Podcasts about Decision

104.3 WQAM presents the best Heat talk from the week featuring The Joe Rose Show, Tobin & Leroy, and Hochman, Crowder & Solana. The crew dissects LeBron James picking the 76ers over Miami, evaluates the Heat's current championship ceiling with Giannis and Bam, and debates what free agency moves Pat Riley needs to make next. That and more this week on Best Of Heat on 104.3 WQAM!

104.3 WQAM presents the best Heat talk from the week featuring The Joe Rose Show, Tobin & Leroy, and Hochman, Crowder & Solana. The crew dissects LeBron James picking the 76ers over Miami, evaluates the Heat's current championship ceiling with Giannis and Bam, and debates what free agency moves Pat Riley needs to make next. That and more this week on Best Of Heat on 104.3 WQAM!

We're not sure that the sentiment has remained the same in recent years, but Jesus Jones' "Right Here, Right Now" captures the hope of the very early 90s, where the fall of the Berlin Wall meant everything good was possible. We not only cover the history of the song and look at its meaning in our lives, but Frank must also decide what he would in his time travel (fictional) biopic. Thanks for joining us! Links: Official Video Bob Dylan in Hamilton, 1986 Thank you for listening! Connect with us on Instagram, Facebook, etc., or send us an email at BandFGuiltFree@gmail.com! We'd love your feedback—please rate and review on the podcast provider of your choice, and don't forget to share our podcast with your friends! We have lots of episodes - stay awhile and listen to some more ;) Our theme music is by the incredibly talented Ian McGlynn

New to LIFE? lifeau.org/connect- Need Prayer? lifeau.org/prayer-request- Made a Decision for Jesus? lifeau.org/connect- To find out more about LIFE, visit lifeau.orgFollow us on social mediaFacebook: facebook.com/lifemelbsInstagram: instagram.com/lifemelbs

One ordinary morning, Leon Joel Russell opened A Course in Miracles and hit a single paragraph that stopped him cold for six days. This week Jennifer Hadley sits down with her fellow ACIM teacher to follow where that paragraph led them, into a question most of us spend a lifetime avoiding: what are we actually afraid of, underneath all of it? Where they take it is lighter than the question sounds. Two friends who love the truth, going somewhere worth following. To learn more about ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠A Course in Miracles⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ please visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Powerofloveministry.net⁠⁠⁠⁠. For the transcript of this episode and more please visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠LivingACourseinMiracles.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. We're remembering that we're miraculous beings. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Want the cheat code to protect and grow your wealth? Check out Rebel Capitalist Pro https://rcp.georgegammon.com/pro

Hey, Family Brand community! Have you ever had an idea that just wouldn't leave you alone? Maybe it was starting a business, improving your health, strengthening your marriage, or trying something completely outside your comfort zone. The question isn't whether you've had those moments—we all have. The real question is: what separates the ideas we simply think about from the ones that actually change our lives? That's exactly what we're exploring in this episode. One of our favorite stories in this conversation comes from Melissa's unexpected "side quest" of starting a vintage business with her sister called Yarn Chasers. It wasn't something they had years of experience doing or a perfectly mapped-out business plan for. They simply decided they were going to do it, rented a booth at a huge market, spent months preparing, and went all in. Whether it lasted forever wasn't the point. The point was that they stopped wondering and started moving. That single decision created opportunities, memories, confidence, and lessons they still carry with them today. Throughout this episode, we talk about something we've both seen play out over and over in our own lives: there's a huge difference between making a decision and truly deciding. It's easy to say, "Someday I'd like to..." It's much harder—and much more powerful—to commit, take action, and move forward before you have every answer. We've found that once you begin moving, opportunities appear, people show up, and clarity often comes through action rather than before it. You don't have to be certain—you simply have to be willing to take the next step. One of our biggest hopes is that this conversation encourages you to look back at your own life. Think about the moments that changed everything. Chances are they began with a simple but powerful commitment: "I'm doing this." Whatever season you're in, maybe this is your reminder to stop waiting for perfect certainty. Choose a direction. Commit to it. Trust that you'll learn along the way, even if the path eventually changes. Sometimes the greatest growth doesn't come from making the perfect decision—it comes from becoming the kind of person who isn't afraid to decide. Hit play to hear the full conversation! We dive into the stories, the mindset shifts, and the powerful quote that inspired this entire discussion—and why we believe commitment often creates the conditions for miracles. P.S. We're here to help you build your own Family Brand, one episode at a time. So go ahead, hit play, and let's grow together! Or, if you're ready to dive even deeper into our community, follow the links below.   LINKS: All Links Family Brand!  stan.store/familybrand familybrand.com/quiz familybrand.com/retreats.  Episode Minute By Minute: 00:00 Chris Surprises Melissa With a Question 01:31 Melissa's Yarn Chasers Story 03:37 What Happens When You Go All In 05:45 The Power of Truly Deciding 08:00 Possibility 2.0 and Radical Commitment 10:05 A Quote That Changed Everything 11:38 From Wishing to Doing 13:00 The Difference Between a Decision and Deciding 14:17 Why Commitment Attracts Opportunity 16:00 The Kitchen Table Analogy 17:26 The Hidden Cost of Indecision 18:40 Looking Back at Life-Changing Decisions 20:32 Expect Miracles 22:00 What If You Choose the Wrong Path? 24:08 Why Deciding Is Never Wasted 25:18 Be a Person Who Commits

Hello and welcome to the Unedited podcast!   The goal of this podcast is to help you develop and enjoy the habit of daily Bible reading and prayer. It is through the Word of God and the presence of God that we GET TO KNOW God.   In today's episode, I share a simple reminder that our primary job as Christians is to abide in the vine and a devotional from my Pastor, Rev. Joseph Hanthorn: " Prayer is The Lifeline."  Recommended listening: "The Unstoppable Power of Prayer" by Rev. Joseph Hanthorn   If this episode is an encouragement, please consider share it or leave a review wherever you listen!   Meg's books are available through Amazon and Pentecostal Publishing House: 
  

I am Rolf Claessen and my co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you to episode 177 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Dr. Ernst-Peter Heilein, who is a German and European patent attorney, the founder of HEILEIN IP LAW, and a long-time IP leader at BSH Home Appliances. He is the mastermind behind the BSH v. Electrolux decision of the European Court of Justice about long-arm jurisdiction in Europe that has the whole patent world stirring in Europe at the moment! But before we jump into this fascinating interview, I have news for you! Emboline v. AorticLab (UPC Court of Appeal) The UPC Court of Appeal has clarified for the first time how a conditional revocation counterclaim should be handled, in a dispute over Emboline’s embolic protection patent EP 2 129 425 against AorticLab. A defendant can validly make its revocation counterclaim conditional on infringement being found first, meaning no ruling on the counterclaim is needed if the infringement claim fails, as the Munich Local Division had held. The Court of Appeal also closed a related gap: if the claimant appeals a non-infringement finding, the counterclaimant may conditionally appeal the unresolved counterclaim too. AorticLab missed its own appeal deadline and can now at best seek re-establishment of rights, while Emboline has already appealed the non-infringement finding. FujiFilm v. Kodak (UPC Court of Appeal) Following the closely watched long-arm jurisdiction ruling of June 2, the UPC Court of Appeal, chaired by Rian Kalden, has now granted FujiFilm an injunction against Kodak in a second proceeding. The Court upheld the limited printing plate patent and found that Kodak’s Sonora XTRA 3 plate infringes it. Kodak can no longer sell or use that plate in Germany. OpenAI v. EUIPO (General Court of the EU, T-555/25) The General Court’s Eighth Chamber dismissed OpenAI’s action against the EUIPO decision to partially cancel the OPENAI trademark. The partial refusal for classes 9, 42, and 45 rests decisively on Article 7(1)(c) EUTMR, the descriptiveness ground. For a significant part of the English-speaking public, “OPENAI” directly conveys that the goods or services are provided using freely accessible artificial intelligence. Dental Monitoring v. Align Technology (CAFC) On July 7, 2026, the Federal Circuit confirmed that AI and deep-learning patent claims covering dental image analysis are not patent-eligible under Section 101. Simply training a “deep learning device” on a specific dataset does not amount to a patent-eligible technical solution. Publisher v. Google (Munich I Regional Court) The Munich I Regional Court issued a preliminary injunction barring Google from spreading false factual claims about a publishing company in its AI Overviews. A search query combining the company’s name with the German term for “fraud scheme” had triggered an AI-generated summary containing entirely fabricated accusations of subscription traps. KPN v. Oppo (Federal Court of Justice, X ZR 103/24) On July 1, the Federal Court of Justice dismissed KPN’s appeal against the revocation of a central claim of its LTE patent EP 2 291 033. Oppo had successfully challenged the claim, leaving KPN’s infringement action against Oppo’s German distribution entity without a legal basis for now. BSH v. Electrolux: What the ECJ Ruling Means for Your Company’s Patent Enforcement Strategy A vacuum cleaner from 2001 has reshaped the European patent landscape. That sounds like an overstatement. It isn’t. For IP Fridays, I spoke with Dr. Ernst-Peter Heilein, founder of HEILEIN IP LAW and long-time Senior IP Leader at BSH Home Appliances. He guided the case BSH v. Electrolux from its first strategic idea all the way to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice, a case that earned the 2025 Managing IP Award as “Europe Impact Case of the Year.” For managing directors, IP heads, and R&D leaders at German Mittelstand companies, this case is not a legal footnote. It changes where you can enforce your patents, and it changes where you yourself can be sued if your company operates across several European markets. That is what this article is about. Background: How a Patent Dispute Became an ECJ Case The invention dates back to 2001 and concerns a new vacuum cleaner technology. In 2006, BSH identified what it believed was an unauthorized use of that invention and contacted Electrolux to clarify the situation. The European patent was granted in 2009 and validated in a number of European countries. Nobody, Heilein says, could have imagined at the time that this matter would eventually reach the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Justice almost twenty years later. In late 2018, BSH successfully defended the patent through opposition and appeal proceedings before the European Patent Office. In 2019, the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf found that certain Electrolux vacuum cleaner models infringed the patent. A classic milestone win, the kind that occurs regularly in patent practice. Except the patent had been validated in many countries. Winning in Germany did not solve the enforcement problem everywhere else. Heilein describes the starting point in very concrete terms: how do you enforce a patent that exists in many countries without filing a separate lawsuit in every single one? And how do you prevent claims from becoming time-barred while you work that out? Running parallel proceedings in multiple countries is not just legally complex. It consumes time, personnel, and money that a mid-sized company rarely has in that quantity to spare. This is exactly where the real value of this case for you begins. From the outset, this was never an academic debate about jurisdiction. It was a question that every company holding rights in more than one country eventually faces: how do you enforce your rights efficiently without burning your budget on ten parallel proceedings? Brussels Ia Regulation: The Underrated Article 4 While searching for a solution, the BSH team came across Article 4 of the Brussels Ia Regulation. The underlying idea is simple: a person can generally be sued in the country where that person is based. In the BSH case, that pointed toward the Swedish home court, because Electrolux is headquartered in Stockholm. For a long time, this rule played no real role in patent practice. The widely held view was that cross-border patent litigation in Europe was effectively dead the moment a defendant challenged the validity of the patent. Anyone wanting to enforce a patent across several countries appeared to have no choice but to litigate country by country. Heilein and his team questioned that assumption instead of simply accepting it. This is the point I find most instructive: challenging accepted assumptions in your own field is often the difference between a standard solution and a strategic one. In 2020, the team decided to file the action in Sweden, aware that they were looking at a possibility, not a guarantee. Cross-Border Enforcement: The Three Questions Referred to Luxembourg After Electrolux challenged the validity of the patents, the Swedish home court declared itself not competent to hear the case. BSH appealed, and the Swedish Court of Appeal agreed to refer three questions to the European Court of Justice. The first question addressed the core problem: does a home court that would otherwise have jurisdiction over an infringement claim lose that jurisdiction simply because the defendant argues the patent is invalid? The second question concerned a feature common to many legal systems, including Germany’s, where infringement and validity are decided in separate proceedings. The third question originally concerned Turkey. Today, most people immediately think of the United Kingdom, and some even think of US patents. Originally, the question was simpler: do the same jurisdiction rules apply to patents from countries outside the European Union? The fact that the ECJ first assigned the case to a Chamber of seven judges and later referred it to the Grand Chamber of 15 judges already signaled how much weight the Court placed on these questions. The Judgment: What the ECJ Actually Decided A home court does not automatically lose jurisdiction simply because the defendant argues the patent is invalid. For many years, the opposite was widely assumed to be settled law. The ECJ made clear that this reading was too narrow. The court where the defendant is based can generally continue to hear the infringement case. One point matters for how you read this ruling: questions concerning the validity of a European patent still fall to the national courts of the country for which the patent was granted, as provided in Article 24(4) of the Brussels Ia Regulation. What is new is that the infringement case does not automatically collapse the moment validity is challenged. The home court keeps control of the overall proceeding. For patents from EU Member States, the home court does not automatically lose jurisdiction. It assesses the validity challenge. If it looks strong, the home court may stay the infringement case. If it looks weak, the home court may proceed. For patents from non-EU countries, the home court may stay the case if a validity proceeding is already pending there, drawing on Articles 33 and 34 of the Brussels Ia Regulation. The result is a considerably more flexible system than most observers expected . Patents from Outside the EU: Long-Arm Jurisdiction The part of the judgment with the greatest international reach concerns patents from countries outside the EU. The ECJ ruled that the special jurisdiction rule for patent validity generally does not apply to non-European patents. That means the general rule can apply instead, opening the door for infringement claims based on non-European patents to be brought before a home court where the defendant is based in the EU. Commentators quickly started calling this “long-arm jurisdiction.” One clarification matters here, because it tends to get lost in the public discussion: the ECJ did not say that a European home court can revoke or invalidate a foreign patent. That remains a matter for the authorities and courts of the country that granted it. What the ECJ said is that a European home court may assess the claims between the parties. That distinction is essential to how you should read this ruling. Consequences in Practice: Fujifilm, Regeneron, and Onesta Three recent cases show how quickly practice is already adapting to the new possibilities. Fujifilm v. Kodak: the Düsseldorf Local Division of the Unified Patent Court accepted jurisdiction over the UK part of a European patent even before the ECJ delivered its judgment, building on reasoning the Advocate General had already signaled in the BSH case. In June 2026, the UPC Court of Appeal further developed that approach based on the principles confirmed in BSH. Regeneron v. Formycon: the Munich home court applied the BSH framework and granted a Europe-wide injunction based on a European patent, one of the first examples of a national home court putting the BSH logic into practice. Onesta v. BMW: this case shows the debate has moved well beyond Europe. After Onesta attempted to assert two US patents before the Munich home court, BMW obtained an anti-suit injunction from a Texas federal court. Judge Albright took the view that US patents should generally be decided by US courts. The injunction was directed against Onesta, not against the Munich court, and Onesta has appealed the Texas decision. The Munich home court stayed the proceeding but did not reject its own jurisdiction. Whether a European home court can ultimately decide infringement claims based on US patents remains an open question, one that has turned from a European jurisdiction issue into an international jurisdiction conflict. What This Means for Your Company Heilein sums up twenty years of litigation in three lessons, and I share this assessment without reservation when advising my Mittelstand clients. First: patent enforcement has become more international. National litigation still matters, but companies should think across borders from the very beginning, not only once the first cease-and-desist letter has been sent. Second: choice of forum now carries real strategic weight. Where you bring a case can matter just as much as the legal arguments themselves. Third: long-term commitment pays off. Major developments rarely result from a single filing or a single hearing. They come from pursuing a clear strategy consistently over many years. For you as a managing director, R&D lead, or Head of IP at an innovative Mittelstand company, this translates into two concrete points. First, if you hold rights in several European countries and a competitor infringes them, you no longer necessarily have to fund five or six parallel national proceedings. A single action at the infringer’s home base can be the economically smarter option. Second, and this side of the ruling gets less attention in public discussion, if your company is based in Germany and operates across several countries, you can now be sued at your own home base over patent infringement claims tied to activities in other countries. That risk belongs in every freedom-to-operate analysis and in every assessment tied to acquisitions or market entry. Here is the full transcript of the interview: Host Today's interview guest is Dr. Ernst-Peter Heilein. If you don't know Ernst-Peter, he is a German and European patent attorney, the founder of HEILEIN IP LAW, and a long-time IP leader at BSH Home Appliances. Thank you for being on IP Fridays. Answer Yeah, great to be here! BLOCK 1 – THE PERSON BEHIND THE CASE Host When looking at your career, one thing stands out: you never really followed the traditional path of either private practice or industry. Er, how did your professional journey begin, actually? Answer My professional roots are actually in private practice. After qualifying as a Patent Attorney, I worked in private practice and fairly early founded my own law firm, which later became HEILEIN IP LAW. Host So you never completely left private practice behind? Answer Exactly. In 2005, I had the opportunity to take on additional responsibilities on the BSH side. There, I was able to build and lead a new unit within the IP organization. The team was responsible for patents in the small appliances business, as well as global design and trademark protection. At the same time, I helped build an international network of internal and external IP counsel and coordinated their work. Host That still sounds fairly like traditional IP work. When did international disputes become part of your career? Answer Over time, my focus gradually shifted from traditional IP protection to strategic enforcement. That included anti-counterfeiting activities, global trademark and design matters, and cross-border patent disputes. Host So your work became more about enforcing rights rather than simply obtaining and managing them, right? Answer Exactly. And that development eventually led me to play a strategic role in the case BSH Home Appliances versus Electrolux, a case that still accompanies me today. Host Looking back now — from private practice, to building an international IP organization, and eventually becoming involved in a case before the European Court of Justice — did you ever imagine that path? Answer No, not at all. Looking back, this combination of private practice, responsibilities on the business side, and international enforcement experience turned out to be very useful when our case eventually reached the European Court of Justice. BLOCK 2 – HOW IT ALL STARTED Host Yeah, talking about this case. The case BSH versus Electrolux started long before it reached the European Court of Justice. When did the story actually begin? Answer The story actually begins much earlier than most people would expect. The invention itself dates back to 2001 and concerns a new vacuum cleaner technology. In 2006, we identified what we believed to be an unauthorized use of the invention and contacted Electrolux to clarify the situation. The European patent in suit was granted in 2009 and validated in a number of European countries. At the time, nobody could have imagined that this would eventually lead to a decision of the European Court of Justice almost twenty years later. Host Wow, 20 years! That's a long time. So, at first this was simply a normal patent dispute? Answer Yes, absolutely! After many years of opposition and appeal proceedings before the European Patent Office, we were finally able to defend the patent successfully in late 2018. Less than one year later, in the summer of 2019, the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf found that certain Electrolux vacuum cleaner models infringed the patent. Host Er, at that point, one might think, that the patent owner had achieved its goal, right? Answer That is what many people would think. But that judgment did not bring the dispute to an end. A new challenge emerged. The patent had been validated in many European countries. Winning in one country, like Germany, did not automatically solve the enforcement issue in all the other countries. Host What was the practical problem then? Answer We were facing a very simple question: How do we enforce a patent that exists in many countries? And how do we prevent claims from becoming time-barred without filing separate infringement actions in every single country? Doing that would not only be legally complex. It would also require a huge amount of time, effort, and money. Host That sounds less like a major legal question and more like a business problem. Answer Exactly. At the beginning, this was not an academic discussion about jurisdiction. It was a very practical business question. How can we enforce our rights efficiently without running parallel lawsuits all over Europe? That was the real challenge we were trying to solve. BLOCK 3 – THE IDEA OF A CENTRAL ACTION Host So, how did the idea of one central action emerge? Answer While looking for possible solutions, we came across Article 4 of the Brussels Ia Regulation. The idea behind that rule is very simple. In general, a person can be sued in the country where that person is based. In our case, that pointed us toward the Swedish home court because Electrolux is based in Stockholm. Host That sounds like a fairly ordinary jurisdiction rule. Answer Yes. And that was exactly what made it interesting. Article 4 is the general rule. The question was whether that rule could also be used for patent infringement claims covering several countries. Host Was that a common approach at the time? Answer No. Quite the opposite. Many people believed that cross-border patent litigation in Europe was effectively dead. Host That sounds rather dramatic. Why did people think that? Answer Because there was a widely held view that a central patent case could be stopped as soon as the defendant challenged the validity of the patent. As a result, many companies assumed they had no real choice but to litigate country by country. Host Yet you decided to look at the issue differently. Answer Yes. Sometimes it is worth taking a fresh look at accepted assumptions. We felt that Article 4 might play a much more important role than many people believed. Host So at that point, you already saw an opportunity, right? Answer Yes, we saw a possibility! Not a guarantee. But we believed there was a strong legal basis for bringing all claims before the Swedish home court. Host And that eventually led to the lawsuit being filed in Sweden, right? Answer Exactly. In 2020, we decided to file the action in Sweden. That followed our success before the European Patent Office in late 2018 and in the Düsseldorf infringement proceedings in 2019. At that stage, our objective was very practical. We were simply trying to find an efficient way to enforce rights that exist in many countries. Host At that point, you already think the case might end up before the European Court of Justice? Answer No. Not at all. We were focused on solving a business problem. The idea that the case would eventually reach the European Court of Justice came much later. BLOCK 4 – THE OBSTACLE: GAT v. LuK Host You mentioned that, er, many people believed cross-border patent litigation in Europe was no longer a realistic option. Why was that? Answer The main reason was an earlier decision of the European Court of Justice known as GAT versus LuK, decided in 2006. For many years, that decision was understood to mean that a home court could lose its ability to hear a patent infringement case as soon as the defendant challenged the validity of the patent. In practice, that understanding made many cross-border patent cases extremely difficult. As a result, many people believed that cross-border patent litigation was not effective. Host And yet you decided to follow exactly that path, right? Answer Yes. Sometimes it is worth questioning assumptions that have been accepted for many years. We believed that Article 4 of the Brussels Ia Regulation played a more important role than many people thought. That is why, in 2020, we decided to file the case in Sweden. Host And at that point, did you already realize that the case might eventually reach the European Court of Justice? Answer No. Not at all. Our goal was simply to find a practical solution to a real enforcement problem. The idea that this would eventually become a case before the European Court of Justice was far from our minds. BLOCK 5 – THE QUESTIONS REFERRED TO THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE Host So, how did the case eventually reach the European Court of Justice then? Answer After we filed the lawsuit in Sweden in 2020, Electrolux challenged the validity of the patents. The Swedish home court then concluded that it could not hear the case and declared itself not competent to proceed. We appealed that decision, because the issues were important and affected far more than just our case. We suggested that several questions should be referred to the European Court of Justice. The Swedish Court of Appeal agreed and sent those questions to Luxembourg. Host So, what were these main questions? Answer At the heart of the case, there were three questions: First: if a home court has jurisdiction over a patent infringement case, does it lose that jurisdiction simply because the defendant argues that the patent is invalid? Second: Does it make a difference if the national legal system requires validity issues to be decided in a separate proceeding? And third: Do this jurisdiction rules also apply to patents from countries outside the European Union? Host The third question sounds particularly interesting. Answer Yes, at the time, the discussion in our case focused on Turkey. Today, many people immediately think about the United Kingdom, and some even think about US patents. But originally, the question was much simpler. We wanted to know, whether the same jurisdiction rules also apply when patents from non-European countries are involved. Host And, did you realize how important that third question might become? Answer No, certainly not to that extent. At the beginning, most of the discussion focused on the relationship between the different jurisdiction rules within Europe. Only later did it become clear that the European Court of Justice’s answers might have consequences far beyond the European Union. Host So, how did the European Court of Justice react then? Answer That was actually quite interesting. The European Court of Justice first heard the case before a Chamber of seven judges. Later, it referred the case to the Grand Chamber of 15 judges. That already showed that the European Court of Justice considered the issues to be important. And when the judgment finally came out, some of the answers were very different from what many observers had expected. BLOCK 6 – THE DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE Host Let’s talk about the European Court of Justice’s answers. What was, in your view, the most important part of the decision? Answer The most important point was this: A home court does not automatically lose jurisdiction just because the defendant argues that the patent is invalid. For many years, many people believed exactly the opposite. The European Court of Justice made it clear that this understanding was too narrow. The home court where the defendant is based can generally continue to hear the infringement case. That is really the key message of the decision. Host Why is that so important? Answer Because it gives new momentum to cross-border patent enforcement in Europe. Before this decision, many people assumed that a defendant could effectively stop a central infringement case simply by challenging the validity of the patent. The European Court of Justice made clear that this is not automatically the case. Host Does that mean the home court hearing the infringement case will now also decide whether the patent is valid? Answer No, and that is a very important point. The European Court of Justice confirmed that questions about the validity of a European patent should still be decided by the national courts of the country for which the patent was granted, as provided for in Article 24(4) of the Brussels Ia Regulation. What is new, is that the infringement case does not automatically fall apart because of a validity challenge. The home court can keep control of the overall case. Host So, how does that work in practice? Answer The European Court of Justice gives the home court some flexibility. For patents from Member States of the European Union, the home court does not automatically lose its power if the defendant says the patent is invalid. The home court can look at the validity challenge. If it seems strong, the home court may stay the infringement case. If it seems weak, the home court may continue the infringement case. For patents from countries outside the European Union, the home court may also stay the case if there is already a validity case pending in that country. In such situations, Articles 33 and 34 of the Brussels Ia Regulation may apply. That creates a much more flexible system than many people expected. Host Er, we have discussed the implications for patents from Member States of the European Union, but a lot of attention has been given to another part of the decision, that we already talked about briefly, namely patents from countries outside the European Union. Answer Absolutely, and that may be the part of the judgment with the biggest international impact. Host Why? Answer Because the European Court of Justice decided that the special jurisdiction rule for patent validity does not generally apply to patents from non-European countries. In simple terms, that means the general rule can still apply. And that opens the possibility of bringing infringement cases based on non-European patents before the home court where the defendant is based in the European Union. Host That sounds like a very far-reaching statement. Answer It is. That is why many commentators started talking about what is often called “long-arm jurisdiction.” In other words, a European home court may, under certain circumstances, deal with infringement claims relating to patents from countries outside the European Union. Host So, many listeners may now wonder: Can a Swedish or a German home court really decide a dispute involving a British or Turkish patent? Answer Ah, we need to be careful here. The European Court of Justice did not say that a European home court can cancel or revoke a foreign patent. That remains a matter for the authorities and national courts of the country that granted the patent. What the European Court of Justice said is that a European home court may assess the claims between the parties in a dispute. That is an important distinction. Host Did you realize during the proceedings how important this part of the decision might become? Answer Not to this extent. We started with a very practical enforcement problem. Only later did it become clear that the European Court of Justice’s answers might have consequences far beyond the original case. Today, the decision is discussed not only in connection with Turkish patents, but also British patents and even possible claims involving US patents. Host If you had to summarize the decision in one sentence, and I know, this is a very difficult task, what would that sentence be? Answer The European Court of Justice did not re-invent cross-border patent enforcement in Europe. But after many years, it clearly gave it much more room to develop. BLOCK 7 – THE REACTION OF THE IP COMMUNITY Host So, how was the decision received after it was published? Answer Ah, the reaction was very strong. It quickly became clear that many people saw the decision as much more than just another patent case. Many articles and commentaries described it as an important development in European patent litigation. Host Did that surprise you? Answer To some extent, yes. Of course, we knew that the questions referred to the European Court of Justice were important. But I was surprised by how quickly the decision became a major topic of discussion across the European patent community. Host Er, you later presented the decision at several conferences yourself, right? Answer Yes. The discussion started right away. I had the opportunity to discuss and present the case at several conferences and events, including the annual VPP conference in Germany and the Ingolstadt Patent Symposium. I recently received an invitation to serve as a panel speaker on cross-border litigation at the AIPPI World Congress 2026 in Hamburg. What struck me most was that both internal and external IP counsel were trying to understand the practice consequences of the decision. Host So, what was the question you were asked most often? Answer Almost always the same one: How far does this decision really go? People wanted to know whether this was simply a correction of earlier case law or whether it marked the beginning of a new phase in cross-border patent enforcement. Host And what did you say? Answer I would describe it as: neither a revolution nor a minor adjustment. The European Court of Justice did not rewrite the system. But it clearly changed the balance between the different jurisdiction rules. That is why I believe the decision will continue to be discussed for many years, both in practice and in academia. Host Er, one year later, the case received the Managing IP Award as the “Europe Impact Case of the Year.” What did that recognition mean to you? Answer First of all, it was a great honor for everyone involved. But for me, the most important thing was the message behind the award. The award showed that the decision affects much more than the parties involved in the case. It has an impact on European patent practice as a whole. And it also shows that the underlying jurisdiction questions reach far beyond patent law. They are relevant whenever companies have to enforce rights across borders in an increasing international world. That is what makes this case special. Host You often describe this case as a team effort. Answer Absolutely. A case of this size is never the work of one person. Many people contributed over many years. On the BSH side, team members from different functions played an important role throughout the proceedings. And we worked closely with external advisors in several countries. So I see the award as recognition of a shared achievement rather than an individual success. Host Looking at the discussions today, would you say the debate is over? Answer Not at all. I actually think we are only at the beginning. There are still many practical questions that home courts will have to answer in the coming years. That is exactly why the decision remains so interesting. BLOCK 8 – WHAT DOES THE DECISION MEAN IN PRACTICE? Host Let’s move from legal theory to practical business implications. What does this decision mean for patent owners and companies? Answer In my view, the biggest change is strategic. Patent owners now have better opportunities to bring cross-border disputes together in one central proceeding. At the same time, companies need to be aware that they may face claims at their European headquarters covering activities in several countries. So the decision creates opportunities, but it also creates new risks. Host That sounds really like a significant shift; right? Answer I would call it a rebalancing rather than a revolution. The European Court of Justice did not create a completely new system. But it made clear that the general rule — suing a defendant where it is based — plays a much bigger role than many people had assumed. As a result, the court at the defendant’s home base becomes much more important strategically. Host In the patent community, people often talk about cases such as Fujifilm v. Kodak, or Regeneron v. Formycon or Onesta v. BMW. Why are those cases attracting so much attention now? Answer Because they show how quickly practice is already adapting to the new possibilities. Fujifilm was important because it was one of the first UPC cases to test the logic that was later confirmed in BSH. At that time, the BSH case was already pending before the European Court of Justice, and the Advocate General had expressed a view that pointed in that direction. Against that background, the Düsseldorf Local Division accepted jurisdiction over the UK part of a European patent even before the European Court of Justice delivered its judgment. In June 2026, based on the principles confirmed in BSH, the UPC Court of Appeal further developed that approach. Host And what happened in Regeneron v. Formycon ? Answer In the Regeneron case, the Munich home court applied the approach confirmed in BSH and granted a Europe-wide injunction based on a European patent. That was one of the first examples of a national home court using the BSH framework in practice. That demonstrates that the decision is not just an academic discussion. It already has practical consequences. Host And what about the Onesta case? Answer The Onesta case shows that the debate has moved beyond Europe. After Onesta attempted to assert two U.S. patents before the Munich home court, BMW obtained an anti-suit injunction from a Texas federal court. Judge Albright took the view that U.S. patents should generally be decided by U.S. courts. The Onesta case therefore illustrates that the limits of the BSH logic are now being tested internationally. Host Did that end the proceedings in Munich? Answer Not necessarily. What makes the case interesting is that the Texas injunction was directed against Onesta, not against the Munich home court. At the same time, Onesta appealed Judge Albright’s decision in the United States. The Munich home court therefore decided to stay the case for the time being. Importantly, however, the Munich home court did not reject its own jurisdiction. So, at least for the moment, the underlying question remains open. Host Can a European home court ultimately decide infringement claims based on U.S. patents? Answer That question has not yet been answered. But the case has already shown that such an attempt can trigger strong reactions outside Europe. In that sense, the debate has moved from a European jurisdiction question to an international jurisdiction conflict. Host For our audience of internal and external IP counsel, what are the main lessons from this decision? Answer For me, there are three key takeaways. First: Patent enforcement has become more international. National litigation remains important, but companies should think across borders from the very beginning. Second: The choice of forum is becoming more important. Where you bring a case may be just as important as the legal arguments themselves. And third: Long-term commitment matters. This case shows that major developments rarely happen because of a single filing or a single hearing. They usually result from pursuing a clear strategy consistently over many years. Host Do you think this decision will also influence the Unified Patent Court, the UPC? Answer Yes, I believe so. The decision fits into a broader trend toward more centralized patent litigation. Both, the UPC and the BSH decision are driven by the same idea: Handling cross-border disputes more efficiently and more consistently. What is interesting is that many of the questions were faced in BSH versus Electrolux are now reappearing in a new form before the UPC. Cases like Fujifilm versus Kodak show that the discussion about jurisdiction, scope, and cross-border effects is far from over. Institutions may be new. But the underlying challenge remains the same: How do we enforce patents effectively across borders? Host Some commentators even see this as a step toward a more independent European patent judiciary. Do you agree? Answer To some extent, yes. Professor Hanns Ullrich, who supervised my doctoral studies on the legal protection of a then new semiconductor technology many years ago, recently observed that the UPC is gradually developing its own European case law.[DH1] I think that is — again — a very accurate observation. If you look at the developments since BSH and the first UPC decisions, you can see that European patent litigation is becoming more connected. National courts will remain important. But at the same time, we are seeing a more integrated European patent system taking shape. How far that development will go remains to be seen. Host Looking back on the entire journey — from a vacuum cleaner patent, through litigation in several countries, all the way to the European Court of Justice and an award-winning decision — what is your personal conclusion? Answer My main conclusion is that innovation needs effective legal protection. But it also requires the willingness to challenge established assumptions and explore new approaches. For me, the BSH versus Electrolux case shows that persistence, teamwork, a willingness to challenge accepted assumptions, and a long-term strategic view can sometimes lead to developments that go far beyond the original dispute. BLOCK 9 – THE PERSON BEHIND THE DECISION Host Ernst-Peter, today we have talked a lot about jurisdiction, patent enforcement, and European case law. When you look back at this journey, which has lasted almost twenty years, what impressed you most? Answer Probably the realization that major developments rarely follow a straight line. When we started thinking about the case, we were dealing with a very practical problem. Nobody said: Let’s create a landmark decision of the European Court of Justice. We were simply looking for a reasonable and practical solution for a company. The fact that this would eventually lead to a decision with Europe-wide impact was something nobody could foresee at the time. Host Were there moments when you thought the case might fail? Answer Of course. Whenever a case lasts many years, there will be setbacks, new questions, and unexpected developments. That is exactly why persistence is so important. In the end, success is often not about one filing or one hearing. It is about staying focused on a clear objective over a long period of time. Host You often talk about teamwork. Is that one of the main lessons from this case? Answer Absolutely. A case of this size requires commitment from many people and institutes over many years. On the BSH side, my role was to help maintain the strategic direction and long-term commitment that such a case requires. At the same time, experts from different functions within BSH contributed technical expertise, testing, documentation, and practical support throughout the proceedings. On the legal side, Roman Sedlmaier and his team at IP-Counsels Gigerich & Sedlmaier (IPCGS) helped develop the cross-border litigation strategy and the overall case architecture. Our Swedish litigation team then carried the arguments through all stages of the proceedings. Looking back, it was the combination of institutional commitment, technical expertise, strategic leadership, well-designed case architecture, and consistent execution that made the difference. Host One final question. What advice would you give to young internal or external IP counsel? Answer Stay curious: Don’t be afraid to question accepted assumptions. Be patient: Intellectual property is usually a marathon, not a sprint. And never forget that every patent dispute involves an invention, a business, and many people who have worked hard to bring that innovation to market. For me, that connection between technology, law, and strategy is what still makes this profession so fascinating today. Host Ernst-Peter, thank you very much for joining us today on IP Fridays. Answer Thank you. It was a pleasure to be here.

What could a recent U.S. Department of Justice memo mean for people with disabilities and the future of community-based care? In this inaugural episode of Front & Center, we examine the ongoing debate surrounding the landmark Olmstead v. L.C. decision and explore its potential impact on individuals, families, and healthcare systems. Featuring perspectives from a family advocate, a public policy leader, and national reporting, this conversation provides context, examines the issues from multiple viewpoints, and highlights why this topic matters to patients, families, and communities.

On this Episode we Discuss Lebron's decision and what it means for the NBA and other Teams, Steph Curry trade rumors, WNBA All-Star Weekend, JD's Bites & Brew, BRR's, and much more!

Are we being too stubborn and missing potential opportunites for deeper growth and bigger success? There could be better options right in front of us if we simply are open to reviewing them. Key Takeaways Stubbornness can prevent us from making better decisions in health, relationships, and work. Recognizing warning signs and being willing to adjust plans is a sign of wisdom, not weakness. Flexibility and openness to change can lead to better outcomes, as illustrated by both personal and business examples. Asking yourself "Am I just being stubborn?" is a valuable self-check before committing to a course of action. Visit ConfidenceThroughHealth.com to find discounts to some of our favorite products.Follow me via All In Health and Wellness on Facebook or Instagram.Find my books on Amazon: No More Sugar Coating: Finding Your Happiness in a Crowded World and Confidence Through Health: Live the Healthy Lifestyle God DesignedProduction credit: Social Media Cowboys

After creating a stir within the community the Fresno City Council decided not to put an initiative on the November ballot that would've given Mayor Dyer the opportunity to run for a third term. Former Councilman and current CEO of Biz Fed Central California Clint Olivier joined Blake Taylor to delve into the situation. What will Dyer do next? Who will run for Mayor now? Plus Kamala and Gavin are cashing in!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Biopharmaceutical manufacturing processes are becoming more complex, prompting manufacturers to evaluate filtration based on its impact across the entire process rather than as a standalone unit operation. Filtration decisions can influence everything from system footprint and flow performance to integration complexity, product recovery, and overall operational efficiency. Growing emphasis on sustainability and yield is also leading manufacturers to examine hidden inefficiencies. In this episode of Off Script, sponsored by Saint-Gobain Critical Process Solutions, we spoke with Hannah Hertrick, market development manager of Filtration Products at Saint-Gobain Critical, about how filtration is evolving into a system-level optimization opportunity. The conversation explores why filtration decisions increasingly extend beyond membrane performance, how filter design and connectivity can simplify system integration, and why manufacturers are taking a more holistic approach to improving process efficiency. Hertrick also discusses the challenge of holdup volume in high-value biologics, the impact of hidden product losses on yield and cost of goods, and the overall importance of reducing system complexity and improving product recovery.

In any design project, there are a lot of decisions to be made, from the smallest one to the biggest, from the easiest to the trickiest.    Gigi's J'adore - A monthly note of pieces & places to inspire you and your home. Join the exclusive list.   Atelier sessions, join the waitlist to be the first to know.    Explore G.A. Atelier and all offers here.   Join me inside the G.A. Atelier Substack here.   The Atelier Design hour - uncover your home's possibilities - book your session here   Connect on Instagram

The most important decision any of us will make is the decision to place our faith in Jesus Christ as our Savior and Lord. All other decisions pale in comparison. Why? Because this decision has eternal implications. Placing our faith in Jesus' death and resurrection for our sins provides us with forgiveness of our sins and gives us the promise of eternal life.Main Points:1.  While many have knowledge about Jesus, they have yet to believe. They still haven't decided to make Him their Savior and Lord. They are living in a place of indecision. I've heard people say, “I'm not ready yet. Maybe someday I'll become a Christian.”2. We must see that indecision is really a decision. Failing to act is actually an action. We don't know what the future holds. We have no promise of tomorrow. But we do have this moment and this opportunity to decide to follow Jesus. We cannot postpone life's most important decision. 3. Listen again to the powerful words from Joshua. “Choose today whom you will serve.” I believe this is a word from the Lord to you and me today. Choose whom you will serve. Make a decision. Place your faith in God. Settle the issue. Move forward as aß Christ-follower whose mind is made up.Today's Scripture Verses:Joshua 24:14-15 - “So fear the Lord and serve him wholeheartedly. Put away forever the idols your ancestors worshiped when they lived beyond the Euphrates River and in Egypt. Serve the Lord alone. But if you refuse to serve the Lord, then choose today whom you will serve. Would you prefer the gods your ancestors served beyond the Euphrates? Or will it be the gods of the Amorites in whose land you now live? But as for me and my family, we will serve the Lord.”Matthew 6:24 - “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other.” Quick Links:Donate to support this podcastLeave a review on Apple PodcastsGet a copy of The 5 Minute Discipleship JournalConnect on SocialJoin The 5 Minute Discipleship Facebook Group

After many requests for the story of how PT Scooter came to be Glenn's “Little Pony” we have put together his origin story. You may want to have a tissue handy. Just sayin'. Listen in…HORSES IN THE MORNING Episode 4008 – Show Notes and Links:The HORSES IN THE MORNING Crew: Glenn the Geek: co-host, executive in charge of comic relief; Jamie Jennings: co-hostPost Image Credit: Scooter before and after.Guest: Dr. Wendy Ying, Helena B. and Coach JennFollow Horse Radio Network on Twitter or follow Horses In The Morning on FacebookTime Stamps:00:32 - Dark day & Scooter origin setup01:32 - Craigslist hackney pony ad03:15 - Photo dates & tack concerns07:30 - Plan to go see the pony08:23 - Monday follow‑up & teaser09:31 - Visit #1: fat, healthy hackney14:44 - Driving into rural Florida16:11 - Meeting starving “Origami”19:17 - Decision to rescue and haul home22:14 - Early health update & poop patrol31:40 - Dr. Wendy's refeeding guidance39:59 - Two‑week plan, worms, and quarantine51:17 - PT's training, walks, and progress53:43 - Choosing the name “PT Scooter”

After many requests for the story of how PT Scooter came to be Glenn's “Little Pony” we have put together his origin story. You may want to have a tissue handy. Just sayin'. Listen in…HORSES IN THE MORNING Episode 4008 – Show Notes and Links:The HORSES IN THE MORNING Crew: Glenn the Geek: co-host, executive in charge of comic relief; Jamie Jennings: co-hostPost Image Credit: Scooter before and after.Guest: Dr. Wendy Ying, Helena B. and Coach JennFollow Horse Radio Network on Twitter or follow Horses In The Morning on FacebookTime Stamps:00:32 - Dark day & Scooter origin setup01:32 - Craigslist hackney pony ad03:15 - Photo dates & tack concerns07:30 - Plan to go see the pony08:23 - Monday follow‑up & teaser09:31 - Visit #1: fat, healthy hackney14:44 - Driving into rural Florida16:11 - Meeting starving “Origami”19:17 - Decision to rescue and haul home22:14 - Early health update & poop patrol31:40 - Dr. Wendy's refeeding guidance39:59 - Two‑week plan, worms, and quarantine51:17 - PT's training, walks, and progress53:43 - Choosing the name “PT Scooter”

A new Marquette poll shows democratic socialist Francesca Hong pulling away in the final weeks of the Democratic primary race for governor. 

Listen to This Prayer Before Making a Decisionhttps://lifemotivationdaily.blogspot.com/https://www.youtube.com/@liveandlaugh2025-y8l

230. How to Stay Visible When You Work Remotely   For years, visibility happened naturally. Leaders were seen in meetings, hallway conversations, customer interactions, and spontaneous problem-solving moments. Those everyday interactions helped decision-makers observe leadership in action. Today's workplace looks very different. Whether you're working remotely or in a hybrid environment, many of those opportunities have disappeared. That means visibility is no longer created through proximity—it's created through intentional communication. In this episode, Sue shares why hybrid work has fundamentally changed how leaders build credibility, demonstrate readiness, and position themselves for future opportunities.   Key Takeaways Hybrid work changed how leadership is observed. Visibility is no longer automatic. Remote leaders can build even broader influence when they're intentional. Decision-makers promote leaders they understand. Proximity creates awareness; communication creates understanding. Intentional visibility closes the perception gap. Visibility doesn't happen by accident. It requires intentional leadership communication. The future belongs to leaders who don't assume their leadership is being seen. They ensure it's being understood.     Connect with Susan M. Barber If this episode resonated with you, share it with another leader who would benefit! You can connect with Susan M. Barber for coaching, leadership development, speaking engagements, and visibility strategy work focused on helping leaders become more influential, trusted, and impactful inside organizations. Check out my books, The Visibility Factor and Your Journey to Visibility Workbook! https://susanmbarber.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/susanbarbercoaching/

With markets reeling after another flare up in U.S.-Iran tensions, earnings from Apple and Amazon are in focus. GDP and PCE reports also await as investors digest the Fed's pause. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.  Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

If you're like me, you consume a lot of information. Many people do that through platforms like social media, but I tend to consume a lot through reading. Recently, I came across a phrase that really stood out: decision hoarding. What is decision hoarding? It's when you hold onto decisions instead of letting them flow. You keep your hands on everything, becoming the bottleneck in your business, your team, or even your family. It often means others have to come to you for every final decision. The problem is, when you're not there, everything stops. People become paralyzed because they haven't been given the tools, knowledge, or authority to move forward on their own. Then you return and feel frustrated, wondering why nothing got done. This happens more often than people realize. Decision hoarding usually means you haven't fully empowered others. You haven't provided clear processes, expectations, or the confidence for them to act independently. But empowerment also means allowing mistakes. I once brought someone new onto my team who struggled to make decisions because their previous environment was highly micromanaged. That kind of experience can create hesitation and even fear around decision-making. So I focus on giving people the tools, clarity, and permission to act — knowing that mistakes are part of growth. Many people who hoard decisions are actually trying to be perfect. They wait, overthink, and delay instead of making clear, timely choices. Fast decision-makers, on the other hand, understand that progress matters more than perfection. I saw this growing up as well. My mother tended to hold control over decisions, and when she didn't have that control, she would channel her energy elsewhere. It was a reminder of how deeply ingrained this pattern can be. But decision hoarding is paralyzing — for you and for everyone around you. It slows progress, creates frustration, and limits growth. If you look at nature, it doesn't operate this way. Nature follows systems and flows based on what's needed — air, water, fire, earth. There's a natural responsiveness and balance. We can learn from that. In our own lives, sometimes what's needed is clarity, communication, research, or simply space. Sometimes you need to step back and let others step forward. And sometimes, you just need to pause — stop over-relying on external input and think for yourself. There's a lot of power in allowing your own mind to work, to create, and to solve problems. So ask yourself: are you holding onto decisions that should be released? --- Follow & Let's Get in Touch! Official Links Website: https://sheevaunmoran.com/ Conference: http://epiclifesuccesssummit.com Blog: https://blog.sheevaunmoran.com/ 

In this episode, Chris gives a eulogy to Archie Goodwin and the final MANHUNTER story, the one Goodwin plotted but never lived to script. Walt Simonson drew it anyway. Every page. Without a single word.  "The Final Chapter" first appeared in 1999's MANHUNTER: THE SPECIAL EDITION, collecting the Goodwin/Simonson run from DETECTIVE COMICS no. 437-443.  COMICS ROT YOUR BRAIN! is a deep dive into ‘80s comics (plus a few notable exceptions). In this weekly podcast, screenwriters Steven Bagatourian (AMERICAN GUN) and Christopher Derrick (STAR TREK: PICARD) discuss their favorite books, runs, and creators from the Bronze Age.  Join our CRYB! Family for only $2.99 a month on YouTube - once you're a member, you'll unlock awesome bonus videos… Don't sleep!  SHOW NOTES 00:00 - Cold Open 00:30 - Intro 01:49 - History of Manhunter 06:30 - Simonson's Decision 08:15 - What Happens In The Story 18:13 - Inspiration and Impact 20:05 - Final Thoughts  #dccomics #dccomicsuniverse #bronzeagecomicsDrop us a line! Support the show+ Check out our YouTube channel to get a look at some of the fantastic art featured in our episodes. Visit ComicsRotYourBrain.com to sign up for our newsletter, Letter Column. You can also find us wherever you stream your favorite podcasts.+ We appreciate your support of the show via Patreon: ComicsRotYourBrain+ For even more cool shit, read Chris's Substack (cinema, comics, and culture) - THIN ICE©2024  Comics Rot Your Brain!#comicbooks #comics #graphicnovel

Grant, John Browner and Tim Parker finally get to the biggest story of the offseason — and they could not disagree more. Tim has never been happier to be wrong: he had LeBron going to Cleveland, then Golden State or Miami, and instead he got the biggest thing in Philadelphia sports history. Xfinity Mobile Arena is MSG now, Broad Street is Broadway, and anybody who lived through the process — Ish Smith, Evan Turner, Thad Young, Henry Sims — has earned this. John pours cold water: he's 42, the best player on the roster is Jaylen Brown, and nobody on that team knows this offense yet. Then John opens the curtain on something fans never see — what an NBA practice actually looks like after training camp ends, why teams won't let you watch it, and why LeBron will not take a full practice rep all season. From there it's a full autopsy of the fit: does Tyrese Maxey get unleashed or buried at number three on the call sheet, is this 1988 Magic or 1991 Magic, and the one argument that finally scares Tim — every champion is a top-12 defense, and this team can't guard anybody. Plus Tim's line in the sand ("no Eastern Conference Finals and LeBron feels a wrath he hasn't felt since The Decision"), the East hierarchy sorted into regular-season good versus playoff good, Charlotte as the dark horse, and the Anthony Simons war that will not die. Before the break, a Kawhi update: a third company has entered the Aspiration investigation, ESPN reports it could bleed into 2027, and John explains why — the league isn't investigating anymore, it's negotiating the punishment behind closed doors. John opens the show with a tribute to his friend and former 1090 colleague Billy Ray Smith Jr., who died Wednesday at 64. The post-show takes on WNBA All-Star weekend, where the off-court coverage swallowed the basketball, and closes with news: the TST Podcast Network is officially happening. New episodes drop nightly. Follow the crew and catch the post-show on X. Directed & Produced by: Grant Mona Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A brief bit of encouragement for the journey from God's Word. Today's Scripture reading: 1 Samuel 29 To support this devotional ministry: https://faithbaptiststerling.com/give/ Music: "Awaken the Dawn" by Stanton Lanierhttps://www.stantonlanier.com CCLI #20109360

Segment 1: Restaurateur Dan Hart, President of Hart Alliance, to talk about the restaurants he runs in McHenry, why McHenry is a great place to do business, the benefits of being located close to the Fox River, some of the fan favorites at the restaurants, the challenge of running a restaurant in the current client, […]

On this week's episode of ‘The Old Man and the Three,' Cam Johnson and Tommy Alter welcome NBA legend Shaquille O'Neal! Shaq discusses his new Dunkman League and goes back and forth trading stories with Cam on some of their best and worst dunk experiences. He also shares his thoughts on LeBron James's decision to join the Philadelphia 76ers, Jalen Brunson and the Knicks winning the Finals, all his off-court ventures and side quests, and what his gameday routines were like. He then explains big-to-big what Victor Wembanyama needs to do better and what he needs to work on this offseason, shares what the best career advice he ever got was, and much more. Let's go!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In hour two, Coach Jim Larrañaga joins Hoch, Crowder, and Appel to discuss the University of Miami's upcoming matchup against the Florida Gators in Tampa. They analyze LeBron James' move to Philadelphia and debate whether defensive shortcomings and depth issues will hinder the 76ers' championship aspirations.

Episode 450: A Baseball Is Dead Pantheon episode is in your feed. Jared, Justin, Dallas, and Tyler chat about Dallas' performance on ‘Just The Nuts' last night, in particular his sweet ride that takes him to and from the ballpark. All-Star stud outfielder Corbin Carroll joins the program as well to talk about the All-Star Game, Seattle music, and the art of the triple. On the opposite end of the spectrum are two pitchers discussed on today's episode: Alek Manoah, who has been released by the Angels, and Shane Bieber, whose Savant page is more blue than the deep blue sea. The guys discuss whether either pitcher can bounce back to their former selves. Lastly, an all-time edition of BID Feud is here, with special guest Ellyn Carrabis joining the program! Jared's mom enters the Thunderdome for a special feud on an amazing Wednesday edition of Baseball Is Dead. 00:00:00 - Dallas' Scooter & Friendship With Former A's 00:11:22 - Check Out Our Otto Lopez Interview! 00:14:16 - Corbin Carroll & A Carrabis Family Member Join The Show! 00:18:41 - Alek Manoah, Released 00:28:18 - Corbin Carroll Joins BID 01:01:02 - NL Player of the Month: CJ Abrams' Heater & The Decision to Trade Him 01:09:52 - Shane Bieber's Icy Baseball Savant 01:21:05 - Scoop Season Is Coming 01:23:16 - BID Family Feud 01:50:17 - Award-Winning Nugs 01:53:46 - Final Thoughts + Philadelphia Drama Buy A Ticket For Section 10 Night! September 8th, Fenway Park, Be There. https://redsox.com/section10 NEW BID MERCH IS HERE: https://www.baseballisdead.com Trade $25 for the chance to earn up to $500: - https://app.kalshi.com/1r91/BID Sign Up For Our Patreon for more Baseball Is Dead Content! https://www.patreon.com/cw/BaseballisDead This episode of Baseball is Dead is sponsored by BetterHelp. Sign up and get 10% off at https://BetterHelp.com/BASEBALL #ad  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today's Sports Daily covers Kyle Shanahan speaking out on what really happened in his car accident, the Shohei Ohtani scandal is a podcast now, Big 10 still wants a 24 team playoff in college football, & Raiders declare a QB starter. Music written by Bill Conti & Allee Willis (Casablanca Records/Universal Music Group)  Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Have you ever found yourself second-guessing your homeschool because of someone else's opinion? Maybe a family member questions your decision, your child mentions wanting to go to school, or another homeschool family decides to enroll their kids in public school. Suddenly, you're wondering if you're doing the right thing.In this episode, I'm sharing how to build real confidence as a homeschool parent, respond to criticism without losing your peace, help your children develop meaningful friendships, and stay rooted in your family's values—even when others question your choice to homeschool.

Kelly Evans and Brian Sullivan go to Washington, DC to sit down with leaders from the White House to the C-Suite ahead of the Federal Reserve's interest rate decision. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Philadelphia 76ers have officially entered championship territory after signing LeBron James, and today we discuss whether anything short of an NBA title should be considered a disappointment. Also, we react to Draymond Green's criticism of LeBron choosing the Sixers over the Warriors, as well as his ridiculous comments about VJ Edgecombe being a loser of the LeBron James signing. Furthermore, Shaquille O'Neal made a bold prediction about Joel Embiid being the NBA's best center next season and it has Sixers fans talking. In other news, we break down the underrated impact LeBron will have on the development of Tyrese Maxey, VJ Edgecombe, and the rest of Philadelphia's young core. Lastly, Kevin Durant weighs in on LeBron's decision to join the Sixers, claiming that he is "ring chasing." Today, we discuss it all! FOLLOW US ON ALL PLATFORMS: https://linktr.ee/phillytakewithrb CHECK OUT THE NEW MERCH: https://phillytakewithrb.com/ Philly Take Discord: https://discord.gg/vEXh2Aqp Venmo: https://venmo.com/phillytakewithrb CashApp: https://cash.app/$phillytakewithrb Subscribe to Philly Take with RB on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZ6xo8_BSzZJVYfWEqEt1Gw INSTAGRAM: https://www.instagram.com/rbphillytake/ TWITTER: https://twitter.com/RBPhillyTake Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I was privileged once again to attend Newport Folk Festival and even more grateful to sit down with Madi Diaz — four years after her first Roadcase guest spot in 2022. Madi is a striking artist with a unique flair for vulnerability and for putting her authentic self — and her feelings — on display in her songwriting. She is also a two-time Grammy nominee for her album Weird Faith, and was a member of Harry Styles' touring band in 2023.Madi talks to me about the importance of embracing her feelings, especially in navigating relationships, and she discusses with me how her knack for finding joy in uncertainty and the unknown helps shape not only her artistry but also her outlook on life. Her upcoming deluxe release — the UN-unplugged version — of her album Fatal Optimist is coming out on September 4, and it further underscores the hope embedded in her attitude of “defiant optimism.”  Heads up for more interviews from Newport Folk Festival, coming up this week and next!!=======================================Chapters:00:00 - Episode intro with Host Josh Rosenberg04:05 - Maddie Diaz's journey and upcoming album Fatal Optimist06:23 - How songwriting reflects personal and universal emotions08:53 - The meaning behind Fatal Optimist as laughing in the face of the current world10:26 - Strategies for managing intense feelings through acceptance and presence12:50 - Decision-making guided by gut instinct and living with no wrong choices14:55 - The creative process behind her innovative music videos and art installations18:28 - Navigating relationships and personal growth during tour adventures20:05 - The transformative experience of performing for Harry Styles and large audiences23:51 - Reflections on touring at Wembley and the impact on her music and mindset27:19 - Her focus on new music, upcoming solo shows, and ongoing projects29:23 - Episode Wrap-up with Host Josh Rosenberg=======================================For more information on Roadcase:https://linktr.ee/roadcasepod and https://www.roadcasepod.comOr contact Roadcase by email:  info@roadcasepod.comRoadcase theme music:  "Eugene (Instrumental)" by Waltzer

Microsoft, Meta, and other AI-linked stocks' earnings may carry more weight than usual amid a chip-led tech sell-off. The Fed meeting also looms with inflation remaining stubborn. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.  Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Tsvetta Kaleynska says consumers have been stressed for the last year and a half despite what economic data suggests. She outlines her firm's data that points to the Fed and current political set-up as what consumer blame for inflation. It's not just inflation — Tsvetta also says the jobs front is also top of mind for Americans. ======== Schwab Network ========Empowering every investor and trader, every market day. Subscribe to the Market Minute newsletter - https://schwabnetwork.com/subscribeDownload the iOS app - https://apps.apple.com/us/app/schwab-network/id1460719185Download the Amazon Fire Tv App - https://www.amazon.com/TD-Ameritrade-Network/dp/B07KRD76C7Watch on Sling - https://watch.sling.com/1/asset/191928615bd8d47686f94682aefaa007/watchWatch on Vizio - https://www.vizio.com/en/watchfreeplus-exploreWatch on DistroTV - https://www.distro.tv/live/schwab-network/Follow us on X – https://twitter.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/schwabnetworkFollow us on LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/company/schwab-network/ About Schwab Network - https://schwabnetwork.com/about

Tone Kapone, KeKe, and Zach Boog talk Back From Cincy, Lebron's Decision, The Black Panther, Usher's Shady Fan, Airplane Etiquette & More!

Fresh out of the studio, Sophie Dionnet, Senior Vice President of Product and Business Solutions at Dataiku, joins us at the Dataiku Summit in Singapore to discuss what turns enterprise AI investment into measurable value. She lays out the three ingredients Dataiku builds around — the right people, orchestration across technologies, and supporting controls — and makes the case that governance is a scaling mechanism rather than a brake. She points to Roche, where a patent lawyer encoded his own professional expertise into a working system of agents, discusses Dataiku's answer to agent sprawl with agent management launching in October, and closes on strong momentum across banking and the public sector in Asia Pacific."A lot of the changes that organizations need to do today actually don't require the latest model. That's not really the problem. It's about doing the hard thing, the change, the things that we talked about. It's easier to be excited by the new toy than by trying to use it. And so yes, I think this is why there is a bit of a gold rush of trying to figure out where is it going to end. We don't know." - Sophie DionnetProfile: Sophie Dionnet, Senior Vice President of Product and Business Solutions at DataikuLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sophie-dionnet-a176894/Episode Highlights [00:00] Quote of the Day by Sophie Dionnet from Dataiku[01:00] Three angles: domain knowledge, orchestration, governance[01:59] What has not changed: data still decides everything[02:31] Data consciousness accelerated over the past twelve months[03:05] The LLM explosion and the raw-power question[03:51] Why Sophie pushed governance before the market asked[05:30] What Dataiku is, and where the name comes from[06:15] Three ingredients: people, orchestration, controls[07:22] Roche: a patent lawyer builds his own agents[08:51] Change management, not technology, is the gap[09:41] Decision takes an hour, implementation takes two years[09:58] Why domain knowledge beats model performance[11:30] Most changes do not require the latest models[11:58] The scaling belief the industry gets wrong[12:50] Centralisation risk and the rise of shadow AI[14:02] Where leaders still quietly choose to do nothing[15:22] Vibe coding, conflicting outputs, and lost consensus[16:43] The GDPR lesson on ex-post compliance cost[18:42] Why the agent question starts at the board[19:38] Agents are simply a new kind of API[20:28] Is agent sprawl technology or organisational design[21:28] What separates AI scalers from pilot purgatory[22:58] The bear case: foundation labs absorb the middle[23:45] Why every leading technology becomes self-centred[24:57] Vibe coding your own Salesforce, and why not[25:23] The pet store analogy for build versus buy[26:22] Systems of record and the real switching cost[28:30] Dataiku in Asia Pacific over the next three years[29:59] ClosingPodcast Information: Bernard Leong hosts and produces the show. The proper credits for the intro and end music are "Energetic Sports Drive." G. Thomas Craig mixed and edited the episode in both video and audio format.

Inflation rose 3.8 per cent in the 12 months to June, down from 4 per cent the previous month, and below the forecasts from economists.

(SPOILER) Your Daily Roundup covers the latest happenings in the Big Brother house, the fallout from the Tea Party, what Kamu's decision was yesterday & more, DWTS: The Next Pro thoughts, & we have a premiere for DWTS Season 35. Music written by Jimmer Podrasky (B'Jingo Songs/Machia Music/Bug Music BMI)Ads:Shopify – The plot twist that you were the business all along. Free trial at: https://shopify.com/realitysteveSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

All eyes on the AI trade as earnings from NXP Semiconductors and Seagate Technology Holdings report after the bell. The traders break down what the results mean for the broader tech trade, as the SMH closes out its fourth day of losses. Then, former Founder & CEO of Geometric Intelligence Gary Marcus lays out the impact of circular AI financing and whether an AI buildout could actually be profitable. Plus, how the market will react to a possible rate hike tomorrow, where retail traders are seeing opportunity, and Ford and Visa on the move after earnings. Fast Money Disclaimer Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

July 27th, 2026 Follow us on Facebook, Instagram and X Listen to past episodes on The Ticket’s Website And follow The Ticket Top 10 on Apple, Spotify or Amazon MusicSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Explore the inspiring story of Adam Wright, CEO of Pilot Companies, who shares how life's toughest moments shape resilience, character, and leadership. From overcoming personal tragedy to leading a business with a focus on people and purpose, Adam's journey offers valuable insights on faith, perseverance, and integrity.In this episode: How Adam's childhood adversity shaped his mindset around resilience and growth The influence of his mother's hard work and unwavering faith on his values The significance of mentors and key relationships in shaping success The importance of doing the next right thing and walking in faith and confidence Leadership principles balancing standards and grace The power of intentional prioritization over striving for balance Lessons from athletic endeavors and how discipline translates into the corporate world Building a purpose-driven organization focused on customer experience and team member engagement The impact of personal faith and the importance of community in decision-making Practical tips on discerning God's calling and walking in confidence Berkshire Hathaway Adam Wright LinkedIn Pilot Flying J Holy Bible LinkedIn Twitter Timestamps: 00:00 - Introduction to Adam Wright's inspiring journey 02:00 - Childhood challenges and the impact of his father's passing 04:30 - Lessons learned from his mother's example of hard work and faith 07:00 - How mentors and coaches influenced Adam's development 09:30 - The importance of showing people they matter in every turn 12:00 - Decision to stay local for family and educational opportunities 14:00 - The significance of faith and prayer in decision-making 16:00 - Overcoming self-doubt and realizing the power of others' belief 18:30 - Transition from college football to NFL: hard work and humility 21:00 - Lessons from athletic discipline and perseverance 24:30 - The role of redshirting and continuous improvement in football and life 27:00 - The mindset of "next game" and relentless pursuit of excellence 30:00 - Navigating challenges in professional sports and the corporate world 33:00 - Leading Berkshire Hathaway Energy: balancing standards with grace 35:00 - Building company culture around authenticity, purpose, and accountability 36:45 - The importance of trust, relational capital, and clear communication 39:00 - Mentors and relationships that reinforced Adam's confidence 42:00 - The role of family, especially his wife's unwavering support 45:00 - Leading Pilot Companies with a customer-centric approach 48:00 - Cultivating company values and ensuring they live beyond words 51:00 - Prioritization over balance: integrating work, family, and faith 53:00 - The indivisibility of life and intentional trade-ups 55:00 - Final thoughts and encouragement to walk in purpose and faith. This episode emphasizes leadership rooted in faith, perseverance, and authentic connection. Adam's story encourages us all to pursue our purpose with confidence, balanced by grace and a commitment to serving others. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hour 4 of Scotty G. & The Coach with Scott Garrard and Tim LaComb. Bill Bender, college football writer for the Sporting News Sports Roulette: QB Baker Mayfield will play out his final year of contract with Tampa Bay Golden State Warriors making all the wrong decisions

"They better put something good around Giannis or else you're a terrible reporter." The fallout continues from LeBron James' decision to sign with the Philadelphia 76ers, and a couple of things are becoming clear: nobody knew anything, and his decision makes a lot of sense. Mike Ryan tells us why he believes this is the best place for LeBron to take one last run at a title, and why the Miami Heat and other teams that missed out on The King have engaged in loser behavior since the decision was made. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Discover what the Fed's next rate decision may be. Will the Federal Reserve hold interest rates steady—or surprise markets with another rate hike? For the first time in years, even seasoned economists and former Federal Reserve officials are deeply divided. Rising oil prices fueled by renewed Middle East tensions are reigniting inflation concerns just as recent inflation data suggested the battle against higher prices may finally be turning a corner. In this episode, Linda P. Jones breaks down the competing forces shaping the Fed's decision, why Chairman Kevin Warsh has intentionally made monetary policy less predictable, and what investors should be watching beyond the headline announcement. Most importantly, Linda explains why she believes the long-term story isn't about one quarter-point rate move—it's about the powerful productivity gains from artificial intelligence that could reshape the economy and create one of the greatest wealth-building opportunities of our lifetime. What You'll Walk Away With Why this is one of the most uncertain Fed meetings in years. How rising oil prices could influence interest rate policy. Why the bond market is signaling concern about inflation. What Kevin Warsh's leadership style means for investors. The split among Fed officials on whether to raise rates. Why AI-driven productivity may ultimately reduce inflation. How geopolitical events complicate monetary policy. What investors should listen for during the Fed press conference. Why long-term investors shouldn't overreact to one Fed meeting. How to stay focused on wealth-building during uncertain markets. Are you on track for financial freedom...or not? Financial freedom is a combination of money, compounding and time (my McT Formula). How well you invest can make the biggest difference to your financial freedom and lifestyle. If you invested well for the long-term, what a difference it would make because the difference between investing $100k and earning 5 percent or 10 percent on your money over 30 years, is the difference between it growing to $432,194 or $1,744,940, an increase of over $1.3 million dollars. Your compounding rate, and how well you invest, matters!  INVESTING IS WHAT THE BE WEALTHY & SMART VIP EXPERIENCE IS ALL ABOUT - Invest in digital assets and stock ETFs for potential high compounding rates - Receive an Asset Allocation model with ticker symbols and what % to invest -Monthly LIVE investment webinars with Linda 10 months per year, with Q & A -Private VIP Facebook group with daily community interaction -Weekly investment commentary -Extra educational wealth classes available -Pay once, have lifetime access! NO recurring membership fees. -US and foreign investors are welcome -No minimum $ amount to invest -Tech Team available for digital assets (for hire per hour) For a limited time, enjoy a 50% savings on my private investing group, the Be Wealthy & Smart VIP Experience. Pay once and enjoy lifetime access without any additional recurring fees. Pay once and you're done! Invest with our successful community for years to come. Enter "SAVE50" to save 50% here: http://tinyurl.com/InvestingVIP Or set up a complimentary conversation to answer your questions about the Be Wealthy & Smart VIP Experience. Request an appointment to talk with Linda here: https://tinyurl.com/TalkWithLinda (yes, you talk to Linda!). SUBSCRIBE TO BE WEALTHY & SMART Click Here to Subscribe Via iTunes Click Here to Subscribe Via Stitcher on an Android Device Click Here to Subscribe Via RSS Feed LINDA'S WEALTH BOOKS 1. Get my book, "3 Steps to Quantum Wealth: The Wealth Heiress' Guide to Financial Freedom by Investing in Cryptocurrencies". 2. Get my book, "You're Already a Wealth Heiress, Now Think and Act Like One: 6 Practical Steps to Make It a Reality Now!" Men love it too! After all, you are Wealth Heirs. :) International buyers (if you live outside of the US) get my book here. WANT MORE FROM LINDA? Check out her programs. Join her on Instagram. WEALTH LIBRARY OF PODCASTS Listen to the full wealth library of podcasts from the beginning.  SPECIAL DEALS #Ad Apply for a Gemini credit card and get FREE XRP back (or any crypto you choose) when you use the card. Charge $3000 in first 90 days and earn $200 in crypto rewards when you use this link to apply and are approved: https://tinyurl.com/geminixrp This is a credit card, NOT a debit card. There are great rewards. Set your choice to EARN FREE XRP! #Ad Protect yourself online with a Virtual Private Network (VPN). Get 3 MONTHS FREE when you sign up for a NORD VPN plan here.  #Ad To safely and securely store crypto, I recommend using a Tangem wallet. Get a 10% discount when you purchase here. #Ad If you are looking to simplify your crypto tax reporting, use Koinly. It is highly recommended and so easy for tax reporting. You can save $20, click here. Be Wealthy & Smart,™ is a personal finance show with self-made millionaire Linda P. Jones, America's Wealth Mentor.™ Learn simple steps that make a big difference to your financial freedom.  (This post contains affiliate links. If you click on a link and make a purchase, I may receive a commission. There is no additional cost to you.)  

Markets are navigating a complex web of Big Tech earnings, an upcoming Federal Reserve rate decision, and mounting geopolitical tensions. Lou Basenese, FOX Business Contributor and Executive Vice President for Market Strategy at Prairie Operating Company, joins FBN's Jackie DeAngelis to break down why the Central Bank is likely to hold interest rates steady, how a temporary pause in U.S.-Iran strikes is impacting oil prices, and why a surprisingly strong earnings season is providing underlying strength to Wall Street. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Ben Standig joins Kevin, as he does every Monday, to explain what led up to the Commanders' decision to dismiss TE coach Ben Steele on Monday morning. Also, Ben weighs in on the ever-present WR2 situation (and especially Brandon Aiyuk), and lays out what to look for as training camp opens this week!

The Jim Rome Show HR 2 - 7/27/26 LA Rams General Manager Les Snead joins the show to break down a busy offseason that included big trades for Myles Garrett and Trent McDuffie. Then, ESPN NBA Reporter Dave McMenamin joins the show to recap LeBron's 3-week free agency period that landed him in Philadelphia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices