part will be inoperative or superfluous, void or insignificant." (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted)).
"The recognition of foreign proceedings is governed by Sections 1515 through 1524." In re Fairfield Sentry, 714 F.3d at 132. The basic requirements for recognition are outlined in 11 U.S.C. § 1517(a): (1) the proceeding "is a foreign main proceeding or foreign nonmain proceeding" as defined by 11 U.S.C. § 1502; (2) "the foreign representative applying for recognition is a person or body"; and (3) the petition for recognition meets the requirements of 11 U.S.C. § 1515.
A "foreign main proceeding"—the category relevant to this appeal—is "a foreign proceeding pending in the country where the debtor has the center of its main interests." 11 U.S.C. § 1502(4). A "foreign proceeding" is "a collective judicial or administrative proceeding in a foreign country ․ under a law relating to insolvency or adjustment of debt in which proceeding the assets and affairs of the debtor are subject to control or supervision by a foreign court, for 17 the purposes of reorganization or liquidation." 11 U.S.C. § 101(23). Debtor is defined, "[f]or the purposes of this chapter [15]," as "an entity that is the subject of a foreign proceeding." 11 U.S.C. § 1502(1).
The question presented by this appeal is whether 11 U.S.C. § 109(a) applies to a debtor under Chapter 15. Section 109(a) provides: "Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, only a person that resides or has a domicile, a place of business, or property in the United States, or a municipality, may be a debtor under this title." Section 103(a) of Title 11 provides that, other than for an exception not relevant here, Chapter 1 "of this title ․ appl[ies] in a case under chapter 15." Section 109, of course, is within Chapter 1 of Title 11 and so, by the plain terms of the statute, it applies "in a case under chapter 15." Because Foreign Representatives made no attempt to establish that OA had a domicile, place of business or property in the United States, recognition should not have been granted.
The straightforward nature of our statutory interpretation bears emphasis. Section 103(a) makes all of Chapter 1 applicable to Chapter 15. Section 109(a)—within Chapter 1—creates a requirement that must be met by any debtor. Chapter 15 governs the recognition of foreign proceedings, which are defined as proceedings in which "the assets and affairs of the debtor are subject to control or supervision by a foreign court." 11 U.S.C. § 101(23). The debtor that is the subject of the foreign proceeding, therefore, must meet the requirements of Section 109(a) before a bankruptcy court may grant recognition of the foreign proceeding.
Commentators have reached the same conclusion. See Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 1501.03 (Alan N. Resnick & Henry J. Somme eds., 16th ed.) ("Although chapter 15 is the principal chapter of the Bankruptcy Code that governs the conduct of ancillary cases, several other sections of the Bankruptcy Code ․ directly affect cases under chapter 15. These include ․ section 109, which limits the types of debtors eligible for chapter 15․"); Susan Power Johnston, Conflict Between Bankruptcy Code §§ 109(a) and 1515: Do U.S. Bankruptcy Courts Have Jurisdiction Over Chapter 15 Cases If the Foreign Debtor Has No Assets or Presence in the U.S.?, 17 J. Bankr.L. & Prac. 5, art. 6 (Aug.2008), at 1 ("[S]ection 109(a) cannot be reconciled with Chapter 15 and ․ contrary to Congress' intent, foreign representatives of foreign debtors without assets in the U.S. are not, on the face of the statute, entitled to the assistance of U.S. bankruptcy courts.").
Foreign Representatives advance several arguments to resist this conclusion. First, they argue that Section 109(a) creates a requirement for debtors "under this title," whereas OA is a debtor under the Australian Corporations Act, not under Title 11. Put another way, Foreign Representatives argue that they are not seeking recognition of a debtor and that no debtor appeared before the Bankruptcy Court; rather, Foreign Representatives appeared seeking recognition of a foreign proceeding.
This argument fails, however, because the presence of a debtor is inextricably intertwined with the very nature of a Chapter 15 proceeding, both in terms of how such a proceeding is defined and in terms of the relief that can be granted. It stretches credulity to argue that the ubiquitous references to a debtor in both Chapter 15 and the relevant definitions of Chapter 1 do not refer to a debtor under the title that contains both chapters.
Although Foreign Representatives are correct that recognition is sought by a foreign representative, not by a debtor, 11 U.S.C. § 1515(a), "[t]he term 'foreign representative' means a person or body ․ authorized in a foreign proceeding to administer the reorganization or the liquidation of the debtor's assets or affairs," 11 U.S.C. § 101(24). Similarly, as noted above, a foreign main proceeding is a foreign proceeding "pending in the country where the debtor has the center of its main interests." 11 U.S.C. § 1502(4). Moreover, Section 1502 defines a "debtor" as "the subject of a foreign proceeding," and the definition of "foreign proceeding" identifies "the assets and affairs of the debtor" as its subject. 11 U.S.C. §§ 101(23), 1502(1).
In addition, both the automatic and discretionary relief provisions that accompany recognition of a foreign main proceeding are directed towards debtors. 11 U.S.C. § 1520(a) applies 11 U.S.C. §§ 361.63, 549 and 552 to "the debtor," "the property of the debtor," or "an interest of the debtor in property," as appropriate. Section 362, in turn, provides for, inter alia, the stay of any "proceeding against the debtor." 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(1); see also 11 U.S.C. § 552(a) (governing post-petition "property acquired by the estate or by the debtor"). The discretionary relief provisions follow the same pattern. See 11 U.S.C. § 1521 (providing for, e.g., "entrusting the administration or realization of all or part of the debtor's assets within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States to the foreign representative," "staying execution against the debtor's assets," and "granting any additional relief that may be available to a trustee"). Even the relief that Foreign Representatives seek requires a debtor under Title 11, as Section 1521(a)(4) provides for "the examination of witnesses ․ concerning the debtor's assets, affairs, rights, obligations or liabilities."
Second, Foreign Representatives argue that even if OA must qualify as a debtor under Title 11, it is only required to meet the Chapter 15–specific definition of "debtor" contained in Section 1502, and not also the requirements of Section 109. As noted above, Section 1502 defines a debtor "[f]or the purposes of this chapter" as "an entity that is the subject of a foreign proceeding." This argument also fails, as we cannot see how such a preclusive reading of Section 1502 is reconcilable with the explicit instruction in Section 103(a) to apply Chapter 1 to Chapter 15. But even if the definition of "debtor" in Section 1502 blocked application of Section 109 within Chapter 15, that would not support the conclusion that OA need not satisfy Section 109 in order for Foreign Representatives to obtain recognition of the foreign proceeding. Given its broadest reading, Section 1502 still could not affect the definitions contained within Chapter 1 because Section 1502's scope is expressly limited to "this chapter" (Chapter 15). It follows that the definitions of "foreign proceeding" and "foreign representative," which both occur within Chapter 1, would not be affected. 11 U.S.C. § 101(23)-(24). Because 17 they both require a debtor, as discussed above, OA would need to satisfy Section 109 in order to meet the requirements contained within Chapter 15 that rely upon those definitions.
The definition of "debtor" in Section 1502, however, does not block application of Section 109 within Chapter 15. Chapter 1 contains a definition of "debtor" introduced by the phrase, "[t]he term 'debtor' means." 11 U.S.C. § 101(13). Section 109(a) does not say that the term debtor "means" anything. Rather, it adds a requirement for the kinds of "person" that "may be a debtor under this title." 11 U.S.C. § 109(a). Section 1502, like Section 101, introduces its definition with the phrase "the term—(1) 'debtor' means." This linguistic parallelism makes clear that Section 1502 supplants Section 101—i.e., it supplants the definition of debtor within the context of Chapter 15—but it does not supplant requirements for "a debtor under this title" not included in the definition. Cf. DiCristina, 726 F.3d at 99 (" 'When an exclusive definition is intended the word 'means' is employed.' " (internal brackets and ellipsis omitted) (quoting Groman v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 302 U.S. 82, 86 (1937))).
The Foreign Representatives' proposed interpretation also fails because it would render Section 109(a) meaningless. They argue that what debtor "means" in Chapter 15 supplants a requirement placed on a debtor "under this title." But consistency would then require that what a debtor "means" in Chapter 1 would have the same effect. The result would be that Section 109(a) would have no application under any circumstances because the definition in Chapter 1 applies generally. This violates the "most basic interpretive canon[ ]" requiring us to interpret statutes such that "no part will be inoperative or superfluous." Mary Jo C., 707 F.3d at 156. Foreign Representatives' argument, therefore, must be incorrect.
Finally, Foreign Representatives offer no explanation as to why, if Congress wished to exclude Chapter 15 from the reach of Section 109(a), it did not say as much. Congress' silence is particularly inexplicable in light of the fact that Congress did expressly restrict the application of Section 109(b) to Chapter 15 by removing a prohibition on application to foreign insurance companies. 11 U.S.C. § 1501(c) ("This chapter does not apply to—(1) a proceeding concerning an entity, other than a foreign insurance company, identified by exclusion in section 109(b).").
We would end our "plain meaning" analysis here. However, Foreign Representatives argue that the context and purpose of Chapter 15 support their reading of the statute. A properly limited contextual analysis of statutory language is encompassed within the ambit of a textual analysis. See In re Application of N.Y. Times Co. to Unseal Wiretap & Search Warrant Materials, 577 F.3d 401, 406 (2d Cir.2009) ("[W]e examine the text of the statute itself, interpreting provisions in light of their ordinary meaning and their contextual setting."); United States v. Magassouba, 544 F.3d 387, 404 (2d Cir.2008) ("In determining whether statutory language is ambiguous, we 'reference the language itself, the specific context in which that language is used, and the broader context of the statute as a whole.' " (internal ellipsis omitted) (quoting Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., 519 U.S. 337, 341 (1997))).
Such an analysis, however, supports application of Section 109(a) to Chapter 15. Congress amended Section 103 to state that Chapter 1 applies to Chapter 15 at the same time as it enacted Chapter 15. See Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, Pub.L. No. 109–8, §§ 801–02, 119 Stat. 23. This strongly supports the conclusion that Congress intended Section 103(a) to mean what it says, namely, that Chapter 1 applies to Chapter 15. Cf. United States v. Battista, 575 F.3d 226, 234 (2d Cir.2009) ("[W]hen two sections 17 share the same purpose, the parallel provisions can, as a matter of general statutory construction, be interpreted to be in pari materia." (internal quotation marks omitted)).
Foreign Representatives argue that application of Section 109(a) to Chapter 15 would be inconsistent with 11 U.S.C. § 1528 and 28 U.S .C. § 1410. Section 1528 states that "[a]fter recognition of a foreign main proceeding, a case under another chapter of this title may be commenced only if the debtor has assets in the United States." Foreign Representatives argue that the necessary implication is that a foreign main proceeding may be recognized even when there are no assets in the United States—i.e., Section 109(a) does not apply to Chapter 15 proceedings.
This argument fails, however, because Section 109(a) requires "a domicile, a place of business, or property in the United States." Section 1528, therefore, is more restrictive than Section 109. It follows that there is nothing contradictory or disharmonious about applying Section 109(a) to Chapter 15 and then further requiring that Section 1528 is met before a case under another chapter of Title 11 may be commenced.
Foreign Representatives come closer to the mark with their argument that 28 U.S.C. § 1410 provides a venue for Chapter 15 cases even when "the debtor does not have a place of business or assets in the United States." This venue statute, however, is purely procedural. Given the unambiguous nature of the substantive and restrictive language used in Sections 103 and 109 of Chapter 15, to allow the venue statute to control the outcome would be to allow the tail to wag the dog.
Finally, Foreign Representatives argue that the purpose of Chapter 15 would be undermined by application of Section 109(a). "[W]e look first to the text and structure of the statute as the surest guide to congressional intent." Mary Jo C., 707 F.3d at 168 (internal quotation marks omitted). Here, Chapter 15 contains an express purpose section that states: "The purpose of this chapter is to incorporate the Model Law on Cross–Border Insolvency so as to provide effective mechanisms for dealing with cases of cross-border insolvency with the objectives of": (1) international cooperation; (2) "greater legal certainty for trade and investment"; (3) "fair and efficient administration of cross-border insolvencies"; (4) "protection and maximization of the value of the debtor's assets; and (5) facilitation of the rescue of financially troubled businesses." 11 U.S.C. § 1501(a). None of these stated purposes are dispositive as they could all be accomplished with or without imposition of Section 109(a). It is true that the Model Law does not contain an express requirement akin to Section 109(a), see generally United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross–Border Insolvency with Guide to Enactment, available at http:// www.uncitral.org/pdf/english/texts/insolven/insolvency-e.pdf (last accessed Dec. 9, 2013), but the Model Law also states that "a State may modify or leave out some of its provisions" id. at Part 2 ¶ 12. Regardless, the omission of Section 109(a), or its equivalent, from the Model Law does not suffice to outweigh the express language Congress used in adopting Sections 109(a) and 103(a). This is especially true where other provisions of federal law provide the relief that the Model Law was intended to provide. Here, 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a) provides for discovery in aid of foreign proceedings without any requirement akin to Section 109(a).3 Congress, therefore, may have intended to limit the relief provided by Chapter 15 because it knew that additional relief was already 13 available outside of Chapter 15.
Because we find that 11 U.S.C. § 109(a) applies to the debtor in a foreign main proceeding under Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code, we VACATE and REMAND to the Bankruptcy Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
We direct the Clerk of Court to forward copies of this opinion to Congress following the specified protocol adopted by the Judicial Conference.
1. " 'While the pecuniary interest formulation is an often used and often useful test of standing in the bankruptcy context, it is not the only test.' " In re DBSD N. Am., Inc., 634 F.3d at 89 n. 3 (quoting In re Zarnel, 619 F.3d at 162). "Instead, even absent a direct pecuniary interest in the litigation, a public interest may also give a sufficient stake in the outcome of a bankruptcy case to confer appellate standing." In re Zarnel, 619 F.3d at 162 (internal quotation marks omitted); see id. (finding that the U.S. Trustee's "responsibility to represent and protect the public interest affords it a substantial interest in, and therefore standing to proceed with" an appeal). In this case, however, no party argues that the pecuniary interest test is not appropriate.
2. Section 1520 prescribes the "[e ffects of recognition of a foreign main proceeding," which include permitting a foreign representative to "operate the debtor's business and ․ exercise the rights and powers of a trustee," limiting the transfer and control of the debtor's property within the United States, and invoking 11 U.S.C. § 362's automatic stay provisions. The automatic relief imposed by Section 1520 stands in contrast to the discretionary relief that "may be granted upon recognition" pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1521. That discretionary relief includes enlarging the automatic stay, enforcing additional restrictions on transfer of the debtor's property, the taking of discovery, and granting relief that "may be available to a trustee," with some exceptions. 11 U.S.C. § 1521(a).
3. Indeed, we note that Foreign Representatives have commenced an action under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 and have entered into a stipulation with Drawbridge and others calling for production of documents within sixty days of October 3, 2013. See Stip. & Order, In re Application of Barnet, 13–Misc.–214, Dkt. No. 32 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 4, 2013).
STRAUB, Circuit Judge:

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
require 'spec_helper'

describe Image do
  let(:image) do
    Image.create!(:id => 1,
                  :image => File.new(File.expand_path('../../uploads/beach.jpeg', __FILE__)))
  end

  context "with valid attributes" do
    it "should create successfully" do
      image.errors.should be_empty
    end
  end

  context "image url" do
    it "should respond to .thumbnail" do
      image.should respond_to(:thumbnail)
    end

    it "should contain its filename at the end" do
      image.thumbnail(nil).url.split('/').last.should == image.image_name
    end

    it "should be different when supplying geometry" do
      image.thumbnail(nil).url.should_not == image.thumbnail('200x200').url
    end

    it "should have different urls for each geometry string" do
      image.thumbnail('200x200').url.should_not == image.thumbnail('200x201').url
    end

    it "should use right geometry when given a thumbnail name" do
      name, geometry = Image.user_image_sizes.first
      image.thumbnail(name).url.should == image.thumbnail(geometry).url
    end
  end

  describe "#title" do
    it "returns a titleized version of the filename" do
      image.title.should == "Beach"
    end
  end

  describe ".per_page" do
    context "dialog is true" do
      context "has_size_options is true" do
        it "returns image count specified by PAGES_PER_DIALOG_THAT_HAS_SIZE_OPTIONS constant" do
          Image.per_page(true, true).should == Image::PAGES_PER_DIALOG_THAT_HAS_SIZE_OPTIONS
        end
      end

      context "has_size_options is false" do
        it "returns image count specified by PAGES_PER_DIALOG constant" do
          Image.per_page(true).should == Image::PAGES_PER_DIALOG
        end
      end
    end

    context "dialog is false" do
      it "returns image count specified by PAGES_PER_ADMIN_INDEX constant" do
        Image.per_page.should == Image::PAGES_PER_ADMIN_INDEX
      end
    end
  end

  describe ".user_image_sizes" do
    it "sets and returns a hash consisting of the keys contained in the RefinerySetting" do
      Image.user_image_sizes.should == RefinerySetting.get(:user_image_sizes)
    end
  end

  # The sample image has dimensions 500x375
  describe '#thumbnail_dimensions returns correctly with' do
    it 'nil' do
      image.thumbnail_dimensions(nil).should == { :width => 500, :height => 375 }
    end

    it '200x200#ne' do
      image.thumbnail_dimensions('200x200#ne').should == { :width => 200, :height => 200 }
    end

    it '100x150#c' do
      image.thumbnail_dimensions('100x150#c').should == { :width => 100, :height => 150 }
    end

    it '250x250>' do
      image.thumbnail_dimensions('250x250>').should == { :width => 250, :height => 188 }
    end

    it '600x375>' do
      image.thumbnail_dimensions('600x375>').should == { :width => 500, :height => 375 }
    end

    it '100x475>' do
      image.thumbnail_dimensions('100x475>').should == { :width => 100, :height => 75 }
    end

    it '100x150' do
      image.thumbnail_dimensions('100x150').should == { :width => 100, :height => 75 }
    end

    it '200x150' do
      image.thumbnail_dimensions('200x150').should == { :width => 200, :height => 150 }
    end

    it '300x150' do
      image.thumbnail_dimensions('300x150').should == { :width => 200, :height => 150 }
    end

    it '5x5' do
      image.thumbnail_dimensions('5x5').should == { :width => 5, :height => 4 }
    end
  end

end

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


I'm currently at Birmingham International, this is an Airport and not somewhere I expected to end up on the way back from London. Indeed the train that I wasn't able to catch at Euston ("reservations only") is the very same train I will be picking up from here, albeit after a trip via Northampton on a National Express Coach. Go figure, gah! Alas, I'll be back by 11:30pm I think.


text:
University of Colorado Alzheimer's and Cognition Center
Brain Donation
Give to the Center
Memory Disorders Clinic
Clinic Visit Q&A
Neuropsychology Q&A
Laboratory Research
Alzheimer's Disease & Down Syndrome
Common Q and A
Healthy Aging Brain
Posterior Cortical Atrophy
Six Steps to Brain Health
Outreach, Diversity, and Inclusion
African American Alzheimer's Advisory Council
CU Alzheimer's and Cognition Center COVID-19 Response
With the recent increase in COVID-19 cases due to the omicron variant, changes have been made to the CU Alzheimer's and Cognition Center clinic and research availability. The following adjustments have been made:
The University of Colorado Memory Disorders Clinic has expanded the availability of in-person clinic visits, while continuing to offer virtual appointments, based on the provider. To ensure patient safety, all who do attend a visit in-person will continue to be required to wear a mask, comply with check-in procedures, and may bring one guest. If a patient would like to have additional guests participate in the visit, those guests may attend virtually. Our staff will also continue to wear masks. Our staff remains available for our current patients via our answering service (720-848-2080) or through MyHealth Connection.
Research studies are enrolling and seeing participants for visits. All study staff will continue to wear masks and will request participants to wear masks for in-person visits. Some complex studies may require that participants be vaccinated to complete in-person visits. For study-specific questions, please contact the coordinator for the study of interest for the latest information regarding enrollment and ongoing visits. If you have any questions, please contact the CU Alzheimer's and Cognition Center at 303-724-7670 or CUAlz@cuanschutz.edu.
We appreciate your understanding and patience as we continue to adapt to this rapidly evolving situation. As always, our patients' and our research participants' safety is of the utmost importance to us, and we will always put that first. We will continue to monitor the spread of COVID-19 and will update our research studies and clinical practices accordingly, as necessary.
More Resources and Information
Center for Disease Control (CDC) Resources
For guidelines on how to protect yourself and help slow the spread, as well as for up-to-date news on COVID-19, please visit their website.
For answers to frequently asked questions about COVID-19, click here.
For CDC guidelines on how to wear and use cloth coverings, click here.
University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus Response
For updates on how the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus is responding to COVID-19, please visit their website.
Alzheimer's Association COVID-19 Resources
For tips for caregivers related to COVID-19, please visit their tips for caregivers page.
For Alzheimer's related support during COVID-19, the Alzheimer's Association free 24/7 Helpline (800-272-3900) is available for help and the latest information
The CU Alzheimer's and Cognition Center is excited that COVID-19 distribution is underway in Colorado, and that older adults are being prioritized to receive the vaccine. Although the Center is not providing vaccines, we have provided some resources below so that you can stay informed about how the vaccines work and what Colorado's current distribution plan is, as it is frequently being updated. If you have any questions, please contact your Primary Care Provider or the Colorado Department of Public Health.
Find more information about Colorado's vaccine distribution plan here
Read Governor Polis's Vaccine Letter to Seniors
Visit the Alzheimer's Association website for information about vaccines and Alzheimer's disease
Learn more about how mRNA vaccines work here
The University of California - San Francisco (UCSF) Memory and Aging Center has a Family Caregiver Webinar Series on Coping with Dementia Care During the Coronavirus Pandemic, found here.
UCSF Memory and Aging Center also has 10 Tips for Brain Health while Social Distancing, found here.
Neurology (SOM)
Research Complex II
Colorado Springs Branch


As part of the Alchemy & Medicine of the Soul workshop we have three other happenings taking place all within the Santa Monica Mountain area. Please note there is limited space available for some of these events, be mindful to grab your seat while they are available!
The word alchemy is often associated with essential oils due to the transformation of physical matter through the process of distillation. Historical origins of alchemy point back in time suggesting that Hermes Trismegistus, which in Egypt was called Thoth was the father of the art.
Learn more about the different points of view on alchemy and its relationship to essential oils, aromatherapy, botanical perfume, psychology and altered states in this unique panel discussion.
As part of the Alchemy & Medicine of the Soul weekend workshop we are offering an evening encounter with hydrosols, led by Cathy Skipper & Dr Florian Birkmayer MD.
In this informal gathering at Blue Table in Agoura Hills, we will explore the transformative subtle frequencies of several hydro distilled elixirs. Our focus will be the emotional and spiritual "properties found in the barely detectable aromatic trace molecules which exist in concentrations of parts per billion, bringing the worlds of matter and spirit."
"Drinking exotic plant hydrosols such as Jasmine Sambac, Blue Lotus, Golden Champa and Frankincense is an immersive experience which is exquisite, both in smell and taste. These plant teachers invite us to participate in a subtle, yet often euphoric, aromatic conversation with the natural wisdom of botanical intelligence."
Join us in this profound inquiry into the relationship between smell and higher consciousness — and feel it spark into your own work. Celebrate the extra-ordinary in the moment as you feel yourself elevated by botanical intelligence.
LOCATION: Blue Table at Whizin Market Hall, 28914 Roadside Dr, unit #219, Agoura Hills, CA 91301, find a map here.
The panel discussion is free and open to everyone who RSVP's in advance. If you are registered for the Alchemy & Medicine of the Soul workshop the class on distillation is included in your tuition. If you would like to attend the Hydrosol Encounter, the fee is $40 which covers all the expenses, including the very special and unique hydrosols we will be sipping.


text:
Home » Power of Attorney » Michigan » Tax
Michigan Tax Power of Attorney (Form 151)
A Michigan tax power of attorney (Form 151), otherwise known as the "authorized representative declaration," is used to appoint someone, usually a tax attorney or certified public accountant, to represent another person at the Michigan Department of Treasury. During such a time this document will be instrumental in making sure that all such agents (i.e. tax preparer) wield the authority to access your tax information and make filings on your behalf with your approval.
1 – Gather The Reference Documents Then Open The Declaration Form
Open and download a workable copy of the required Declaration Form to designate and Authorized Representative. This form is available as a PDF, ODT, or Word document as indicated by the buttons by the preview image.
2 – Document The Principal Taxpayer's Identity and Contact Information
Once you have opened the form with the appropriate software or printed it, you may begin entering the information it requires. Locate the table in "Part 1: Taxpayer Information." In the first box, below the term "Taxpayer's Name and Address…," enter the Full Name and Complete Address of the Declarant or Principal Taxpayer. If the Taxpayer has filed jointly with a Spouse, the Spouse's Name and Address must be recorded here. The box labeled "If A Business, Enter DBA, Trade Or Assumed Name" is conditional. That is if the Principal Taxpayer is not a business entity it may be left blank. If so, then enter the Legal Name (including any applicable suffix) of the Principal Taxpayer Business in this box.
The next row in this area will require the "Daytime Telephone Number" and provide an option to report the "Fax Number" where the Principal Taxpayer is reliably reached. Make sure the Phone Number(s) entered here are well-maintained by the Principal. Next, enter the Principal Taxpayer's official "E-Mail Address." The fourth and fifth rows in this area are devoted to the Principal Taxpayer's Identification Number.
If the Principal Taxpayer (appointing a Representative) is a Business Entity, then record its "FEIN, ME, or TR Number" in the first box of the fourth row. If the Principal Taxpaying Entity is known by two Identification Numbers (i.e. FEIN and ME), the second number may be entered in the "Additional FEIN, ME, or TR Number" box. If the Principal Taxpayer (appointing a Representative here) is a person, then enter this individual's Social Security Number in the box labeled "Taxpayer's Social Security Number." If the Principal Taxpayer filed jointly with a Spouse, then enter his or her "Spouse's Social Security Number" in the next box.
3 – Provide The Effective Dates Of Representation And The Appointed Representative's Information
By default, the Representative's Principal Powers will be available to the Representative Agents upon the Principal's Signature and remain in effect until the Principal issues a written revocation. However, if the Principal Taxpayer has definitive Dates when the Agent's Principal Power should go into and out of Effect, he or she may apply this determination in the first are of the next section "Part 2: Representative And Authorization Dates."
To declare a Start Date to the Representative Agent's Principal Powers, enter it in the box labeled "Authorization Start Date," as noted, enter this Date in the MM/DD/YYYY format. Then, if a Termination date has been determined (by the Principal Taxpayer), enter it in the box labeled "Authorization Expiration Date" (also, in the MM/DD/YYYY format). The next row in this section is required information as this will document who the Representative receiving Principal Taxpayer Powers is. Begin by entering the Full Name and Address of the Appointee in the box labeled "Representative's Name And Address." If this is a Business Entity, then enter the Full Name of an individual who can receive correspondence on the Business's behalf (pertaining to these Tax Matters) in the box labeled "Contact Name." If there are two individuals who may engage in correspondence on behalf of this entity, then enter the second individual's Name in the space designated as "Additional Contact Name." Note: If the Representative is an individual, re-enter his or her Name in the box labeled "Contact Name." Next, enter each Representative Contact's "Telephone Number," "Fax Number," and "E-Mail Address" using the column below the corresponding Contact's reported Name.
4 – Define How Previous Authority Documents Stand After This One's Execution
The successful Execution and Submission of this delegation form will not necessarily affect other Authority documents. However, if the purpose of this form is to change and Authorized Representative or to Revoke (and possibly replace) a pre-existing document altogether, this may be indicated in "Part 3: Change In Authorization."
If this document is meant to Change the Representative on a Tax Matter named here, then mark the first box, labeled "Check This Box To Change Authorized Representation…" If the purpose of this form is to Revoke previous Authorities, then mark the box labeled "Check This Box To Revoke Previous Authorization"
5 – Specify The Type Of Principal Taxpayer Authorization Being Granted
In "Part 4: Type Of Authorization," we will specify the extent of the Principal Authority being granted to the Representative. Here two choices will be presented (Choice A and Choice B). Enter mark one of these boxes to indicate how much Principal Authority is being appointed to the Representative.
If the Principal Taxpayer only wants to grant a Limited Authority, then mark the box between the bold letter "A" and the words "Limited Authorization." If this box is marked, the Principal will need to initial the blank space just before the words "Initial." In order to designate a Limited Authority, it will be necessary to indicate what the Limited Authority affects. A list of four checkboxes has been provided to this end. The first will grant the Representative the Principal Power to Receive and Provide Confidential Information on behalf of the Principal Taxpayer, the second will grant the Agent the right to represent the Principal, the third will give the Representative the right to Sign the Principal's Returns, while marking the fourth check box empowers the Representative to enter the Principal into Agreements. Place a Mark in the check boxes corresponding to actions the Representative may take in the Name of the Principal. In addition to the list of Limited Powers, the Representative's Principal Authority may be further defined in the "Specific Limits" table. Here, there will three columns where you may report the "Tax, Debt Type or Fee" the appointed Agent may utilize Principal Authority within the first column, its corresponding "Form Type or Assessment Number" in the second column, and the "Year(s) of Period(s)" that apply to that Matter where the Representative's Principal Authority is effective in the third column. You may report on three Tax Matters using this table however if the Limited Powers will apply to more, you may document this in an attachment that is properly labeled. If the Principal Taxpayer is granting Unlimited Authorization to empower the Representative with the maximum amount of Principal Authority allowed by law, then mark the checkbox after the bold letter "B." The Principal Taxpayer will also need to initial this choice in the space provided.
6 – The Principal Taxpayer's Required Signature
The final table, in "Part 5: Taxpayer's Signature" shall verify the Principal Taxpayer's intent behind this submission. It will also verify that all the information is being presented with the full Authorization and Knowledge of the Signature Party.
The Principal Taxpayer must sign his or her name in the blank box labeled "Signature" The Principal Taxpayer must also supply his or her printed Name and any Title he or she holds in the box labeled "Print Name and Title." Finally, the Date of the Principal Taxpayer's Signature must be entered (by the Principal Taxpayer) in the box labeled "Date." The second row is reserved for the use of a Spouse who the Principal Taxpayer has filed jointly with. If this applies, the Principal Taxpayer's Spouse must sign his or her Name, print his or her Name, and enter the Date of Signature in the first, second, and third columns.


text:
Transmigration of Souls and Oddities About Titanic
August 11, 2016 By Michael J. Bowler Leave a Comment
As a child, I felt a strong connection to the Titanic disaster from the first moment I read about it, and then proceeded to devour every book published on the subject. I don't quite know where that "pull" came from, but it was almost as if I'd been there in 1912 on that cold April night, even though such a thing would have been impossible. Or would it? Many people believe that after we die our souls transmigrate into others just being born. If each of us is unique with a distinctive soul all our own, how could this work? Maybe it's what the Church refers to as Purgatory or Limbo – our souls are housed within other, distinctly unique people, until it's our time to permanently move on. The distinctly unique person then feels an attachment to a past he or she was not a part of because of the other soul housed within. One character in A Matter of Time—Dan—takes offense at this notion when it's postulated by the main character, Jamie. "I am not a bus stop," he asserts indignantly. But what if we are? Could that explain why I, as a child, became obsessed with an event that happened decades before my birth? Or why I always felt an intense affinity for Native American culture? Was I at some time in the past also Native American? It's a tantalizing concept and one I play with in A Matter of Time.
Some other "oddities" about Titanic and her fateful journey added fuel to my imagination and melded into the fanciful plot that became my story. Fifteen minutes before Titanic took her final plunge into the sea, Captain Smith relieved the two wireless officers of duty, telling them there was nothing more they could do. These men had been frantically calling for help on the Marconi wireless and had missed all but one of the lifeboats. Jack Phillips and Harold Bride exited the wireless cabin, which was located very near the already submerged bow of the ship. At that point, there was only one collapsible lifeboat left, strapped down very close to the rapidly rising seawater, and some crewmen were struggling to float it off into the ocean before it could be pulled under with the sinking ship.
As would be expected, Bride rushed forward to assist, since that final boat would be his only hope for survival. But Phillips did something odd and counterintuitive – he turned and headed aft, towards the sloping stern of Titanic! Why? Why go towards certain death when your salvation lay a few feet away? That anomalous behavior led me to create a reason for his choice, a fantastical reason, to be sure, but a reason that evolved into the basic plot of my book.
There was another little known fact I glommed on to because I was always fascinated by everything supernatural. Titanic was carrying that night, in her cargo hold, the mummy of an Egyptian priestess, from the temple of Amon Ra. This mummy had already gained a reputation for being cursed – several of its owners had died mysteriously and photographs of the wrapped corpse displayed a living woman with glaring eyes. Even the photographer who'd taken those pictures died suddenly. There were so many mishaps and deaths associated with this mummy that the British museum finally sold the cursed object to an American buyer. The buyer packed it up, sarcophagus and all, and shipped it off to New York—aboard Titanic.
Later, after the sinking, some of the more superstitious people of the day attributed the collision and sinking to the mummy's presence on board the ship, another casualty of the same curse that had killed so many others. In my book, the sarcophagus, not the mummy, does play a major role in how events unspool on April 15th, 1912, and in fact, does contribute to the circumstances which lead to the collision. How? Well, that would be a spoiler, wouldn't it? Suffice to say that the person using the sarcophagus previously inspired one of the evilest characters in literary history. To say more would ruin the voyage of discovery.
A Matter of Time is available as an eBook, an Audible download read by the super-talented Aaron Landon, and in paperback. Purchase on Amazon.
Filed Under: History, Writing Tagged With: a matter of time, aaron landon, amreading, audiobooks, college life, Egyptian mummy aboard Titanic, evil literary character, historical fiction, Jack Phillips wireless operator, odd facts about Titanic, purgatory, reincarnation, time travel, Titanic, transmigration of souls
About Michael J. Bowler
Michael J. Bowler is an award-winning author who grew up in San Rafael, California. He majored in English and Theatre at Santa Clara University and earned a master's in film production from Loyola Marymount University, a teaching credential in English from LMU, and another master's in Special Education from Cal State University Dominguez Hills. Using his many degrees Michael taught high school in Hawthorne, California for twenty-five years, both in general education and to students with disabilities. When Michael is not writing you can find him volunteering as a Big Brother with the Catholic Big Brothers Big Sisters program. With thirty+ years volunteering within the juvenile justice system in Los Angeles Michael is a passionate advocate for the fair treatment of children and teens in California. He hopes his books can show teens they are not alone in their struggles.


text:
Holmes is an English-language surname with several origins.

The name can be a variant of the surname Holme. This surname has several etymological origins: it can be derived from a name for someone who lived next to a holly tree, from the Middle English holm; it can also be derived from the Old English holm and Old Norse holmr. Another probable origin of Holmes is from a placename near Dundonald, or else a place located in the barony of Inchestuir. The surname is also sometimes an Anglicised form of the Gaelic Mac Thomáis; similarly, Holmes can also be a variant of Cavish, derived as an Anglicised form of Mac Thámhais.

People

A
 Alan Holmes, Welsh musician and record producer
 Albert Holmes (footballer, born 1885) (1885–?), English footballer
 Albert Holmes (footballer born 1942), English-born footballer
 Alex Holmes (born 1981), American football player
 Alexander Holmes, crewman of the ship William Brown, convicted of manslaughter in 1841 for forcing passengers out of an overloaded lifeboat
 Alexander Holmes, pseudonym of Hans Habe
 Alfred Holmes (1931–1994), sergeant of the Gibraltar Regiment
 Alfred Holmes (composer) (1837–1876), violinist and composer
 Alice Waring Holmes (1872 – 1939), dentist and suffragette
 Alvin Holmes (1939–2020), American politician
 Andre Holmes (born 1988), American football player; brother of Jason Holmes (see below)
 Andrew Holmes (disambiguation), multiple people
 Anthony Holmes, British author and businessman
 Anthony D. Holmes (born 1945), Australian plastic and reconstructive surgeon
 J. Anthony Holmes, American diplomat
 Arthur Holmes (1890–1965), British geologist
 Arthur F. Holmes (born 1924), American professor of philosophy
 Ashton Holmes (born 1978), American film and TV actor
 Augusta Holmès (1847–1903), French composer

B
 Barry Holmes (1928–1949), Anglo-Argentinian rugby union player
 Ben Holmes (1890–1943), American film director
 Benjamin Holmes (disambiguation)
 Besby Holmes (1917–2006), American World War II fighter pilot
 Bill Holmes (disambiguation)
 Brad Holmes (born 1979), American football executive
 Bruce Holmes (born 1965), American football player
 Burton Holmes (1870–1958), American traveller, photographer and filmmaker

C
 Catherine Holmes, Australian judge
 Charles Holmes (disambiguation)
 Charlie Holmes (1910–1985), American jazz saxophonist
 Chris Holmes (disambiguation)
 Christian Holmes (born 1997), American football player
 Chuck Holmes (ice hockey) (born 1935), Canadian hockey player
 Clarence Holmes (born 1968), also known as Ready Rock C, American musician
 Clay Holmes (born 1993), American baseball player
 Clent Holmes (born 1917), American guitarist

D
 Daniel Henry Holmes (1816–1898), American businessman
 Danny Holmes (born 1989), English footballer
 Darnay Holmes (born 1998), American football player
 Darren Holmes (baseball) (born 1966), American baseball player and coach
 Dave Holmes (actor) (born 1971), American television personality
 Dave Holmes (sportscaster), American sportscaster
 David Holmes (disambiguation)
 Derek Holmes (born 1978), Scottish footballer
 Derek Holmes (ice hockey) (born 1939), Canadian ice hockey player, coach, and administrator
 Diane Holmes (born 1935), Canadian politician
 Don Holmes (born 1959), Australian rules football player
 Don Holmes (American football) (born 1961), American former National Football League player and college coach
 Donald F. Holmes  (1910–1980), American inventor
 Donald Grahame Holmes, Australian electrical engineer

E
 Eamonn Holmes (born 1959), Northern Irish journalist and broadcaster
 Earl Holmes, American football player
 Edmond Holmes (1850–1936), English writer and poet
 Edward Morell Holmes (1843–1930), British botanist
 Edwin Holmes (disambiguation)
 Elizabeth Holmes, American businesswoman, founder of Theranos
 Emma Holmes, American Civil War diarist
 Eric Holmes (racing driver) (born 1974), American race car driver
 Eric Holmes (video game designer), Scottish writer, creative director and videogame designer
 Eric Leighton Holmes, British chemist
 Ernest Holmes (1887–1960), founder of the movement known as Religious Science, also known as "Science of Mind," a part of the New Thought Movement
 Ernie Holmes (1948–2008), American football player
 Errol Holmes (1905–1960), English cricketer

F
 Frank Holmes (disambiguation)
 Fred Holmes (1878–1956), American baseball player
 Frederic L. Holmes (1932–2003), American historian of science
 Frederick Hale Holmes (1812–1875), British professor of chemistry, pioneer of electric lighting and inventor
 Frederick William Holmes (1889–1969), English soldier awarded the Victoria Cross

G
 Gabriel Holmes (1769–1829), American politician
 Gavrielle Holmes, American politician
 Genta Hawkins Holmes (born 1940), American foreign service officer
 George Holmes (professor) (1927–2009), Chichele Professor of Medieval History Emeritus at the University of Oxford
 George Frederick Holmes (1829–1897), American educator
 George M. Holmes (1929–2009), U.S. politician
 Gordon Morgan Holmes (1876–1965), British neurologist
 Greg Holmes (cricketer) (born 1993), Welsh cricketer
 Greg Holmes (rugby union) (born 1983), Australian rugby union player
 Greg Holmes (tennis) (born 1963), American former tennis player

H
 Hamilton E. Holmes (1941–1995), American physician who helped desegregate the University of Georgia as one of the first two African-American students
 Hap Holmes (1889–1940), Canadian ice hockey goalie
 Harold Holmes (disambiguation)
 Harry Holmes (disambiguation)
 Harvey Holmes (1873–1948), American college football player and coach of football, baseball and track
 Helen Freudenberger Holmes (1915–1997), American journalist, historian, teacher, politician and Women's Army Corps officer
 Helen Holmes (actress) (1893–1950), American actress
 Henry Holmes (disambiguation)
 H. H. Holmes (1861–1896), American con man, killer and bigamist
 Howdy Holmes (born 1949), American racing driver
 Hugh Holmes (1840–1916), Irish politician

I
 Ian Holmes (disambiguation)

J
 J. Anthony Holmes, American diplomat
 Jacob Holmes (born 1983), Australian basketball player
 Jackie Holmes (1920–1995), American Formula One driver
 Jake Holmes (born 1939), American folk-pop singer/songwriter
 Jalyn Holmes (born 1996), American football player
 James Holmes (disambiguation)
 Jason Holmes (born 1989), American Australian rules footballer; brother of Andre Holmes
 Jennifer Holmes (disambiguation), multiple people
 Jerome Holmes (born 1961), American federal judge
 Jessica Holmes (born 1973), Canadian comedian and actor
 Jimmy Holmes (born 1953), Irish former professional footballer
 Joan Holmes (born 1935), founding president of The Hunger Project
 Joe Holmes (born 1963), American heavy metal guitarist
 Joe Holmes (singer) (1906–1978), Irish singer
 Joe Holmes (rugby league), rugby league footballer
 Joel Holmes (1821–1872), English soldier awarded the Victoria Cross
 John Holmes (disambiguation)
 Jon Holmes (born 1973), British comedy writer and broadcaster
 Jonathan Holmes (disambiguation)
 Joseph Holmes (disambiguation)
 Josh Holmes (rugby union) (born 1987), Australian rugby union player
 Josh Holmes (video game designer) (born 1973), Canadian game producer and video game designer
 Julie Lynn Holmes, American former figure skater

K
 Katie Holmes (born 1978), American actress
 Keith Holmes (palaeobotanist) (born 1933), Australian palaeobotanist
 Keith Holmes (boxer) (born 1969), American boxer
 Kelda Holmes (born 1970), English actress
 Kelly Holmes (born 1970), British middle-distance athlete
 Kenneth Holmes (1934–2021), British scientist
 King K. Holmes (born 1937), American physician, medical researcher, and medical school professor
 Kris Holmes (born 1950), American type designer

L
 Larry Holmes (born 1949), American boxer
 La'Shanda Holmes (born 1985), American Coast Guard helicopter pilot
 Lee Holmes (born 1987), English footballer
 Len Holmes, Australian rugby league footballer
 Linda Holmes (born 1959), American politician
 Lindsey Holmes (born 1973), American politician
 Lizzie Holmes (1850–1926), American anarchist and editor
 Louis Holmes, American football player
 Lucy Holmes (born 1979), British-born Australian TV presenter and performer

M
 Mackenzie Holmes (born c. 2001), American basketball player
 Margaret Holmes (1909–2009), Australian peace activist
 Margaret Holmes (ecumenist) (1886–1981), Australian refugee resettlement officer
 Margaret Flagg Holmes (1886–1976), co-founder of Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority
 Mark Holmes (disambiguation)
 Martha Holmes (photographer) (1923–2006), American photographer
 Martha Holmes (broadcaster), British marine biologist, TV journalist and producer
 Mary Holmes (disambiguation)
 Matt Holmes (actor) (born 1976), Australian actor
 Matthew Holmes (engineer) (1844–1903), chief mechanical engineer of the North British Railway
 Maurice Holmes (cricketer), English cricketer and barrister
 Michael Holmes (disambiguation)
 Michelle Holmes (born 1967), English actress
 Mike Holmes (born 1963), Canadian professional contractor and host of Holmes on Homes
 Mike Holmes (born 1948), British electrical engineer
 Mike Holmes (wide receiver) (born 1950), Canadian Football League receiver

N
 Nancy Holmes (born 1959), Canadian poet and educator
 Nick Holmes (disambiguation)

O
 Obadiah Holmes (1610–1682), early Rhode Island settler and Baptist minister
 Oliver Holmes (rugby league) (born 1992), Canadian rugby player
 Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr. (1809–1894), poet and essayist
 Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (1841–1935), justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
 Oscar Holmes (1916–2001), first African-American Naval Aviator and air traffic controller

P
 Paul Holmes (disambiguation)
 Pehr G. Holmes (1881–1952), US Representative from Massachusetts
 Percy Holmes (1886–1971), English cricketer
 Pete or Peter Holmes (disambiguation)
 Philip Holmes (born 1945), American engineering professor
 Phillips Holmes (1907–1942), American film actor
 Priest Holmes (born 1973), American football player

R
 Ray Holmes (1914–2005), British Second World War fighter pilot
 Rand Holmes, (1942–2002), Canadian comic artist
 Reggie Holmes (born 1987), American basketball player
 Richard Holmes (disambiguation)
 Richaun Holmes (born 1993), American basketball player
 Robert Holmes (disambiguation)
 Ruth Bradley Holmes (1924–2021), American linguist, educator, and polyglot

S
 Samuel Jackson Holmes (1868–1964), American zoologist
 Santonio Holmes (born 1984), American footballer and  Super Bowl XLIII MVP
 Sharon Holmes (1950–2015), Canadian artist nee Sharon Christian
 Simon Hugh Holmes (1831–1919), Nova Scotia politician, publisher and lawyer
 Stanley Holmes, 1st Baron Dovercourt (1878–1961), British politician
 Steve Holmes (actor) (born 1961), Romanian-born German pornographic film actor
 Susan Holmes (disambiguation)

T
 Taylor Holmes (1878–1959), American stage actor
 Terry Holmes (born 1957), former Welsh international rugby union player
 Theophilus H. Holmes (1804–1880), Confederate Civil War lieutenant general
 Thomas Holmes (disambiguation)
 Tim Holmes (artist) (born 1955), American sculptor, filmmaker and musician
 Tim Holmes (actor) (born 1967), American actor
 Timothy Holmes (1825–1907), English surgeon
 Tina Holmes (born 1973), American television and film actress
 Tom Holmes (born 1979), contemporary American artist
 Tom Holmes (born 1930s), current chairman of the far-right British political party the National Front
 Tommy Holmes (1917–2008), American baseball player

V
 Valentine Holmes (born 1995), Australian-born American football player and rugby player
 Valerie Susan Holmes (born 1946), English beauty pageant contestant
 Victoria Holmes, English novelist

W
 William Holmes (Australian general) (1862–1917), Australian Army Major General during World War I
 William Holmes (British general)
 William Edgar Holmes (1895–1918), English soldier and VC recipient
 William Holmes (1779–1851), British politician
 William Holmes (British Army officer) (1892–1969), British general during the Second World War
 William Henry Holmes (1846–1933), American anthropologist, archaeologist, geologist and museum director
 William Henry Holmes (musician) (1812–1885), English musician

Fictional characters
 Enola Holmes (character), sister of Sherlock Holmes created by Nancy Springer
 Mycroft Holmes, brother of Sherlock Holmes
 Sherlock Holmes, fictional detective

References

See also
 Justice Holmes (disambiguation)
 Safiya Henderson-Holmes (1950–2001), African-American poet
 Holmes à Court, a surname
 Derek St. Holmes (born 1953), American musician
 Holm (surname)

English-language surnames
Surnames of Scottish origin
Toponymic surnames


« Let's navigate a trigger, our fight or flight mechanism.
Let's be realistic about our expectations. Our healing path will have set backs, frustrating results, intense anxiety mixed with fear.
Our trauma (PTSD) has access to our fight or flight mechanism. A trigger thought, a sound or smell ignites our fight or flight mechanism. We are preparing for a lethal threat from the past, but none currently exists.
PTSD is a mirage, a stored implicit memory of trauma. The physical changes and drugs our body secretes are real.
There is no real danger, just our own defense mechanism. Hopefully, this wisdom helps us resist avoiding, ruminating or freezing (shutting down).
In my mindfulness group, if someone is triggered, I trace five slow, intense breaths with them. Eyes open, I sit across from them, tracing the breathing track together.
I reassure them of their safety, using slow breaths to dissipate the cortisol and adrenaline. They are instructed to let go of the storyline and absorb the cortisol with their slow exhales.
It may take five or more breaths. They realize you can impact PTSD fear and anxiety.
It surprises them when things calm a bit. The intense fear and anxiety can be influenced.
PTSD loses some power each time we focus, let go and breathe deeply.
Our fearful thoughts and judgments soften and fade.
Each time we let the storyline go, we inch closer to wellbeing.
This is when PTSD is at its strongest, triggering the fight or flight mechanism. We fear triggers so much we avoid people and situations that ignite our trauma.
This is also the time when PTSD is at its most vulnerable.
If you can entertain the thought that PTSD is a bluff, that no real power or danger is present, healing is possible.
If we can stay present, focused, PTSD loses power.
You will discover no real danger exists inside our defense mechanism.
With practice we can learn to accept the anxious, scary mechanism as normal.
My fight or flight mechanism does not fire around my triggers anymore.
You can also integrate your trauma and calm your nervous system!
Start at the bottom right corner. Trace upwards your slow deep inhale. Next we pause to let oxygen absorb into the lungs. Feel the energy, the pressure holding this breath in.
Then slow downward exhale, focus and feel your body absorb this anxiety. Next the final pause to balance the breath. Feel the calm let the storyline go.
Tunnel Vision: One's field of vision narrows and tunnels into the perceived threat. Auditory Exclusion: The hearing tends to shut off. Loss of fine motor skills: Often only gross motor functions are possible under the adrenal state. Tai-chi-Psyche: Everything seems to move in slow motion. Increased heart rate, blood pressure and respiration. Coagulants and pain killers are also dumped into the bloodstream.