Podcasts about Pi

When Matt Aulsbrook moved to Fort Worth, he was riding the bus to DWI classes and sleeping on a blow-up mattress. No license. No law degree. No safety net. Today, his firm is one of the most active trial teams in Tarrant County, with an eight-figure practice built on profit discipline, not vanity metrics. In this episode, Matt breaks down how he bootstrapped growth, survived the lean years, and uses a simple KPI stack to keep his PI shop healthy in a brutal market. You'll learn: The real ROI timelines behind digital, radio, and TV (and how to know if your spend is actually working) The simple KPI mix that reveals whether your firm is healthy, overstaffed, or running too thin What high-performing intake teams focus on to consistently convert wanted leads Ways firms are using AI and mass-tort diversification to stay resilient in unpredictable markets If you like what you hear, hit subscribe. We do this every week. Get Social! Personal Injury Mastermind (PIM) powered by Rankings.io is on Instagram | YouTube | TikTok

Lee el blogpost completo: https://ecctrainings.com/cuidado-de-quemaduras-en-zonas-remotas-versus-combate-lecciones-cruzadas-entre-las-guias-jts-y-wms Únete al ECCnetwork en Circle: Sé parte de la comunidad que transforma la educación en emergencias. Activa tu membresía gratuita y accede a contenido exclusivo, foros y eventos. 

Send us a textDr. Elizabeth Foglia, University of Pennsylvania/Children's Hospital of Philadelphia and scientific PI for AAP's DRIVE (Delivery Room Intervention and Evaluation) Network, discusses building a 3,000-hospital US collaboration to understand real-world delivery room practices. Despite robust evidence supporting supraglottic airways for PPV in infants 34+ weeks, surveys show minimal provider use—representing a significant evidence-to-practice gap. The SUGAR trial compares implementation strategies to increase adoption using hybrid effectiveness-implementation design. DRIVE currently includes 50 hospitals with diverse delivery room configurations, providing infrastructure for pragmatic trials, quality improvement, and benchmarking. First network-wide meeting launches multi-center QI project in February. Sites can join via AAP DRIVE Network website. Support the showAs always, feel free to send us questions, comments, or suggestions to our email: nicupodcast@gmail.com. You can also contact the show through Instagram or Twitter, @nicupodcast. Or contact Ben and Daphna directly via their Twitter profiles: @drnicu and @doctordaphnamd. The papers discussed in today's episode are listed and timestamped on the webpage linked below. Enjoy!

We will examine the volatile 2026 forecast for the U.S. dollar, which Morgan Stanley predicts will decline to a 2021 low by mid-year before staging a significant rebound.Today's Stocks & Topics: Warner Bros. Discovery, Inc. (WBD), Market Wrap, Defiance AI & Power Infrastructure ETF (AIPO), “US Dollar Volatility: The Choppy Path to Stabilization in 2026”, Stryker Corporation (SYK), Intuitive Surgical Inc. (ISRG), Impinj, Inc. (PI), U.S. Consumer Sentiment, Fidelity ZERO Large Cap Index (FNILX), U.S. Global Jets ETF (JETS), A-I and Shopping.Our Sponsors:* Check out Incogni: https://incogni.com/investtalk* Check out Invest529: https://www.invest529.com* Check out NordProtect: https://nordprotect.com/investalk* Check out Progressive: https://www.progressive.com* Check out Quince: https://quince.com/INVEST* Check out TruDiagnostic and use my code INVEST for a great deal: https://www.trudiagnostic.comAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brands

On this week's episode of Great Practice, Great Life, you're in for a ride. Steve Riley sits down with attorney Brad Wiewel, whose career took a wild turn in 1979 when a client's husband fired a bullet into Brad's car because Brad was fighting too hard in a divorce case involving a stripper. That single ka-pow moment launched Brad's 45-year obsession with what he calls Defensive Law; a proactive, slightly paranoid, and incredibly effective system for protecting yourself, your team, and your license when clients lie, forget, or turn on you. This is hands down the most practical malpractice-prevention episode we've recorded, and it applies to every practice area: PI, family, estate planning, elder law, business—all of it. Brad walks through the exact tools that have kept him grievance-free and malpractice-suit-free for more than four decades. You'll hear about the bulletproof fee agreements packed with bold disclaimers, including the now famous "we can fire you for personality conflicts" clause he makes clients read aloud. You'll learn why every third party, kids, financial advisors, new spouses, sign a non-representation letter the second they enter the room. He shares his library of 100+ one-page "Against My Advice" disclosures clients sign when they insist on risky decisions, the settlement confirmation letter every PI lawyer should require before accepting a dime, and how he turns high-risk fact patterns into written client admissions that stop surprises in court or in front of the bar. And yes, he reveals his dead-simple signing ceremony protocol: hand clients the stack, leave the room for 15 minutes, come back to flawless signatures. No drama. No complaints. No gaps. Brad doesn't deal in theory; he built one of the largest estate planning practices in Texas on these systems. He credits them for never having a single successful grievance or malpractice claim in 45 years. If you've ever lost sleep wondering, "Did I document that conversation well enough?" or heard a former client shout, "You never told me that!", this episode gives you the exact playbook to make those nightmares disappear. Fair warning: After this conversation, you'll never look at a client the same way again. (You'll see every single one as a potential plaintiff, and you'll sleep like a baby because your files will finally be bulletproof.) In this episode, you will hear: The wild "stripper and the bullet" story that birthed Defensive Law Why every client is a potential plaintiff (and how to sleep anyway) The 5 documents that have kept Brad 45 years grievance-free Fee-agreement clauses that kill most problems on day one The 60-second fix when kids or advisors sit in your meeting 100+ one-page "I'm doing this against your advice" disclosures The settlement letter every PI lawyer must get signed How to make clients admit the real facts — in writing The signing-room trick that makes clients happily sign everything An instant checklist to make your entire practice bulletproof Subscribe & Review Never miss an episode. Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube. ⭐Like what you hear? A quick review helps more people find the show.⭐ Supporting Resources: Brad Wiewel:  www.texastrustlaw.com/learn-about-us/attorney-brad-wiewel Texas Trust Law, PLLC: www.texastrustlaw.com Atticus Workshops: atticusadvantage.com/workshops Atticus Newsletter The Path to A Great Practice Great Life Workshop:  atticusadvantage.com/workshops/the-path-to-a-great-practice-great-life If there's a topic you would like us to cover on an upcoming episode, please email us at steve.riley@atticusadvantage.com. Curious about growing your own practice? Contact Atticus to see whether our law firm coaching can help you strengthen attorney success, refine your law firm business strategy, and build a practice that actually supports your life. You can also sign up for our newsletter to get practical insights on how to grow a law firm: from law firm leadership and management to marketing, hiring, operations, culture, and profitability, so you can build a Great Practice and a Great Life.

In this hysterical episode of the Advanced Refrigeration Podcast, hosts Brett Wetzel and Kevin Compass tackle a series of CO2 startup disasters and share amusing tales from the field. From maneuvering oversized manifolds to enduring 43-degree machine rooms, the guys recount their week's most head-scratching moments. They also break down tricky Danfoss configurations, including mysterious PI calculations and the intricacies of addressing E1K controllers. Whether you're in it for the technical deep dives or just the chuckles, you're in for a wild refrigerant ride!

In this hysterical episode of the Advanced Refrigeration Podcast, hosts Brett Wetzel and Kevin Compass tackle a series of CO2 startup disasters and share amusing tales from the field. From maneuvering oversized manifolds to enduring 43-degree machine rooms, the guys recount their week's most head-scratching moments. They also break down tricky Danfoss configurations, including mysterious PI calculations and the intricacies of addressing E1K controllers. Whether you're in it for the technical deep dives or just the chuckles, you're in for a wild refrigerant ride!

Learn a new phrase and make your English sound more natural and interesting. Words We Use is a bilingual series that helps you understand idioms like 'to shout'. - Learn a new phrase and make your English sound more natural and interesting. Words We Use is a bilingual series that helps you understand idioms like 'to shout'. Piɔɔc wɛt yam ku looi thööŋ English bi ya pïŋ ke ye lɔ gɛɛi ku nhiaar. Wël Yeku Luööi ee ke ci looi thook tɛ̈ɛ̈kic ke biööth ke ciok ku bïk yïïn kuɔɔny dɛɛtic wël ci thiäänkɔ̈ɔ̈th cimen, 'tɔ̈ɔ̈ŋ yïpuöu'

Pastor John Pérez, nos comparte: ¡Milagros, Desatan Milagros!– Milagro Tras Milagro (PT2)“MILAGRO TRAS MILAGRO”¿Piensas que nunca has experimentado un milagro en tu vida? Piénsalo otra vez.¡TU VIDA ES UN MILAGRO!En esta nueva serie exploraremos cómo Dios ha demostrado Su poder, Su amor y Su fidelidad a través de milagros que cambiaron la historia… y cómo esos mismos milagros siguen resonando en nuestras vidas hoy.Cada mensaje nos llevará a mirar más allá de lo natural, a reconocer la mano de Dios en medio de nuestras batallas, y a creer nuevamente que lo imposible es posible para Él.Nuestro deseo es que cada persona descubra que Dios nunca ha dejado —ni dejará— de moverse… Él sigue obrando MILAGRO TRAS MILAGRO.¡Vive Hoy! y Escucha Ya!- EXPERIENCIA - TRANSFORMACIÓN – EMPODERAMIENTOhttps://www.facebook.com/775elcordero 

Discover all of the podcasts in our network, search for specific episodes, get the Optimal Living Daily workbook, and learn more at: OLDPodcast.com. Episode 1892: Will Hoekenga shares four foundational copywriting techniques that every storyteller can use to write with more clarity, discipline, and impact. From replacing creative blocks with deadlines to gathering specific details and ideas in a swipe file, these practical strategies help writers consistently produce compelling work. Read along with the original article(s) here: https://goinswriter.com/copywriting/ Quotes to ponder: "Need to get more curious about life? Ask questions. Listen closely. Dig deep beneath the surface of everyday life." "Never underestimate the power of a well-researched story." "There's a lot to be learned from copywriting." Episode references: Writing Tools by Roy Peter Clark: https://www.amazon.com/Writing-Tools-Essential-Strategies-Writer/dp/0316014990 Life of Pi by Yann Martel: https://www.amazon.com/Life-Pi-Yann-Martel/dp/0156027321 The Art of Work by Jeff Goins: https://www.amazon.com/Art-Work-Written-Called-Work/dp/0718022076 Real Artists Don't Starve by Jeff Goins: https://www.amazon.com/Real-Artists-Dont-Starve-Creative/dp/0718086260  

! JOIN SHERI HORN HASAN for this & more Astro News You Can Use! @ https://www.karmicevolution.com/astrologically-speaking which drops today, December 5!When a full Moon occurs, the Moon reflects the light of the Sun back onto itself, thus revealing its shadow side which the Moon then implores the Sun to release. In this case, the Jupiter-ruled Sun's shadow often includes the tendency toward hubris, or arrogance. And, since Jupiter often represents the “king,” “ruler,” or “leader,” while the Moon often rules “the people,” it's easy to put this into a current context in the U.S. as its president tries to gerrymander his way to hubristically maintain future control over those living here.Yesterday, as the Gemini Full Moon perfected at 13'04” Gemini at 3:14 p.m. PT & 6:14 p.m. ET on December 4, the Supreme Court announced its decision to let stand the Texas state gerrymander that would give its GOP five more U.S. House Representatives in the 2026 midterm elections.What's interesting about this particular Gemini Full Moon is that its squares the transiting mean nodal axis's Virgo South Node & Pisces North Node—which urges us to move way from trying to control everyone & everything & to let go & let it flow.The tension of this Gemini Full Moon thus creates a mutable grand cross, denoting a shift in the karmic axis as the heart (Moon) & the mind (Sun) cry out for integration. This combines with Mars in Sagittarius's approaching square to Saturn in Pisces, which perfects December 8, & portends a period of irritability & frustration, & cautions us to work concentratedly & carefully rather than succumbing to despair. While grand water trine formed between Mercury in Scorpio, Jupiter in Cancer, & Saturn & Neptune in Pisces at this Gemini Full Moon is touted as a way to get more deeply in touch with our feelings, it can also blind us to the emotional plight of others. That's because a grand water trine is subjective rather than objective. And as such, it can cause us to feel sorrier for ourselves than for others. However, awareness of this tendency now can save us from becoming emotionally immune to suffering of others.I CAN SEE CLEARLY NOW AS NEPTUNE STATIONS DIRECT IN PISCESThe latter is potentially more true than the former, given that Neptune--the planet of illusion, confusion, & delusion—which entered Aries on March 30 of this year, then stationed retrograde at 2'10” Aries on July 7, then moved back into 29-degrees of PI on October 22--is about to station direct @ 29'22” Pisces on December 10.It's during this retrograde period that “the powerful empathy between oneself & those who are helpless is a mirror of one's own inner helplessness,” explains Jungian astrologer Erin Sullivan in her book “Retrograde Planets, Traversing the Inner Landscape.”In other words “one really hopes in the process of helping others to help oneself,” Sullivan explains. To me, there is a strong element of “there, but for the grace of god, go I,” as well as the oft quoted proverb to “walk a mile in someone else's shoes before judging them” in Sullivan's explanation of the Neptune retrograde period.And, when we take into consideration the time span of NE's Rx period-- which was accompanied fairly closely with SA's station Rx on July 13 @ 1'56” Aries & his subsequent station direct at 25'09” PI on November 27—during which the two remained in fairly close transit--we can see even more clearly now in retrospect the dissolution of boundaries between the ego & the unconscious--in each of us individually as well as within the greater collective.All we need do, at least here in America, is remember how this period led to the passage in the U.S. Congress of Trump's touted “big beautiful bill” signed into law on July 4. And how--in addition to adding to the continued future financial inequality of Americans (by virtue of huge tax cuts for the rich)--resulted also in the huge increase in funding for the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration & Customs Enforcement. Because during its retrograde Neptune backtracks over potentially sensitive degrees, we might note now that this is what happened since Neptune crossed the the U.S. Sibly July 4, 1776, natal chart's IC & 4th House cusp at 1'03” Aries twice so far. Once direct, Neptune will hit this degree again circa January 28, 2026.In psychological astrology, Neptune in or ruling the 4th House (meaning Pisces is on its cusp) denotes what Jungian astrologer Liz Greene calls a ”weak father.” Given that we're looking at the chart of the birth of America, as Monty Python would say “say no more…” if you catch my drift & recognize that a president is known as “the father his country.”Saturn will reenter Aries on February 13 & conjoin with Neptune exact @0'45” Aries on February 20 at 11:53 a.m. ET. Saturn then reenters the U.S. 4th House on February 23 & Neptune follows suit on February 28.When we synthesize these movements, we've got a lot of potential dissolution of foundations located at the very foundation of the U.S. Sibly chart—particularly related to the “father of the country.” Nuff said—for now…Be sure to tune in to learn more about all of this--including Mercury's opposition to Uranus December 10, the third quarter monthly lunar square of the Pisces Moon to the Sagittarius Sun & Mercury's entrance into Jupiter-ruled Sagittarius December 11!It all drops today December 5 at 11 a.m. PT & 2 p.m. ET @ https://www.karmicevolution.com/astrologically-speakingSee you then! Namaste...

We're joined by Brace Belden, co-host of the TrueAnon podcast. •They don't make heroin anymore•The Taco Bell connection•King of the libertarians•Kmele almost dies•You say Somali, I say Somalian, let's call the whole thing off•The people cut out of the Minnesota Somali fraud story•Does Ben Shapiro think we're white?•A Maoist small businessman•Certain liberties•Curtis Yarvin discovers YouTube•Yarvin = Slavoj Žižek of the right? •Libertarian Escape (the Piña Colada Song)•The cathedral•Brace, Citarella, and the new intellectual left•Mamdani “is fully a Democrat”•Nationalize Mr. Fruit•Body count•War is a force that gives us meaning•Call of Duty: Median Soldier•Brace is on the DHS shit list•Kmele spent more time at Occupy than Brace did•In China, the trains run on time•The DSA clappers•Don't let's start on Venezuela•Wistful for Colin Powell•Where are the drugs!?•The Grifters•The neoneocons•Thumbing the scale•Jeffrey Epstein, quintessential striver•The Chomsky connectionPrefer to watch & chat live with other members of the Fifthdom? This episode premieres over on our YouTube channel at 10am EST.Thanks for reading The Fifth Column (A Podcast)! This post is public so feel free to share it.Follow The Fifth ColumnYouTube: @wethefifthInstagram: @we.the.fifthX: @wethefifthTikTok: @wethefifthFacebook: @thefifthcolumn This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.wethefifth.com/subscribe

Marco Imarisio parla del viaggio del presidente russo in un Paese che è uno storico alleato, mentre sembra allontanarsi la pace in Ucraina. Giuseppe Guastella spiega perché la ex ministra degli Esteri si è dimessa da rettore del Collegio d'Europa, per l'inchiesta su presunta frode e corruzione nell'ambito della quale è stata prima fermata e poi rilasciata. Alessandro Trocino racconta le polemiche sulla presenza a «Più libri più liberi» di una casa editrice che pubblica testi fascisti e nazisti.I link di corriere.it:Putin a Delhi, le ragioni di un'alleanza storica e la «trappola della rupia»Federica Mogherini si dimette da rettore del Collegio d'Europa: «Ho sempre agito con rigore»«Più libri più liberi», dopo le polemiche (e la rinuncia di Zerocalcare) il Comune di Roma diserta la conferenza stampa di presentazione

Kevin Daisy interviews New York trial lawyer Arkady Frekhtman live at Law-Di-Gras. Arkady shares how his PI firm uses multiple office locations to strengthen Google Maps visibility, how his YouTube channel drives nationwide referrals, and why he is exploring AI and system improvements to scale. A concise look at modern PI firm growth through content, visibility, and trial-focused strategy. Chapters (00:00:00) - The Conference for Law Firms: Thinking Big(00:00:59) - How to Start a Personal Injury Firm in New York(00:02:43) - Law De Gras 2019: How to Grow the Firm(00:06:49) - Lardi Gras 2017 conference interview

Recorded at Law-Di-Gras, this episode features Jeremy Alters, founder of ClaimAngel, the first litigation funding marketplace in the country. Jeremy explains how his ethics journey inspired a transparent platform that protects both lawyers and clients by offering fair, low-rate funding options. He also discusses rapid adoption by major PI firms and how ClaimAngel is reshaping funding as a strategic tool for maximizing case value, Chapters (00:00:00) - Disbarred Lawyer on Claim Angel(00:00:58) - Developing Your Managing Partners Podcast(00:01:24) - ClaimAngel: The e-bay of Litigation Funding(00:03:08) - Disbarred Lawyer on Claim Angel(00:05:06) - Claim Angel

Neste episódio especial, gravado diretamente do Kurotel, Thaís conversa com a médica Mariela Silveira — Diretora do SPA médico e fundadora da ONG Mente Viva. Elas mergulham na ciência da felicidade, nos pilares da longevidade, no equilíbrio entre corpo e mente e na busca humana por uma vida mais plena. Mariela compartilha histórias, pesquisas e reflexões profundas sobre saúde integral, hábitos possíveis e o impacto real de parar, respirar e se observar. Um episódio para quem deseja viver melhor, viver mais — e, principalmente, viver com sentido.Vambora entender como esse sucesso aconteceu?Toda semana tem novo episódio no ar, pra não perder nenhum, siga: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/thaisroque/Instagram Thais: https://www.instagram.com/thaisroque/ Instagram DCNC: https://www.instagram.com/decaronanacarreira/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@decaronanacarreiraYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Decaronanacarreira?sub_confirmation=1Link do Kurotel:Insta - https://www.instagram.com/kuroteloficial/Mariela - https://www.instagram.com/dramarielasilveira/Mala de viagem:As sete leis - https://amzn.to/3KBKP0aAventuras de Pi - https://www.adorocinema.com/filmes/filme-54343/Gandhi - https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhi_(filme) Equipe que faz acontecer:Criação, roteiro e apresentação: Thais RoqueConsultoria de conteúdo: Beatriz FiorottoProdução: José Newton FonsecaSonorização e edição: Felipe DantasIdentidade Visual: João Magagnin

The second to last installment in our "Shadow Ticket" series is currently only available to subscribers in its entirety. Join the PPM Patreon today:patreon.com/ParaPowerMappingAlso, heads up - because of increasing automated censorship and flagging, I can no longer use music breaks on Spot°fy. To hear eps as originally intended, please listen on the Patreon or Substack.We're picking back up our brief, alternative history of American class violence, the anticommunist apparatus, and anti-syndicalist dynamite false flags, much wider spread than even I would have realized, this time honing in on a number of rhyming, causal & effective deep events rippling down the welded wrought iron links of the anchor chain of history, largely Chicago and Milwaukee concentric sagas of strike action and counterinsurgent reactions by the capitalist powers that be.File today's episode under: the Haymarket Affair; the Bay View Massacre at the North Chicago Rolling Mills steel foundry that left at least seven Polish, German, and Native workers dead the day following the bloodbath in the Windy City; the 8 Hour Work Day movement; the Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions (FOTLU), precursor to AFL; the snake Samuel Gompers; Milwaukee Central Labor Union socialist Paul Grottkau; Catholic Church Knights of Labor's Robert Shilling; Gov. Rusk; "shoot to kill" orders; Cpt. Treaumer muttering "halt" orders under his breath; the N. Chi Rolling Mills into Illinois Steel Company and then rolled up into US Steel come J.P. Morgan's Carnegie and otherwise monopolistic consolidation; Kosciusko Militia; FOTLU and Gomper's feud with the Knights of Labor; the labor significance of the phrase "amalgamated" (formed of individual craft unions) and what this says about ST protagonist Hicks McTaggart's work as strikebreaking PI for UNamalgamated Ops; Pynchon gets real Hobsbawmian, Gramscian, and Adamic-ian with it; "Haymarket FRAME-UP job"; explicitly references Bay View and Rolling Mills; Debs Rebellion; Pullman Strike; Henry Clay Frick nearly merc-ed by Berkman; the Gov. Steunenberg dynamiting; Big Bill Haywood's framing close shave; James McParland; Harry Orchard's confessions under duress; Pinkerton's; more US Steel; Mine Owners Association; Clarence Darrow; WFM; Wobblies; the McNamara Affair, the LA Times Building Bombing, and brothers J.J. and J.B.; surprise guilty pleas kneecapping the Job Harriman socialist mayoral candidacy in LA; spies catch Darrow bribing jurors?; Propaganda of the Deed comes to Milwaukee... or maybe not; the Italian Evangelical Church; ex-Catholic priest Rev. August Giuliani, MPD and BOI/DOJ informant; rabble rousing in the Third Ward, singing jingoistic songs, proselytizing to Catholics (which they didn't take kindly to from an apostate priest cum Protestant), and offering to pay for any anti-war anarchists or leftists of varying stripes' return tickets to the boot of Italy, all painting a picture of the gadfly pastor acting on behalf of federal law enforcement and local business interests with his troublemaking in the Ward; faced down by anarchists like Maria Nardini; the Bay View Riots, multiple Italian immigrant residents of Cream City killed by officers of the law with false flag violence (Antonio Fornasier and August Marinelli killed in the fray); the Milwaukee Station House Bombing of 1917; the comedy of errors; single deadliest day for law enforcement in American history up until 9/11; the curious lag in MPD response to the bomb's arrival at Giuliani's church; the claim the IMOPIO or infernal machine was anarchist made being sourced from BOI agent Julius Brown and possibly a Milwaukee congressman by way of MPD Capt. John T. Sullivan; the Galleanisti, followers of anarcho-communist Deed-Propagandist and advocate of various nitroglycerin and lead means for affecting change, squarely in the crosshairs; and much much more, breadcrumb trails we'll resume tracing next time.

We had the great honour of producing a podcast for the ALBA-IBRO Diversity Podcast.This podcast series is a unique resource, a guide that will help you to adress the difficult issue of transitioning from postdoc to team leader. We hope it will inspire you as much as it has transformed our vision of academia !The ALBA-IBRO Diversity Podcast 'From Postdoc to PI' is organized with the support of the International Brain Research Organization, a founding partner of the ALBA Network.This podcast is hosted by The Lonely Pipette, produced by Exaltia and organised with the support of IBRO.Enjoy listening and see you next Wednesday for the broadcast of this limited series, which will be released every two weeks! The ALBA Diversity Podcast interviews neuroscientists from underrepresented groups to better understand their hurdles and victories, and what keeps them going in today's brain research community. In season 2, with IBROs' support, we focus on the transition from postdoc to PI, highlighting the unique challenges faced by postdocs and early-career PIs worldwide. By sharing their experiences and strategies for overcoming obstacles, the podcast aims to provide valuable insights for scientists navigating this critical career stage.To find out more about Renaud and Jonathan : Twitter : https://twitter.com/LePourpre LinkedIn : https://www.linkedin.com/in/renaudpourpre/ Twitter : https://twitter.com/Epigenetique LinkedIn : https://www.linkedin.com/in/jonathanweitzman/%20

On this week's episode, Maria sits down with attorney Sabrina Visram. They discuss starting a firm six months out of law school, learning from failures, the importance of networking, how to build an effective team, and the future of PI. Get in touch with Sabrina at https://www.vg.law/ Guest Sabrina Visram (@sabrinavisram on Instagram) is a founding partner of VG Law Group. Prior to founding VG Law Group, Ms. Visram has dedicated her practice to civil justice. She has spent her years overseeing and managing all forms of personal injury matters and negotiating settlements in the value of millions. Host Maria Monroy (@marialawrank on Instagram) is the Co-founder and President of LawRank, a leading SEO company for law firms since 2013. She has a knack for breaking down complex topics to make them more easily accessible and started Tip the Scales to share her knowledge with listeners like you. _____ LawRank grows your law firm with SEO Our clients saw a 384% increase in first-time calls and a 603% growth in traffic in 12 months. Get your free competitor report at https://lawrank.com/report. Subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app Rate us 5 stars on iTunes and Spotify Watch us on YouTube Follow us on Instagram and TikTok

Au menu de la deuxième heure des GG du mercredi 3 décembre 2025 : "Piétons, cyclistes, automobilistes : tous délinquants ?" et "Faut-il bannir certaines répliques célèbres de Miss France ?", avec Bruno Poncet, cheminot, Antoine Diers, consultant auprès des entreprises et Fatima Ait Bounoua, professeure de Français.

A 10h, ce mercredi 3 décembre 2025, les GG : Bruno Poncet, cheminot, Antoine Diers, consultant auprès des entreprises et Fatima Ait Bounoua, professeure de Français, débattent de : Piétons, cyclistes, automobilistes : tous délinquants ?

On this week's episode, Maria sits down with attorney Sabrina Visram. They discuss starting a firm six months out of law school, learning from failures, the importance of networking, how to build an effective team, and the future of PI. Get in touch with Sabrina at https://www.vg.law/ Guest Sabrina Visram (@sabrinavisram on Instagram) is a founding partner of VG Law Group. Prior to founding VG Law Group, Ms. Visram has dedicated her practice to civil justice. She has spent her years overseeing and managing all forms of personal injury matters and negotiating settlements in the value of millions. Host Maria Monroy (@marialawrank on Instagram) is the Co-founder and President of LawRank, a leading SEO company for law firms since 2013. She has a knack for breaking down complex topics to make them more easily accessible and started Tip the Scales to share her knowledge with listeners like you. _____ LawRank grows your law firm with SEO Our clients saw a 384% increase in first-time calls and a 603% growth in traffic in 12 months. Get your free competitor report at https://lawrank.com/report. Subscribe to us on your favorite podcast app Rate us 5 stars on iTunes and Spotify Watch us on YouTube Follow us on Instagram and TikTok

Première nuit de la Transat Café L'Or : en pleine tempête, le bateau d'Erwan Le Draoulec chavire et se remplit d'eau. Piégés à l'intérieur du voilier retourné, presque en apnée, Erwan et son coéquipier se pensent condamnés. L'alerte finit par passer. Un hélicoptère de la gendarmerie les extraits in extremis... Au même moment, les sauveteurs de la SNSM se lancent dans une mission quasi impossible : tenter de sauver le voilier, en pleine nuit, dans une mer déchainée. Marqué à vie par leur courage, Erwan rêve aujourd'hui de les emmener naviguer avec lui. Yoann Sanson, patron de la station SNSM, qui a mené ce sauvetage hors norme est également invité de l'émission,Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Pier Giorgio Curti"Riflessi di solitudine"Un percorso tra psicoanalisi, pittura e filosofiaEdizioni ETSwww.edizioniets.comIn questo saggio, lo sguardo di uno psicoanalista che dialoga con la filosofia e l'arte si posa su un tema tanto universale quanto sfuggente: la solitudine. Non come esperienza da definire, ma come spazio da attraversare. Attraverso un percorso volutamente frammentario – simile a una visita in una mostra immaginaria – il lettore è invitato a camminare tra specchi, prismi e anamorfosi, figure simboliche che mettono in scena l'identità come movimento, disallineamento, possibilità.Il testo intreccia storia delle idee e storia delle immagini, proponendo una cartografia della soggettività moderna: instabile, riflessa, decentrata. In questo intreccio, l'arte non è solo oggetto estetico, ma superficie rivelatrice dell'animo umano, luogo di pensiero e affetto, esercizio dello sguardo obliquo. Più che spiegare, questo libro mostra: mostra come la solitudine apra squarci inattesi sull'identità, come il vuoto possa farsi soglia, e come il senso emerga, a volte, solo nel disorientamento.Pier Giorgio Curti è psicologo, psicoterapeuta, psicoanalista, saggista, direttore delle strutture O.A.M.I. di Livorno, supervisore individuale e istituzionale, direttore della collana editoriale “Oltre la disabilità” pubblicata da ETS. Da oltre trent'anni la sua ricerca opera nei margini tra psicoanalisi, filosofia e arte. Autore e curatore di numerose pubblicazioni.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

Nel The Essential di mercoledì 3 dicembre, Chiara Piotto parla di: 00:00 Prada è riuscita alla fine a comprarsi Versace; 03:23 l'inchiesta per corruzione che coinvolge Federica Mogherini e altri due diplomatici italiani a Bruxelles; 07:15 l'appello di alcuni intellettuali italiani per escludere una casa editrice dalla fiera della piccola e media editoria (Più libri più liberi) a Roma. Iscriviti a Spinelli, la newsletter di Will che racconta l'UE da Bruxelles: https://spinelliwillmedia.substack.com/  Iscriviti ai corsi 100% online in Digital Journalism e Branded Storytelling della New Media Academy, la scuola di Chora e Will! Ultimi posti disponibili, scopri il programma e i docenti su ⁠⁠⁠https://newmediacademy.com/⁠⁠⁠ o scrivici a ⁠⁠⁠info@newmediacademy.com⁠⁠ Presentiamo la terza stagione del podcast Mele Marce, giovedì 4 dicembre alle 18:30 a Milano, in via della Moscova 18. Iscriviti qui: https://www.lcalex.it/presentazione-di-mele-marce/ Giovedì 11 dicembre a Roma al Teatro delle Comete, lo Story Tour di Chora e Will insieme a Enel: uno spettacolo per raccontare l'innovazione con Mario Calabresi, Simone Pieranni, Riccardo Haupt e Clara Morelli. Iscriviti qui: https://www.eventbrite.com/cc/enel-story-tour-a-roma-4797067 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Did you like the episode? Send me a text and let me know!!Jesse (Skoob) & Pi (AI Assistant) Focus: Entrepreneur Mindset, Self-Sabotage, Psychology of SuccessWhy do entrepreneurs often self-sabotage just when they start winning? In this episode of Business Conversations with Pi, Jesse and his AI co-host explore the Upper Limit Problem—a psychological barrier that caps our happiness and success—and provide a 5-step roadmap to break through it.

Mohli bychom o tom mluvit týdny, ale stejně se nejspíš nedopídíme k jednoznačné odpovědi: proč fotbalový videosystém VAR chybuje, ačkoli má prakticky všechny předpoklady k tomu, aby byl dokonalý?Brunátný sparťan Matěj Ryneš se přiřítí k pardubickému soupeři Krobotovi, který nestoudně provokuje a vysmívá se padlému favoritovi i jeho fanouškům. Ano, bylo to od pardubického vůdce stupidní gesto, možná zralé na žlutou kartu za nesportovní chování, ale podstatné je, že Ryneš za svůj útok nedostal červenou. Ne, nevyloučili ho za facku do tváře.„Chyba!“ zdůraznila komise rozhodčích, která dohlíží na ošemetné momenty v ligových zápasech.Druhý incident nastal v zápase Slavie se Slováckem, kdy se útočník Tomáš Chorý skácel k zemi a červenobílí následně z penalty vstřelili gól. Pokutový kop neměl podle komise nastat.I kvůli tomu jsou výkony rozhodčích znovu pod palbou. Proč nejmodernější technika, kterou rozhodčí využívají, neumí napravit lidská selhání? Straní se snad ve fotbalové lize silnějším? Také o tom se diskutuje v nejnovějším díle podcastu MVP, který zdaleka neřeší jen rozhodčí. Soudí třeba, jestli je pyrotechnika na fotbale zločin (protože Ajaxu kvůli nebezpečné ohnivé show v nizozemské lize odložili zápas) nebo jak slávistickému kouči Jindřichu Trpišovskému sekne nová módní kolekce, kterou v charitativním projektu představil záložník Lukáš Provod.---Fotbal ze všech možných i nemožných úhlů pohledu. MVP jsou bývalí fotbaloví profesionálové Karel Tvaroh, Antonín Rosa, Tomáš Kučera a zkušený novinář Jan Palička, šéf sportovní rubriky Seznam Zpráv. Společně s námi hledejte nejdůležitější hráče, trenéry, přestupy, akce, problémy. Do hloubky a s humorem. I vy můžete být MVP. Každé úterý na webu Seznam Zpráv.Odebírejte na Podcasty.cz, Apple Podcasts nebo Spotify.Sledujte nás na Stream.cz nebo YouTube.Máte návrh, jak podcast vylepšit? Nebo nás chcete pochválit? Pište na audio@sz.cz.

Join The MisFitNation as host Rich LaMonica welcomes US Army Veteran Lori McVicar-Peltan — MP pioneer, private investigator, actress, comedian, and the definition of grit. Lori's journey is unlike any other. She served in the first group of women to go coed at Fort McClellan in 1978, trained as the first female Military Police boxer, and served on the streets of Frankfurt. After the military, she became the first female to start her own PI firm in Buffalo, NY, earned top investigative honors at AIG, and now continues her mission as a grandmother of 11, actress in the film Lucy and the Lake Monster, presenter at the VETTYS, and graduate of a comedy writing program. In this episode, we dive into trailblazing military history, resilience, humor, survival, and the courage to keep reinventing yourself through every season of life.

TRASCRIZIONE https://italianwithgiuliaprofessor.blogspot.com/2025/12/parole-della-patente-italiana-lingua.htmlCiao! Benvenuto in questo nuovo episodio del podcast “Italian with Giulia”. Oggi vediamo insieme cinque parole molto utili per chi sta studiando per la patente. Sono parole che trovi spesso nei test, ma dette in modo semplice così capisci tutto senza stress. Andiamo!La prima parola è spazio totale di arresto. Questo nome sembra difficile, ma in realtà è semplice: lo spazio totale di arresto è la distanza che serve alla macchina per fermarsi completamente. Cioè, da quando tu vedi un pericolo e decidi di frenare, fino al momento in cui la macchina si ferma davvero. Questo spazio dipende dalla velocità e dalle condizioni della strada.La seconda parola è tempo di reazione. È il tempo che passa tra il momento in cui vedi un pericolo e il momento in cui cominci a frenare. Per esempio: vedi un pedone che attraversa, e dopo un attimo freni. Quel piccolo “attimo” è il tempo di reazione. Più sei attento, più il tuo tempo di reazione è veloce.La terza parola è consentire. Nei test della patente lo vedi spesso, e significa “permettere”. Per esempio: “Il semaforo in figura non consente di superare la velocità indicata”. Vuol dire che il semaforo non permette di andare più veloce del limite.La quarta parola è essere munito. È un'espressione un po' formale, e significa “avere con sé”. Nei test puoi trovare frasi come: “Il conducente deve essere munito di patente”, cioè il conducente deve avere la patente con sé, deve portarla.E l'ultima parola di oggi è la motrice. La motrice è la parte davanti di un veicolo pesante, come un camion. È la parte che ha il motore e che traina il rimorchio. Quindi, se vedi un camion con due parti, la motrice è quella che tira e guida tutto il resto.Bene, queste erano le parole di oggi! Spero che ti aiutino a capire meglio i test della patente e a studiare con più tranquillità. Ci sentiamo nel prossimo episodio!--GUARDA LE LIVE OGNI GIORNO SU TIKTOK PER PRENDERE LA PATENTE ITALIANA--content offered by: Giulia Mannocci- Italian as second and foreign language teacher (Certified with DITALS)- CILS Examiner & PLIDA examiner assistant- Ce.Co.L. interviewer and examiner- English, Spanish and Portuguese languages Teacher- On-site and Remote Conference Interpreter- Legal Interpreter & Translator- Proofreader and texts' editorLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/giulia-mannocci-interpretertranslator/LinkTree: https://linktr.ee/Italianwithgiulia 

1271. Arranco este episodio con nuevas recomendaciones de podcast, y lo hago con la sensación de estar retomando un hilo que nunca termina de romperse. Cada vez que vuelvo a estas recopilaciones me doy cuenta de que no son simples listas: son pequeñas cápsulas de memoria sonora que he ido construyendo a lo largo de los años. Hoy me toca visitar la vigésimo quinta entrega de este repaso, y, sinceramente, cada vez que me siento a revisar estas notas me sorprende pensar que ya van más de 260 recomendaciones solo dentro de este recopilatorio. Si cuento todas las que he mencionado desde que empecé este proyecto, creo que ya he sobrepasado de largo el millar.  Los proyectos repasados en este episodios son los siguientes:Actualidad informativa sobre derechos humanos:https://pod.link/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZXMuYW1uZXN0eS5vcmcvZW4tcXVlLWVzdGFtb3MvcG9kY2FzdC9wb2RjYXN0LnhtbAOído Pi:https://pod.link/aHR0cDovL2ZlZWRwcmVzcy5tZS9vaWRvcGkEl Porkast:https://pod.link/1230966429NBACast:https://pod.link/1292564813Valencia Destroy:https://pod.link/1286668201Territorio Cover:https://pod.link/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5pdm9veC5jb20vZmVlZF9mZ19mMTQ3NDgyNF9maWx0cm9fMS54bWwGol en las gaunas:https://pod.link/1091034393DayToDay:https://pod.link/905646372Bacteriófagos:https://pod.link/bacteriofagos_____________El ciclo 2026 de Podnights Madrid ya está en marcha y puedes apoyarlo a través de la campaña de Verkami. Consigue tu abono de temporada, podcast en directo, merchandising o patrocinio con descuento a través de este enlace: https://podnightsmadrid.com/_____________ ¡Gracias por pasarte 'Al otro lado del micrófono' un día más para seguir aprendiendo sobre podcasting! Si quieres descubrir cómo puedes unirte a la comunidad o a los diferentes canales donde está presente este podcast, te invito a visitar https://alotroladodelmicrofono.com/unete Además, puedes apoyar el proyecto mediante un pequeño impulso mensual, desde un granito de café mensual hasta un brunch digital. Descubre las diferentes opciones entrando en: https://alotroladodelmicrofono.com/cafe. También puedes apoyar el proyecto a través de tus compras en Amazon mediante mi enlace de afiliados https://alotroladodelmicrofono.com/amazon La voz que puedes escuchar en la intro del podcast es de Juan Navarro Torelló (PoniendoVoces) y el diseño visual es de Antonio Poveda. La dirección, grabación y locución corre a cargo de Jorge Marín. La sintonía que puedes escuchar en cada capítulo ha sido creada por Jason Show y se titula: 2 Above Zero.  'Al otro lado del micrófono' es una creación de EOVE Productora.

durée : 00:59:49 - Allons-y voir ! - par : Patrick Boucheron - Quelle marche a raté le graveur néerlandais M.C Escher pour que ses œuvres peuplent à ce point nos imaginaires sans se faire une place dans l'histoire de l'art ? Pièges à regard, les escaliers impossibles de ce maître de l'illusion mettent nos esprits sens dessus dessous. - réalisation : Laurence Millet - invités : Jean-Hubert Martin Historien de l'art, conservateur, directeur d'institution et commissaire d'expositions; Sébastien Rongier écrivain, philosophe et théoricien du cinéma; Sophie Cras Maître de conférences en histoire de l'art contemporain à l'université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1); Mathieu Potte-Bonneville Philosophe et directeur du département Culture et création du Centre Pompidou

Conversación con los autores del caso clínico publicado en International Journal of Emergency Medicine (2025) En este episodio del ECCpodcast, conversamos con los autores del caso "Cardiopulmonary resuscitation-induced consciousness in an elderly patient: a case report in the prehospital setting"—un fenómeno sorprendente y todavía poco comprendido: la conciencia inducida por RCP (CPRIC). Hablamos con Jose Daniel Yusty-Prada y Jose Luis Piñeros-Alvarez, quienes documentaron la historia de un paciente de 80 años que, sin haber recuperado pulso, comenzó a moverse, hacer sonidos y quitarse el equipo… durante las compresiones torácicas. Este caso abre una conversación fundamental sobre la fisiología, el manejo clínico, la ética y la capacitación necesaria para enfrentar CPRIC en entornos reales. Contexto del Caso El paciente colapsó en un área pública, rápidamente reconocido como un paro cardíaco presenciado. Los testigos iniciaron compresiones inmediatas, y un equipo BLS llegó con un AED, confirmando un ritmo desfibrilable. Durante los ciclos iniciales de RCP, el paciente comenzó a: flexionar las piernas, mover brazos, intentar remover el BVM y los parches, vocalizar sonidos, y mover la cabeza. Todo esto sin pulso palpable y sin signos de perfusión sostenida. Los movimientos desaparecían al detener las compresiones y reaparecían al reanudarlas: un patrón clásico de CPRIC. Esto provocó interrupciones prematuras por parte del equipo, dudas entre los testigos e incluso conflictos psicológicos en los rescatistas, quienes inicialmente pensaron que el paciente "despertaba". Finalmente, tras múltiples desfibrilaciones y sin sedación disponible en protocolo, se logró ROSC. ¿Qué es CPR-Induced Consciousness (CPRIC)? Los autores explican que CPRIC es un fenómeno real, probablemente subdiagnosticado, en el cual un paciente sin pulso presenta: Formas interferentes Intentar quitarse dispositivos Empujar a los rescatistas Movimientos coordinados Vocalizaciones Mover cabeza, brazos o piernas Formas no interferentes Parpadeo Mirada fija o seguimiento Suspiros Movimientos mínimos La evidencia señala que CPRIC ocurre más en: paros presenciados, ritmos desfibrilables, paro de causa cardiaca, CPR de alta calidad, y pacientes sin daño cerebral previo severo. Cada vez vemos más casos porque estamos dando mejor RCP, con mayor perfusión cerebral y más equipos con feedback. Retos del Caso: Técnica, logística y psicología Uno de los aspectos más valiosos del episodio es cuando los autores discuten cómo el fenómeno impacta al equipo. 1. Interrupciones prematuras Los movimientos llevaron al equipo a detener compresiones 30–40 segundos antes del análisis del AED, y esto puede comprometer el éxito de la desfibrilación. 2. Manejo de vía aérea Los movimientos orales hicieron imposible avanzar más allá del OPA + BVM. Intentar insertar una supraglótica se volvió riesgoso. 3. Interferencia del público Familiares y testigos gritaban que el paciente estaba "despertando" y pedían detener la RCP. Esto modificó la toma de decisiones del equipo. 4. Dilema ético y emocional Los autores describen la experiencia como "desconcertante", incluso sabiendo que el paciente estaba en VF refractaria.   Sedación en CPRIC: ¿Cuándo? ¿Cómo? ¿Con qué? El artículo y los autores coinciden en que la evidencia actual favorece el uso de ketamina para manejar CPRIC interferente: 0.5–1 mg/kg IV o bolos de 50–100 mg Ventajas: No compromete presión arterial No deprime respiración Inicio muy rápido Ayuda en estrés psicológico post-evento Sin embargo: La mayoría de los sistemas en Latinoamérica no tienen protocolos Providers temen administrar sedación en pleno paro No existe guía formal de AHA o ERC ILCOR solo tiene un best practice statement Los autores recalcan que la sedación debe considerarse solo si CPRIC interfiere con las maniobras. Lecciones para EMS y emergencias Los autores destacan tres grandes enseñanzas: 1. CPRIC no es ROSC Si no hay pulso, no hay circulación espontánea, aunque el paciente hable o se mueva. 2. La educación pública es crucial Los testigos pueden ejercer presión equivocada. Es necesario explicar durante la escena qué está pasando. 3. Los sistemas deben crear protocolos ya Incluyendo: reconocimiento temprano decisiones sobre sedación documentación comunicación con familiares entrenamiento en simulación Por qué este caso es importante Este artículo es uno de los pocos reportes en un paciente geriátrico, resalta desafíos culturales en Latinoamérica y propone la urgente necesidad de estandarización internacional. CPRIC seguirá aumentando porque la RCP sigue mejorando. Y si no lo reconocemos, aumentarán: interrupciones innecesarias, conflictos en escena, mala calidad de RCP, y peor pronóstico. Llamado a la acción para la comunidad Si este episodio te hizo reflexionar: ðŸ'‰ Únete al ECCnetwork: https://ecctrainings.circle.so ðŸ'‰ Conoce nuestros cursos premium: ACLS, Manejo Avanzado de Vía Aérea, Emergency Nursing, Critical Care, TCCC-CMC www.ecctrainings.com ðŸ'‰ Lee el artículo completo: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12245-025-01032-w Yusty-Prada, J.D., Portuguez-Jaramillo, N.E. & Piñeros-Alvarez, J.L. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation-induced consciousness in an elderly patient: a case report in the prehospital setting. Int J Emerg Med 18, 230 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12245-025-01032-w

Welcome to episode 307 of Grow Your Law Firm, hosted by Ken Hardison. In this episode, Ken welcomes Ed Levy, creator of I Love My PI Lawyer—a curated client-gifting and referral system for personal injury firms. After two decades in promotional marketing for brands like Porsche, Gallo Wines, and major agencies, Ed spotted a gap: PI firms were under-leveraging their happiest audience. His program turns thoughtful, high-perceived-value gifts into stronger relationships, better reviews, and consistent referrals, without looking like advertising. What you'll learn about in this episode: 1. Client Gifting That Actually Moves the Needle - Why gifts must feel personal (not promo) to change client attitudes - How "high perceived value" (typically $25–$35+) beats swag every time 2. Timing & Touchpoints Across the Case - Best moments to gift: onboarding, mid-case, and 30–60 days post-settlement - How mid-case gifting calms nerves and post-settlement gifting says "not forgotten" 3. Design, Messaging & Differentiation - Crafting firm-specific designs and note cards that tell why this gift was chosen - Removing calls-to-action so the gift strengthens trust (not sells) 4. Execution Without the Headaches - Creative, production, warehousing, and weekly fulfillment handled for you - Practical ranges with glassware, blankets, tech, and more 5. ROI, Referrals & Ethics Nuance - How a 1–3% referral lift can pay for the entire program - Ideas for past-client/referrer tiers—plus watching state-bar rules on gifts   Resources:  Website: edventurepromotions.com/ilovemypilawyer LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/edlevy Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ilovemypilawyer/  Additional Resources:    https://www.pilmma.org/the-mastermind-effect https://www.pilmma.org/resources https://www.pilmma.org/mastermind AI for PI Expo:   www.pilmma.org/ai-for-pi-expo

I am Rolf Claessen and together with my co-host Ken Suzan I am welcoming you to episode 169 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Prof. Aloys Hüttermann, co-founder of my patent law firm Michalski Hüttermann & Partner and a true expert on the Unified Patent Court. He has written several books about the new system and we talk about all the things that plaintiffs and defendants can learn from the first decisions of the court and what they mean for strategic decisions of the parties involved. But before we jump into this very interesting interview, I have news for you! The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is planning rule changes that would make it virtually impossible for third parties to challenge invalid patents before the patent office. Criticism has come from the EFF and other inventor rights advocates: the new rules would play into the hands of so-called non-practicing entities (NPEs), as those attacked would have few cost-effective ways to have questionable patents deleted. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) reports a new record in international patent applications: in 2024, around 3.7 million patent applications were filed worldwide – an increase of 4.9% over the previous year. The main drivers were Asian countries (China alone accounted for 1.8 million), while demand for trademark protection has stabilized after the pandemic decline. US rapper Eminem is taking legal action in Australia against a company that sells swimwear under the name “Swim Shady.” He believes this infringes on his famous “Slim Shady” brand. The case illustrates that even humorous allusions to well-known brand names can lead to legal conflicts. A new ruling by the Unified Patent Court (UPC) demonstrates its cross-border impact. In “Fujifilm v. Kodak,” the local chamber in Mannheim issued an injunction that extends to the UK despite Brexit. The UPC confirmed its jurisdiction over the UK parts of a European patent, as the defendant Kodak is based in a UPC member state. A dispute over standard patents is looming at the EU level: the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) of the European Parliament voted to take the European Commission to the European Court of Justice. The reason for this is the Commission’s controversial withdrawal of a draft regulation on the licensing of standard-essential patents (SEPs). Parliament President Roberta Metsola is to decide by mid-November whether to file the lawsuit. In trademark law, USPTO Director Squires reported on October 31, 2025, that a new unit (“Trademark Registration Protection Office”) had removed approximately 61,000 invalid trademark applications from the registries. This cleanup of the backlog relieved the examining authority and accelerated the processing of legitimate applications. Now let's jump into the interview with Aloys Hüttermann: The Unified Patent Court Comes of Age – Insights from Prof. Aloys Hüttermann The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has moved from a long-discussed project to a living, breathing court system that already shapes patent enforcement in Europe. In a recent IP Fridays interview, Prof. Aloys Hüttermann – founder and equity partner at Michalski · Hüttermann & Partner and one of the earliest commentators on the UPC – shared his experiences from the first years of practice, as well as his view on how the UPC fits into the global patent litigation landscape. This article summarises the key points of that conversation and is meant as an accessible overview for in-house counsel, patent attorneys and business leaders who want to understand what the UPC means for their strategy. How Prof. Hüttermann Became “Mr. UPC” Prof. Hüttermann has been closely involved with the UPC for more than a decade. When it became clear, around 13 years ago, that the European project of a unified patent court and a unitary patent was finally going to happen, he recognised that this would fundamentally change patent enforcement in Europe. He started to follow the legislative and political developments in detail and went beyond mere observation. As author and editor of several books and a major commentary on the UPC, he helped shape the discussion around the new system. His first book on the UPC appeared in 2016 – years before the court finally opened its doors in 2023. What fascinated him from the beginning was the unique opportunity to witness the creation of an entirely new court system, to analyse how it would be built and, where possible, to contribute to its understanding and development. It was clear to him that this system would be a “game changer” for European patent enforcement. UPC in the Global Triangle: Europe, the US and China In practice, most international patent disputes revolve around three major regions: the UPC territory in Europe, the United States and China. Each of these regions has its own procedural culture, cost structure and strategic impact. From a territorial perspective, the UPC is particularly attractive because it can, under the right conditions, grant pan-European injunctions that cover a broad range of EU Member States with a single decision. This consolidation of enforcement is something national courts in Europe simply cannot offer. From a cost perspective, the UPC is significantly cheaper than US litigation, especially if one compares the cost of one UPC action with a bundle of separate national cases in large European markets. When viewed against the territorial reach and procedural speed, the “bang for the buck” is very compelling. China is again a different story. The sheer volume of cases there is enormous, with tens of thousands of patent infringement cases per year. Chinese courts are known for their speed; first-instance decisions within about a year are common. In this respect they resemble the UPC more than the US does. The UPC also aims at a roughly 12 to 15 month time frame for first-instance cases where validity is at issue. The US, by contrast, features extensive discovery, occasionally jury trials and often longer timelines. The procedural culture is very different. The UPC, like Chinese courts, operates without discovery in the US sense, which makes proceedings more focused on the written record and expert evidence that the parties present, and less on pre-trial disclosure battles. Whether a company chooses to litigate in the US, the UPC, China, or some combination of these forums will depend on where the key markets and assets are. However, in Prof. Hüttermann's view, once Europe is an important market, it is hard to justify ignoring the UPC. He expects the court's caseload and influence to grow strongly over the coming years. A Landmark UPC Case: Syngenta v. Sumitomo A particularly important case in which Prof. Hüttermann was involved is the Syngenta v. Sumitomo matter, concerning a composition patent. This case has become a landmark in UPC practice for several reasons. First, the Court of Appeal clarified a central point about the reach of UPC injunctions. It made clear that once infringement is established in one Member State, this will usually be sufficient to justify a pan-European injunction covering all UPC countries designated by the patent. That confirmation gave patent owners confidence that the UPC can in fact deliver broad, cross-border relief in one go. Second, the facts of the case raised novel issues about evidence and territorial reach. The allegedly infringing product had been analysed based on a sample from the Czech Republic, which is not part of the UPC system. Later, the same product with the same name was marketed in Bulgaria, which is within UPC territory. The Court of Appeal held that the earlier analysis of the Czech sample could be relied on for enforcement in Bulgaria. This showed that evidence from outside the UPC territory can be sufficient, as long as it is properly linked to the products marketed within the UPC. Third, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to state its view on inventive step. It confirmed that combining prior-art documents requires a “pointer”, in line with the EPO's problem-solution approach. The mere theoretical possibility of extracting a certain piece of information from a document does not suffice to justify an inventive-step attack. This is one of several decisions where the UPC has shown a strong alignment with EPO case law on substantive patentability. For Prof. Hüttermann personally, the case was also a lesson in oral advocacy before the UPC. During the two appeal hearings, the presiding judge asked unexpected questions that required quick and creative responses while the hearing continued. His practical takeaway is that parties should appear with a small, well-coordinated team: large enough to allow someone to work on a tricky question in the background, but small enough to remain agile. Two or three lawyers seem ideal; beyond that, coordination becomes difficult and “too many cooks spoil the broth”. A Game-Changing CJEU Decision: Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux Surprisingly, one of the most important developments for European patent litigation in the past year did not come from the UPC at all, but from the Court of Justice of the European Union. In Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux, the CJEU revisited the rules on cross-border jurisdiction under the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Brussels Ia). Previously, under what practitioners often referred to as the GAT/LuK regime, a court in one EU country was largely prevented from granting relief for alleged infringement in another country if the validity of the foreign patent was contested there. This significantly limited the possibilities for cross-border injunctions. In Bosch, the CJEU changed course. Without going into all procedural details, the essence is that courts in the EU now have broader powers to grant cross-border relief when certain conditions are met, particularly when at least one defendant is domiciled in the forum state. The concept of an “anchor defendant” plays a central role: if you sue one group company in its home forum, other group companies in other countries, including outside the EU, can be drawn into the case. This has already had practical consequences. German courts, for example, have issued pan-European injunctions covering around twenty countries in pharmaceutical cases. There are even attempts to sue European companies for infringement of US patents based on acts in the US, using the logic of Bosch as a starting point. How far courts will ultimately go remains to be seen, but the potential is enormous. For the UPC, this development is highly relevant. The UPC operates in the same jurisdictional environment as national courts, and many defendants in UPC cases will be domiciled in UPC countries. This increases the likelihood that the UPC, too, can leverage the broadened possibilities for cross-border relief. In addition, we have already seen UPC decisions that include non-EU countries such as the UK within the scope of injunctions, in certain constellations. The interaction between UPC practice and the Bosch jurisprudence of the CJEU is only beginning to unfold. Does the UPC Follow EPO Case Law? A key concern for many patent owners and practitioners is whether the UPC will follow the EPO's Boards of Appeal or develop its own, possibly divergent, case law on validity. On procedural matters, the UPC is naturally different from the EPO. It has its own rules of procedure, its own timelines and its own tools, such as “front-loaded” pleadings and tight limits on late-filed material. On substantive law, however, Prof. Hüttermann's conclusion is clear: there is “nothing new under the sun”. The UPC's approach to novelty, inventive step and added matter is very close to that of the EPO. The famous “gold standard” for added matter appears frequently in UPC decisions. Intermediate generalisations are treated with the same suspicion as at the EPO. In at least one case, the UPC revoked a patent for added matter even though the EPO had granted it in exactly that form. The alignment is not accidental. The UPC only deals with European patents granted by the EPO; it does not hear cases on purely national patents. If the UPC were more generous than the EPO, many patents would never reach it. If it were systematically stricter, patentees would be more tempted to opt out of the system. In practice, the UPC tends to apply the EPO's standards and, where anything differs, it is usually a matter of factual appreciation rather than a different legal test. For practitioners, this has a very practical implication: if you want to predict how the UPC will decide on validity, the best starting point is to ask how the EPO would analyse the case. The UPC may not always reach the same result in parallel EPO opposition proceedings, but the conceptual framework is largely the same. Trends in UPC Practice: PIs, Equivalents and Division-Specific Styles Even in its early years, certain trends and differences between UPC divisions can be observed. On preliminary injunctions, the local division in Düsseldorf has taken a particularly proactive role. It has been responsible for most of the ex parte PIs granted so far and applies a rather strict notion of urgency, often considering one month after knowledge of the infringement as still acceptable, but treating longer delays with scepticism. Other divisions tend to see two months as still compatible with urgency, and they are much more cautious with ex parte measures. Munich, by contrast, has indicated a strong preference for inter partes PI proceedings and appears reluctant to grant ex parte relief at all. A judge from Munich has even described the main action as the “fast” procedure and the inter partes PI as the “very fast” one, leaving little room for an even faster ex parte track. There are also differences in how divisions handle amendments and auxiliary requests in PI proceedings. Munich has suggested that if a patentee needs to rely on claim amendments or auxiliary requests in a PI, the request is unlikely to succeed. Other divisions have been more open to considering auxiliary requests. The doctrine of equivalents is another area where practice is not yet harmonised. The Hague division has explicitly applied a test taken from Dutch law in at least one case and found infringement by equivalence. However, the Court of Appeal has not yet endorsed a specific test, and in another recent Hague case the same division did not apply that Dutch-law test again. The Mannheim division has openly called for the development of an autonomous, pan-European equivalence test, but has not yet fixed such a test in a concrete decision. This is clearly an area to watch. Interim conferences are commonly used in most divisions to clarify issues early on, but Düsseldorf often dispenses with them to save time. In practice, interim conferences can be very helpful for narrowing down the issues, though parties should not expect to be able to predict the final decision from what is discussed there. Sometimes topics that dominate the interim conference play little or no role in the main oral hearing. A Front-Loaded System and Typical Strategic Mistakes UPC proceedings are highly front-loaded and very fast. A defendant usually has three months from service of the statement of claim to file a full statement of defence and any counterclaim for revocation. This is manageable, but only if the time is used wisely. One common strategic problem is that parties lose time at the beginning and only develop a clear strategy late in the three-month period. According to Prof. Hüttermann, it is crucial to have a firm strategy within the first two or three weeks and then execute it consistently. Constantly changing direction is a recipe for failure in such a compressed system. Another characteristic is the strict attitude towards late-filed material. It is difficult to introduce new documents or new inventive-step attacks later in the procedure. In some cases even alternative combinations of already-filed prior-art documents have been viewed as “new” attacks and rejected as late. At the appeal stage, the Court of Appeal has even considered new arguments based on different parts of a book already in the file as potentially late-filed. This does not mean that parties should flood the court with dozens of alternative attacks in the initial brief. In one revocation action, a plaintiff filed about fifty different inventive-step attacks, only to be told by the court that this was not acceptable and that the attacks had to be reduced and structured. The UPC is not a body conducting ex officio examination. It is entitled to manage the case actively and to ask parties to focus on the most relevant issues. Evidence Gathering, Protective Letters and the Defendant's Perspective The UPC provides powerful tools for both sides. Evidence inspection is becoming more common, not only at trade fairs but also at company premises. This can be a valuable tool for patentees, but it also poses a serious risk for defendants who may suddenly face court-ordered inspections. From the perspective of potential defendants, protective letters are an important instrument, especially in divisions like Düsseldorf where ex parte PIs are possible. A well-written protective letter, filed in advance, can significantly reduce the risk of a surprise injunction. The court fees are moderate, but the content of the protective letter must be carefully prepared; a poor submission can cause more harm than good. Despite the strong tools available to patentees, Prof. Hüttermann does not view the UPC as unfair to defendants. If a defendant files a solid revocation counterclaim, the pressure shifts to the patentee, who then has only two months to reply, prepare all auxiliary requests and adapt the enforcement strategy. This is even more demanding than at the EPO, because the patentee must not only respond to validity attacks but also ensure that any amended claims still capture the allegedly infringing product. It is entirely possible to secure the survival of a patent with an auxiliary request that no longer covers the defendant's product. In that scenario, the patentee has “won” on validity but lost the infringement case. Managing this tension under tight time limits is a key challenge of UPC practice. The Future Role of the UPC and How to Prepare Today the UPC hears a few hundred cases per year, compared with several thousand patent cases in the US and tens of thousands in China. Nevertheless, both the court itself and experienced practitioners see significant growth potential. Prof. Hüttermann expects case numbers to multiply in the medium term. Whether the UPC will become the first choice forum in global disputes or remain one pillar in parallel proceedings alongside the US and China will depend on the strategies of large patentees and the evolution of case law. However, the court is well equipped: it covers a large, economically important territory, is comparatively cost-effective and offers fast procedures with robust remedies. For companies that may end up before the UPC, preparation is essential. On the offensive side, that means building strong evidence and legal arguments before filing, being ready to proceed quickly and structured, and understanding the specific styles of the relevant divisions. On the defensive side, it may mean filing protective letters in risk-exposed markets, preparing internal processes for rapid reaction if a statement of claim arrives, and taking inspection requests seriously. Conclusion The Unified Patent Court has quickly moved from theory to practice. It offers pan-European relief, fast and front-loaded procedures, and a substantive approach that closely mirrors the EPO's case law. At the same time, national and EU-level developments like the Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux decision are reshaping the jurisdictional framework in which the UPC operates, opening the door for far-reaching cross-border injunctions. For patent owners and potential defendants alike, the message is clear: the UPC is here to stay and will become more important year by year. Those who invest the time to understand its dynamics now – including its alignment with the EPO, the differences between divisions, and the strategic implications of its procedures – will be in a much better position when the first UPC dispute lands on their desk. Here is the full transcript of the interview: Rolf Claessen:Today's interview guest is Prof. Aloys Hüttermann. He is founder and equity partner of my firm, Michalski · Hüttermann & Partner. More importantly for today's interview, he has written several books about the Unified Patent Court. The first one already came out in 2016. He is co-editor and author of one of the leading commentaries on the UPC and has gained substantial experience in UPC cases so far – one of them even together with me. Thank you very much for being on IP Fridays again, Aloys. Aloys Hüttermann:Thank you for inviting me, it's an honour. How did you get so deeply involved in the UPC? Rolf Claessen:Before we dive into the details, how did you end up so deeply involved in the Unified Patent Court? And what personally fascinates you about this court? Aloys Hüttermann:This goes back quite a while – roughly 13 years. At that time it became clear that, after several failed attempts, Europe would really get a pan-European court and a pan-European patent, and that this time it was serious. I thought: this is going to be the future. That interested me a lot, both intellectually and practically. A completely new system was being built. You could watch how it evolved – and, if possible, even help shape it a bit. It was also obvious to me that this would be a complete game changer. Nobody expected that it would take until 2023 before the system actually started operating, but now it is here. I became heavily interested early on. As you mentioned, my first book on the UPC was published in 2016, in the expectation that the system would start soon. It took a bit longer, but now we finally have it. UPC vs. US and China – speed, cost and impact Rolf Claessen:Before we go deeper into the UPC, let's zoom out. If you compare litigation before the UPC with patent litigation in the US and in China – in terms of speed, cost and the impact of decisions – what are the key differences that a business leader should understand? Aloys Hüttermann:If you look at the three big regions – the UPC territory in Europe, the US and China – these are the major economic areas for many technology companies. One important point is territorial reach. In the UPC, if the conditions are met, you can get pan-European injunctions that cover many EU Member States in one go. We will talk about this later in more detail. On costs there is a huge difference between the US and the UPC. The UPC is much cheaper than US litigation, especially once you look at the number of countries you can cover with one case if the patent has been validated widely. China is different again. The number of patent infringement cases there is enormous. I have seen statistics of around 40,000 infringement cases per year in China. That is huge – compared with roughly 164 UPC infringement cases in the first year and maybe around 200 in the current year. On speed, Chinese courts are known to be very fast. You often get a first-instance decision in about a year. The UPC is comparable: if there is a counterclaim for revocation, you are looking at something like 12 to 15 months for a first-instance decision. The US can be slower, and the procedure is very different. You have full discovery, you may have juries. None of that exists at the UPC. From that perspective, Chinese and UPC proceedings are more similar to each other than either is to the US. The UPC is still a young court. We have to see how influential its case law will be worldwide in the long run. What we already see, at least in Germany, is a clear trend away from purely national patent litigation and towards the UPC. That is inside Europe. The global impact will develop over time. When is the UPC the most powerful tool? Rolf Claessen:Let's take the perspective of a global company. It has significant sales in Europe and in the US and production or key suppliers in China. In which situations would you say the UPC is your most powerful tool? And when might the US or China be the more strategic battleground? Aloys Hüttermann:To be honest, I would almost always consider bringing a case before the UPC. The “bang for the buck” is very good. The UPC is rather fast. That alone already gives you leverage in negotiations. The threat of a quick, wide-reaching injunction is a strong negotiation tool. Whether you litigate in the US instead of the UPC, or in addition, or whether you also go to China – that depends heavily on the individual case: where the products are sold, where the key markets are, where the defendant has assets, and so on. But in my view, once you have substantial sales in Europe, you should seriously consider the UPC. And for that reason alone I expect case numbers at the UPC to increase significantly in the coming years. A landmark UPC case: Syngenta vs. Sumitomo (composition patent) Rolf Claessen:You have already been involved in several UPC cases – and one of them together with me, which was great fun. Looking at the last 12 to 18 months, is there a case, decision or development that you find particularly noteworthy – something that really changed how you think about UPC litigation or how companies should prepare? Aloys Hüttermann:The most important UPC case I have been involved in so far is the Syngenta v. Sumitomo case on a composition patent. It has become a real landmark and was even mentioned in the UPC's annual report. It is important for several reasons. First, it was one of the first cases in which the Court of Appeal said very clearly: if you have established infringement in one Member State, that will usually be enough for a pan-European injunction covering all UPC countries designated by the patent. That is a powerful statement about the reach of UPC relief. Second, the facts were interesting. The patent concerned a composition. We had analysed a sample that had been obtained in the Czech Republic, which is not a UPC country. Later, the same product was marketed under the same name in Bulgaria, which is in the UPC. The question was whether the analysis of the Czech sample could be used as a basis for enforcement in Bulgaria. The Court of Appeal said yes, that was sufficient. Third, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to say something about inventive step. It more or less confirmed that the UPC's approach is very close to the EPO's problem-solution approach. It emphasised that, if you want to combine prior-art documents, you need a “pointer” to do so. The mere theoretical possibility that a skilled person could dig a particular piece of information out of a document is not enough. For me personally, the most memorable aspect of this case was not the outcome – that was largely in line with what we had expected – but the oral hearings at the appeal stage. We had two hearings. In both, the presiding judge asked us a question that we had not anticipated at all. And then you have about 20 minutes to come up with a convincing answer while the hearing continues. We managed it, but it made me think a lot about how you should prepare for oral hearings at the UPC. My conclusion is: you should go in with a team, but not too big. In German we say, “Zu viele Köche verderben den Brei” – too many cooks spoil the broth. Two or three people seems ideal. One of them can work quietly on such a surprise question at the side, while the others continue arguing the case. In the end the case went very well for us, so I can speak about it quite calmly now. But in the moment your heart rate definitely goes up. The CJEU's Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux decision – a real game changer Rolf Claessen:You also mentioned another development that is not even a UPC case, but still very important for European patent litigation. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes. In my view, the most important case of the last twelve months is not a UPC decision but a judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU): Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux. This is going to be a real game changer for European IP law, and I am sure we have not seen the end of its effects yet. One example: someone has recently sued BMW before the Landgericht München I, a German court, for infringement of a US patent based on acts in the US. The argument is that this could be backed by the logic of Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux. We do not know yet what the court will do with that, but the fact that people are trying this shows how far-reaching the decision might be. Within the UPC we have already seen injunctions being issued for countries outside the UPC territory and even outside the EU, for example including the UK. So you see how these developments start to interact. Rolf Claessen:For listeners who have not followed the case so closely: in very simple terms, the CJEU opened the door for courts in one EU country to rule on patent infringement that took place in other countries as well, right? Aloys Hüttermann:Exactly. Before Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux we had what was often called the GAT/LuK regime. The basic idea was: if you sue someone in, say, Germany for infringement of a European patent, and you also ask for an injunction for France, and the defendant then challenges the validity of the patent in France, the German court cannot grant you an injunction covering France. The Bosch decision changed that. The legal basis is the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Brussels Ia), which deals with jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters in the EU. It is not specific to IP; it applies to civil cases generally, but it does have some provisions that are relevant for patents. In Bosch, a Swedish court asked the CJEU for guidance on cross-border injunctions. The CJEU more or less overturned its old GAT/LuK case law. Now, in principle, if the defendant is domiciled in a particular Member State, the courts of that state can also grant cross-border relief for other countries, under certain conditions. We will not go into all the details here – that could fill a whole separate IP Fridays episode – but one important concept is the “anchor defendant”. If you sue a group of companies and at least one defendant is domiciled in the forum state, then other group companies in other countries – even outside the EU, for example in Hong Kong – can be drawn into the case and affected by the decision. This is not limited to the UPC, but of course it is highly relevant for UPC litigation. Statistically it increases the chances that at least one defendant will be domiciled in a UPC country, simply because there are many of them. And we have already seen courts like the Landgericht München I grant pan-European injunctions for around 20 countries in a pharmaceutical case. Rolf Claessen:Just to clarify: does it have to be the headquarters of the defendant in that country, or is any registered office enough? Aloys Hüttermann:That is one of the open points. If the headquarters are in Europe, then it is clear that subsidiaries outside Europe can be affected as well. If the group's headquarters are outside Europe and only a subsidiary is here, the situation is less clear and we will have to see what the courts make of it. Does the UPC follow EPO case law? Rolf Claessen:Many patent owners and in-house counsel wonder: does the UPC largely follow the case law of the EPO Boards of Appeal, or is it starting to develop its own distinct line? What is your impression so far – both on substantive issues like novelty and inventive step, and on procedural questions? Aloys Hüttermann:On procedure the UPC is, of course, very different. It has its own procedural rules and they are not the same as at the EPO. If we look at patent validity, however, my impression is that there is “nothing new under the sun” – that was the title of a recent talk I gave and will give again in Hamburg. Substantively, the case law of the UPC and the EPO is very similar. For inventive step, people sometimes say the UPC does not use the classical problem-solution approach but a more “holistic” approach – whatever that is supposed to mean. In practice, in both systems you read and interpret prior-art documents and decide what they really disclose. In my view, the “error bar” that comes from two courts simply reading a document slightly differently is much larger than any systematic difference in legal approach. If you look at other grounds, such as novelty and added matter, the UPC even follows the EPO almost verbatim. The famous “gold standard” for added matter appears all over UPC decisions, even if the EPO case numbers are not always cited. The same is true for novelty. So the rule-based, almost “Hilbertian” EPO approach is very much present at the UPC. There is also a structural reason for that. All patents that the UPC currently deals with have been granted by the EPO. The UPC does not handle patents granted only by national offices. If the UPC wanted to deviate from EPO case law and be more generous, then many patents would never reach the UPC in the first place. The most generous approach you can have is the one used by the granting authority – the EPO. So if the UPC wants to be different, it can only be stricter, not more lenient. And there is little incentive to be systematically stricter, because that would reduce the number of patents that are attractive to enforce before the UPC. Patent owners might simply opt out. Rolf Claessen:We also talked about added matter and a recent case where the Court of Appeal was even stricter than the EPO. That probably gives US patent practitioners a massive headache. They already struggle with added-matter rules in Europe, and now the UPC might be even tougher. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes, especially on added matter. I once spoke with a US practitioner who said, “We hope the UPC will move away from intermediate generalisations.” There is no chance of that. We already have cases where the Court of Appeal confirmed that intermediate generalisations are not allowed, in full alignment with the EPO. You mentioned a recent case where a patent was revoked for added matter, even though it had been granted by the EPO in exactly that form. This shows quite nicely what to expect. If you want to predict how the UPC will handle a revocation action, the best starting point is to ask: “What would the EPO do?” Of course, there will still be cases where the UPC finds an invention to be inventive while the EPO, in parallel opposition proceedings, does not – or vice versa. But those are differences in the appreciation of the facts and the prior art, which you will always have. The underlying legal approach is essentially the same. Rolf Claessen:So you do not see a real example yet where the UPC has taken a totally different route from the EPO on validity? Aloys Hüttermann:No, not really. If I had to estimate how the UPC will decide, I would always start from what I think the EPO would have done. Trends in UPC practice: PIs, equivalents, interim conferences Rolf Claessen:If you look across the different UPC divisions and cases: what trends do you see in practice? For example regarding timelines, preliminary injunctions, how validity attacks are handled, and how UPC cases interact with EPO oppositions or national proceedings? Aloys Hüttermann:If you take the most active divisions – essentially the big four in Germany and the local division in The Hague – they all try to be very careful and diligent in their decisions. But you can already see some differences in practice. For preliminary injunctions there is a clear distinction between the local division in Düsseldorf and most other divisions. Düsseldorf considers one month after knowledge of the infringement as still sufficiently urgent. If you wait longer, it is usually considered too late. In many other divisions, two months is still viewed as fine. Düsseldorf has also been the division that issued most of the ex parte preliminary injunctions so far. Apart from one special outlier where a standing judge from Brussels was temporarily sitting in Milan, Düsseldorf is basically the only one. Other divisions have been much more reluctant. At a conference, Judge Pichlmaier from the Munich division once said that he could hardly imagine a situation where his division would grant an ex parte PI. In his words, the UPC has two types of procedure: one that is fast – the normal main action – and one that is very fast – the inter partes PI procedure. But you do not really have an “ultra-fast” ex parte track, at least not in his division. Another difference relates to amendments and auxiliary requests in PI proceedings. In one recent case in Munich the court said more or less that if you have to amend your patent or rely on auxiliary requests in a PI, you lose. Other divisions have been more flexible and have allowed auxiliary requests. Equivalence is another area where we do not have a unified line yet. So far, only the Hague division has clearly found infringement under the doctrine of equivalents and explicitly used a test taken from Dutch law. Whether that test will be approved by the Court of Appeal is completely open – the first case settled, so the Court of Appeal never ruled on it, and a second one is still very recent. Interestingly, there was another Hague decision a few weeks ago where equivalence was on the table, but the division did not apply that Dutch-law test. We do not know yet why. The Mannheim division has written in one decision that it would be desirable to develop an autonomous pan-European test for equivalence, instead of just importing the German, UK or Dutch criteria. But they did not formulate such a test in that case because it was not necessary for the decision. So we will have to see how that evolves. On timelines, one practical difference is that Düsseldorf usually does not hold an interim conference. That saves them some time. Most other divisions do hold interim conferences. Personally, I like the idea because it can help clarify issues. But you cannot safely read the final outcome from these conferences. I have also seen cases where questions raised at the interim conference did not play any role in the main oral hearing. So they are useful for clarification, but not as a crystal ball. Front-loaded proceedings and typical strategic mistakes Rolf Claessen:If you look at the behaviour of parties so far – both patentees and defendants – what are the most common strategic mistakes you see in UPC litigation? And what would a well-prepared company do differently before the first statement of claim is ever filed? Aloys Hüttermann:You know you do not really want me to answer that question… Rolf Claessen:I do! Aloys Hüttermann:All right. The biggest mistake, of course, is that they do not hire me. That is the main problem. Seriously, it is difficult to judge parties' behaviour from the outside. You rarely know the full picture. There may be national proceedings, licensing discussions, settlement talks, and so on in the background. That can limit what a party can do at the UPC. So instead of criticising, I prefer to say what is a good idea at the UPC. The system is very front-loaded and very fast. If you are sued, you have three months to file your statement of defence and your counterclaim for revocation. In my view, three months are manageable – but only if you use the time wisely and do not waste it on things that are not essential. If you receive a statement of claim, you have to act immediately. You should have a clear strategy within maybe two or three weeks and then implement it. If you change your strategy every few weeks, chances are high that you will fail. Another point is that everything is front-loaded. It is very hard to introduce new documents or new attacks later. Some divisions have been a bit generous in individual cases, but the general line is strict. We have seen, for example, that even if you filed a book in first instance, you may not be allowed to rely on a different chapter from the same book for a new inventive-step attack at the appeal stage. That can be regarded as late-filed, because you could have done it earlier. There is also case law saying that if you first argue inventive step as “D1 plus D2”, and later want to argue “D2 plus D1”, that can already be considered a new, late attack. On the other hand, we had a revocation action where the plaintiff filed about 50 different inventive-step attacks in the initial brief. The division then said: this does not work. Please cut them down or put them in a clear hierarchy. In the end, not all of them were considered. The UPC does not conduct an ex officio examination. It is entitled to manage the case and to tell the parties to limit themselves in the interest of a fair and efficient procedure. Rolf Claessen:I have the feeling that the EPO is also becoming more front-loaded – if you want to rely on documents later, you should file them early. But it sounds like the UPC is even more extreme in that regard. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes, that is true. Protective letters, inspections and the defendant's perspective Rolf Claessen:Suppose someone from a company is listening now and thinks: “We might be exposed at the UPC,” or, “We should maybe use the UPC offensively against competitors.” What would you consider sensible first steps before any concrete dispute arises? And looking three to five years ahead, how central do you expect the UPC to become in global patent litigation compared to the US and China? Aloys Hüttermann:Let me start with the second part. I expect the UPC to become significantly more important. If we have around 200 cases this year, that is a good start, but it is still very small compared to, say, 4,000 to 5,000 patent cases per year in the US and 40,000 or so in China. Even François Bürgin and Klaus Grabinski, in interviews, have said that they are happy with the case load, but the potential is much larger. In my view, it is almost inevitable that we will see four or five times as many UPC cases in the not-too-distant future. As numbers grow, the influence of the UPC will grow as well. Whether, in five or ten years, companies will treat the UPC as their first choice forum – or whether they will usually run it in parallel with US litigation in major disputes – remains to be seen. The UPC would be well equipped for that: the territory it covers is large, Europe is still an important economy, and the UPC procedure is very attractive from a company's perspective. On sensible first steps: if you are worried about being sued, a protective letter can make a lot of sense – especially in divisions like Düsseldorf, where ex parte PIs are possible in principle. A protective letter is not very expensive in terms of court fees. There is also an internal system that ensures the court reads it before deciding on urgent measures. Of course, the content must have a certain quality; a poor protective letter can even backfire. If you are planning to sue someone before the UPC, you should be extremely well prepared when you file. You should already have all important documents and evidence at hand. As we discussed, it is hard to introduce new material later. One tool that is becoming more and more popular is inspection – not just at trade fairs, where we already saw cases very early, but also at company premises. Our firm has already handled such an inspection case. That is something you should keep in mind on both sides: it is a powerful evidence-gathering tool, but also a serious risk if you are on the receiving end. From the defendant's perspective, I do not think the UPC is unfair. If you do your job properly and put a solid revocation counterclaim on the table, then the patentee has only two months to prepare a full reply and all auxiliary requests. And there is a twist that makes life even harder for the patentee than at the EPO. At the EPO the question is mainly: do my auxiliary requests overcome the objections and are they patentable? At the UPC there is an additional layer: do I still have infringement under the amended claims? You may save your patent with an auxiliary request that no longer reads on the defendant's product. That is great for validity, but you have just lost the infringement case. You have kept the patent but lost the battle. And all of this under very tight time limits. That creates considerable pressure on both sides. How to contact Prof. Hüttermann Rolf Claessen:Thank you very much for this really great interview, Aloys. Inside our firm you have a nickname: “the walking encyclopedia of the Unified Patent Court” – because you have written so many books about it and have dealt with the UPC for such a long time. What is the best way for listeners to get in touch with you? Aloys Hüttermann:The easiest way is by email. You can simply write to me, and that is usually the best way to contact me. As you may have noticed, I also like to speak. I am a frequent speaker at conferences. If you happen to be at one of the conferences where I am on the programme – for example, next week in Hamburg – feel free to come up to me and ask me anything in person. But email is probably the most reliable first step. Rolf Claessen:Perfect. Thank you very much, Aloys. Aloys Hüttermann:Thank you. It was a pleasure to be on IP Fridays again. Some of your long-time listeners may remember that a few years ago – when you were not yet part of our firm – we already did an episode on the UPC, back when everything was still very speculative. It is great to be back now that the system is actually in place and working. Rolf Claessen:I am very happy to have you back on the show.

Losy pierwszych emancypantek, między innymi: Narcyzy Żmichowskiej, Zofii Nałkowskiej, przyszłej żony Marszałka Piłsudskiego - Aleksandry Szczerbińskiej czy Wandy Gertz, która wbrew prawu przebrała się za chłopaka i została Kazikiem Żuchowiczem, by walczyć w Legionach Polskich. W książce "Parasolki" Dominiki Buczak jest też słynna doktorka Anna Tomaszewicz-Dobrska, która jako pierwsza w Polsce przeprowadziła zakończone podwójnym sukcesem cesarskie cięcie. w tym wydaniu "Kultury osobistej" o XX-wiecznych emancypantkach, które zabiegały o prawa wyborcze kobiet. Audycja emitowana w rocznicę uzyskania praw wyborczych kobiet - zarówno czynne (możliwość głosowania), jak i bierne (możliwość kandydowania). Stało się to 28 listopada 1918 roku, kiedy Józef Piłsudski podpisał dekret o ordynacji wyborczej do Sejmu Ustawodawczego. Polska była jednym z pierwszych krajów na świecie, który przyznał kobietom tak szerokie prawa polityczne, wyprzedzając m.in. USA (1920) czy Szwajcarię (1971). W studio Radia TOK FM Marta Perchuć-Burzyńska gości autorkę "Parasolek".

Learn a new phrase and make your English sound more natural and interesting. Words We Use is a bilingual series that helps you understand idioms like 'take it easy'. - Learn a new phrase and make your English sound more natural and interesting. Words We Use is a bilingual series that helps you understand idioms like 'take it easy'. Piɔ̈ɔ̈c wɛ̈t yam ku looi thööŋ dun English bi ya pïŋ ke ye lɔ gɛi ku nhiaar. Wël Yeku Luöi ee ke ci looi thok tɛ̈kic ke bu biɔ̈ɔ̈th ye ciök ku bi kuɔ̈ɔny dɛtic wël ci thiään kɔ̈ɔ̈th cïmën 'nyiääi ke puɔlic'.

The 49ers are entrenched in the final NFC playoff spot as they prepare to face the Cleveland Browns. However, with low temperatures, high-winds, and possible perception forecast for Sunday's matchup, holding onto that precious wild card spot might be more complicated. Having lost their previous contest in Cleveland under similar conditions in 2023, San Francisco will be tasked with executing their offense more efficiently this time while mitigating current NFL sack leader Myles Garrett. On this episode of "49ers Talk," co-hosts Matt Maiocco and Jennifer Lee Chan discuss Brock Purdy's regression last week against the Panthers and how he and the 49ers' offense can minimize mistakes against familiar obstacles in inclement weather and a formidable pass-rush. Also, Matt and Jennifer provide injury updates, surprising takes on a San Francisco offensive line playing well under-the-radar and where the 49ers might look in the draft. They also praise the evolution of Christian McCaffrey's game during an incredible individual season.--(4:00) Purdy's attributes as a starter -- anticipation, decisiveness, accuracy - were absent on three INTs(9:00) This is the first time Purdy has dealt with significant in-season time off, and he's adjusting(11:00) Will precipitation ahead of the game in Cleveland play a role in the outcome?(18:00) 49ers Injury Updates (Bethune, Okuayinonu, Piñeiro out)(22:00) Myles Garrett will be a handful for Trent Williams and offensive line(24:00) Matt believes the 49ers' OL starters this year might not change next year given their performance(32:00) CMC leads the league in rushing attempts and receptions, and is San Francisco's MVP Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

  «Por lo tanto, echen mano de toda la armadura de Dios para que, cuando llegue el día malo, puedan resistir hasta el fin y permanecer firmes. Por tanto, manténganse firmes y fajados con el cinturón de la verdad, revestidos con la coraza de justicia, y con los pies calzados con la disposición de predicar el evangelio de la paz. Además de todo esto, protéjanse con el escudo de la fe, para que puedan apagar todas las flechas incendiarias del maligno. Cúbranse con el casco de la salvación, y esgriman la espada del Espíritu, que es la palabra de Dios» (Efesios 6:13-17)   La Biblia nos enseña que como creyentes debemos ser una fuerza de ocupación del Señor hasta que Él regrese. En el campo militar, ocupar significa: "Tomar posesión o apoderarse de un territorio y sus tropas, invadiéndolo o instalándose en él". Para llevar a cabo esa tarea en una forma eficaz hasta que el Señor venga, la mayoría de nosotros tendrá que cambiar de actitud. Tendremos que tener presente que Jesucristo ya venció y ya obtuvo la victoria. Así es. Satanás fue derrotado y despojado en el Calvario; él es quien está a la defensiva, no nosotros. Es más, Jesucristo nos ha dado Su armadura y Su espada para mantener en su lugar a ese diablo derrotado. Podrás ser un debilucho de 45 kilos, pero si te revistes de la armadura de Dios, el diablo nunca lo notará. Huirá de ti como si fueras el mismo Jesucristo. Piénsalo. ¿Qué harías si fueras el diablo y te encontraras cara a cara con un creyente vestido con la armadura, el yelmo y las armas de Dios? Siempre y cuando ese creyente se limite a declarar las palabras de Dios, creerás que es el mismo Señor quien está dentro de la armadura. No se te olvide ninguno de los componentes de la armadura que se te ha provisto. Revístete con su totalidad. Haz que el diablo esté siempre a la defensiva—¡y participa de la fuerza de ocupación hasta que Jesús regrese! Lectura bíblica: Lucas 12:35-44   © 1997 – 2019 Eagle Mountain International Church Inc., también conocida como Ministerios Kenneth Copeland / Kenneth Copeland Ministries. Todos los derechos reservados.

Weźmy się za jajka. Polska - jest jednym z największych producentów i eksporterów jaj na świecie. Nie chodzi o te polityczne, ale kurze. Czyli tę cudowną żółtą kulkę, zanurzoną w przezroczystej plazmowatej mazi, a to wszystko obute w delikatną skorupkę. Piękniejszej definicji jaja nie znajdziecie. Przystępując do tematu: 40 procent polskiej produkcji jaj trafia na rynki zagraniczne. Nawet do Tajlandii. Ale też kupujemy jaja kurze z Ukrainy, Turcji, a nawet z Brazylii, tak zwane kochones. Za taki stan rzeczy nasz branża jajcarska wini przede wszystkim politykę Unii Europejskiej, bo unijne wymogi stawiane producentom jaj podnoszą ceną tego niemal kulistego zdrowego produktu. Nieustanne zaostrzanie przepisów dotyczących produkcji jaj daleko ponad standardy obowiązujące na świecie powoduje, że jajka nie unijne są dużo tańsze. Problem polskich jaj zatem leży w samej istocie biurokracji...

Di vê bûletene de: Komek ji reformên jîngehê dê di parlemenê de derbas bibin... Piştî êrîşa masiyê qirş/shark li beraveke dûr a New South Wales, jinek mir û zilamekî jî di nexweşxaneyê de ye... Û di werzîşê de, Pîl wate torchê Olîmpiyadê li Olîmpiya kevnar hate vêxistin. Ew nûçeyana û nûçeyên din di bûlentenê de hene.

The Truth:Creative power is nebulous, making it hard to measure, but it is trained in the same way as physical strength.Your skill level as a producer is moving right now. The question is: which direction?Your skills are either growing or decaying---change is constant. Your development is a dynamic consequence of your decisions.Up close, progress may seem invisible. That's an illusion of perspective. Growth is happening even when you can't point to it in a given moment. The key is to trust that consistent, intentional work produces results---whether you feel them today or not.Creative Strength TrainingStrength---physical or creative---is your capacity to do it when you don't feel like it. It means doing what you said you were going to do. In the gym, that means showing up and doing your workout. In the studio, it means showing up consistently, working through doubt, and carrying ideas to completion.The version of you that goes to the gym will be stronger than the version that doesn't. How much stronger depends on: the consistency of your workouts (refer to Frequency) and the quality of design in alignment with your goals (see The Piñata Method). The same holds true in the studio---consistency and intentional practice generate creative power.The Session Doesn't Count. The Streak Does.What we can lift today versus a year from now has less to do with what we accomplish in one session and everything to do with how many sessions we are able to link together.This is easy to forget if we don't feel ourselves getting stronger moment to moment. From one day or week to the next you may find that you are lifting the same weight, maybe even a little less. There's a recency bias inherent in this natural desire for fast results. We can't remember what it felt like a year ago, but we recognize that compared to yesterday, I'm not lifting any more than I did. The key here is to zoom out. And the longer the recorded history, the more we are able to see. The more we show up on a daily basis, the more recorded history we have in the future. Temperature doesn't increase every single day, but overall the planet is warmer. As you execute your strength training program according to a schedule aligned with your goals you will notice that it grows in a similar way.Trust the PracticeWe cannot control the rate of growth, but growth is inevitable when we are committed to the plan. If someone were to tell you that they are going to the gym five days a week and are expecting to be stronger a year from now, you wouldn't question that assumption. How is creative strength any different?Embracing this is powerful because when we understand that growth is happening, we can commit ourselves to the underlying practice.“But What About...?”Talent. I love this idea from Jerry Seinfeld: talent is like being gifted a thoroughbred horse. It's fast and powerful, but you have to learn to ride it. Unapplied and untrained talent will atrophy over time. Talent is a gift. Training is a choice. Regardless of how much talent you perceive yourself to have or lack, developing skill is your decision.Decay. If we can grow, we can shrink. In the never-ending quest for growth and improvement, it is easy to take what we have for granted. But, what we have gained is not retained if not maintained. If you miss a day or two at the gym, you probably won't notice much of a change. But extend this to a week, a month, or even a year and it becomes obvious. The perspective of decline and deterioration is equally powerful in its reminder that our ability is not a static trait.Plateaus. The paradox of skill development: the more skilled you become, the harder it is to improve. That said, plateaus aren't dead ends, they are firm ground for forward motion. They are platforms to internalize what you learn until it becomes automatic, generating momentum to carry you to the next level. With accumulated experience, you can refine your goals and adjust how you train. The plateau isn't where growth stops---it's where your next climb begins.Making bad music. No matter how much your skill level grows, you're not immune to making bad music. The music we share is always our “best of.” The most direct path to making good music is to make music often. Most of what you make will be bad---that's not a problem, that's the process that leads to your best work.As you head to the studio, start tracking one simple metric: How many sessions can you link together? Experimenting, sketching, finishing---they all count. The decisions are within your control. The outcomes will reveal themselves over time. Nothing is static---especially when it feels like it is. Show up. You are getting stronger even when you can't feel it. Get full access to ProducerHead at producerhead.substack.com/subscribe

V dnešním RECAPU druhé poloviny tabulky CHANCE ligy přivítíme brankářskou oporu Příbrami Martina Melichara, který prožil možná nejlepší půlrok kariéry.

Pastor John Pérez, nos comparte: ¡Uno En Un Millón! – Milagro Tras Milagro (PT1)“MILAGRO TRAS MILAGRO”¿Piensas que nunca has experimentado un milagro en tu vida? Piénsalo otra vez.¡TU VIDA ES UN MILAGRO!En esta nueva serie exploraremos cómo Dios ha demostrado Su poder, Su amor y Su fidelidad a través de milagros que cambiaron la historia… y cómo esos mismos milagros siguen resonando en nuestras vidas hoy.Comprenderemos que Dios es más grande de lo que pensamos o percibimos; que está más cerca de lo que imaginamos; y que Su obra no se ha detenido.Albert Einstein dijo: “Sólo hay dos maneras de vivir tu vida: una, como si nada fuera un milagro; la otra, como si todo fuera un milagro.”Cada mensaje nos llevará a mirar más allá de lo natural, a reconocer la mano de Dios en medio de nuestras batallas, y a creer nuevamente que lo imposible es posible para Él.Nuestro deseo es que cada persona descubra que Dios nunca ha dejado —ni dejará— de moverse… Él sigue obrando MILAGRO TRAS MILAGRO. ¡Vive Hoy! y Escucha Ya!- EXPERIENCIA - TRANSFORMACIÓN – EMPODERAMIENTOhttps://www.facebook.com/775elcordero 

This week we dig into The Predictive Index and how tools like it can help leaders better understand the people on their team. Instead of guessing at strengths, motivations, or communication styles, PI creates a clearer picture of how someone naturally works — and how to set them up for success. We talk about why these insights matter, how they can guide hiring and coaching, and where they fit alongside culture, values, and real-world performance. At its core, this episode is about using data to support people, not define them. PI isn't a shortcut or a replacement for good leadership; it's a way to communicate better, set clearer expectations, and build teams that function with more empathy and alignment. When leaders combine tools like this with strong values and intentional culture, they create workplaces where people actually thrive.

Don and Tom go deep on a shady “non-profit” financial education group that funnels retirees into high-commission indexed annuities, using a listener tip to unpack the advisor's fake credentials, mismatched ADV filings, dubious fiduciary claims, and the simple math that reveals where the money really comes from. Along the way, they cover how to investigate advisors yourself, why financial fairy tales persist, and answer listener questions on Avantis gold holdings, private equity's impact on small-cap value, and the quality of Schwab's 529 plan. 0:04 Don's industry rant and a look at the “American Financial Education Alliance” disguise. 1:01 How pseudo-nonprofits target advisors and consumers with “no-sales” sales pitches. 2:20 Tom's take on the recycled seminar game and fake educator designations. 3:40 Listener tip sparks Don's PI dive into the flyer, claims, and contradictions. 4:49 How to vet advisors using BrokerCheck and Form ADV. 5:58 The firm's tiny AUM and impossible economics of their claimed operations. 8:02 The Maryland house vs. the Lakewood Ranch mansion — where the money REALLY comes from. 9:25 The inevitable reveal: indexed annuity commissions driving the whole machine. 10:18 Breaking down the seminar pitch language and the deceptive “market returns without risk” promise. 11:24 Why the sales story collapses under math and dividends. 12:34 The “licensed fiduciary” myth and regulatory reality for small firms. 14:38 How consumers get fooled by the fiduciary framing in seminar mailers. 16:13 Don and Tom dissect the pre-fab radio/TV show factories behind these advisors. 17:19 Why the meeting is the real sales trap — and how to avoid it. 18:48 Don's plea: stop believing financial fairy tales. 19:26 Don jokes about infiltrating steak-dinner seminars undercover. 20:14 Transition to listener Q&A from Maryland: AVDV's gold exposure. 21:26 Why Avantis owns gold miners without being “in gold.” 23:47 Momentum, value screens, and why the gold weight makes sense. 24:26 Gold Hill, Oregon 529 question: Is the Schwab plan good? 25:30 Age-based 529s and Schwab's low-cost structure. 27:28 Private equity fears: will it starve small-cap value indexes? 28:41 Why the concern is mostly a media creation, not an investment reality. 29:48 Don on the IPO–private–IPO cycle and how markets actually work. 30:11 Why private equity performs worse in bad markets. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Further reading: Mysterious ‘blue goo' at the bottom of the sea stumps scientists Three new species of ground snakes discovered under graveyards and churches in Ecuador Show transcript: Welcome to Strange Animals Podcast. I'm your host, Kate Shaw. I've come down a cold this week, and while I'm feeling better, it is settling into my chest as usual and I'm starting to cough. Since I'm still recovering and need to be in bed instead of sitting up researching animals, and since my voice is already sounding a little rough, here's a Patreon episode this week instead of a regular episode. I had been planning to run old Patreon episodes for a few weeks in December so I could have some time off for the holidays, and those were already scheduled, so I just moved one of those episodes up to use this week instead. This is a Patreon episode from October of 2022, where we talked about two very slightly spooky animal discoveries. We'll start with a suggestion from my brother Richard, about a strange newly discovered creature at the bottom of the ocean. On August 30, 2022, the NOAA Ocean Exploration research team was off the coast of Puerto Rico. That's in the Caribbean, part of the Atlantic Ocean. The expedition was mostly collecting data about the sea floor, including acoustic information and signs of climate change and habitat destruction. Since the Caribbean is an area of the ocean with high biodiversity but also high rates of fishing and trawling, the more we can learn about the animals and plants that live on the sea floor, the more we can do to help protect them. When a remotely operated vehicle dives, it sends video to a team of scientists who can watch in real time and control where the rover goes. On this particular day, the rover descended to a little over 1,300 feet deep, or around 407 meters, when the sea floor came in view. Since this area is the site of an underwater ridge, the sea floor varies by a lot, and the rover swam along filming things and taking samples of the water and so forth, sometimes as deep as about 2,000 feet, or 611 meters. The rover saw lots of interesting animals, including fish and corals of various types, even a fossilized coral reef. Then it filmed something the scientists had never seen before. It was a little blue blob sitting on the sea floor. It wasn't moving and it wasn't very big. It was shaped roughly like a ball but with little points or pimples all over it and a wider base like a skirt where it met the ground. And it was definitely pale blue in color. Then the rover saw more of the little blue blobs, quite a few of them in various places. The scientists think it may be a species of soft coral or possibly a type of sponge, possibly even a tunicate, which is also called a sea squirt. All these animals are invertebrates that don't move, which matches what little we know about the blue blob. The rover wasn't able to take a sample from one of the blue blobs, so for now we don't have anything to study except the video. But we know where the little blue blobs are, so researchers hope to visit them again soon and learn more about them. Next, let's return to dry land and learn about some newly discovered snakes. In fact, we're not just on dry land, we're way up high in the Andes Mountains in South America, specifically in some remote villages in Ecuador. A teacher named Diego Piñán moved to the town of El Chaco in 2013, and he started noticing dead snakes on the road that he didn't recognize. He also realized that people were killing the snakes on purpose. A lot of people are afraid of snakes, so Piñán made sure to teach his students about them so they would learn that most snakes aren't dangerous. He also kept the dead snakes he found and preserved them in alcohol so he could figure out later what species they were. But he never could figure it out. Then a scientist named Alejandro Arteaga assembled a team to study the animals found in remote areas of the...

Episode 249 :     Intro:       Welcome to the next episode of Pi Perspectives. Today we go behind the scenes and we welcome Adrian Padarath. Adrian handles all the social media marketing for Pi-perspectives, Investiagtors-Toolbox and Satellite Investigations. The guys discuss how they met and their approach to social media marketing. This is a great how to episode for those who run their own businesses and want to grow a presence online. Please welcome Adrian Padarath and NY Private Eye, Matt Spaier  Links:      Matt's email: MatthewS@Satellitepi.com   Linkedin: Matthew Spaier       www.investigators-toolbox.com   Adrian on Linkedin: Adrian Padarath Email: Adrian@Adrianpadarath.com https://www.adrianpadarath.com/
 PI-Perspectives Youtube link:  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYB3MaUg8k5w3k7UuvT6s0g Sponsors:     https://piinstitute.com/ https://www.skopenow.com https://researchfpr.com/ https://www.trackops.com FBI Tip Line https://tips.fbi.gov/home https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/newyork/about - (212) 384-1000

Meet Drew Bivona, the founder and visionary behind Bivona Law. Dedicated to being the voice for kids, Drew is a thoughtful attorney who has represented personal injury victims across Texas with energy, passion, and honesty. His mission? Deliver legal advocacy with no fluff, no BS, and no egos — just hard work, transparency, and a fierce commitment to protecting children… Drew is one of the only attorneys in Texas who focuses almost exclusively on child injury cases. From daycare negligence and unsafe premises to systemic bullying and cases involving inappropriate touching, he represents minors and their families when negligence leads to harm. His firm also handles traditional personal injury matters, but its heart is centered on children who can't fight for themselves. Bivona Law is rapidly growing, with several clear goals: educating parents, holding negligent childcare providers accountable, and ensuring injured kids receive the justice and care they deserve. Hit play to discover: The most common injuries in daycare and childcare settings. How systemic bullying develops and why negligent supervision is often the root cause. What makes child injury cases legally and emotionally different from adult PI cases. What parents should look for when choosing a daycare or private school. Want to find out more about Drew Bivona and his work helping injured children? Visit Bivona Law now!

First Take begins with reaction to the PI call that swung Sunday Night's brawl between the Eagles and Lions. Could the Lions really miss the playoffs? Spitgate - The crew reacts to video showing Ja'Marr Chase spitting on Jalen Ramsey. How long should he be suspended? The Time is Now! - John Cena joins to discuss his final match at MSG Monday night. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Brock Purdy's return sparked the 49ers' offense, it also brought a much needed divisional win in a blowout against the Cardinals. Purdy threw for three touchdowns on Sunday, two of which went to a favorite target in tight end George Kittle and the other went to offensive fulcrum Christian McCaffrey, who leads the NFL in scrimmage yards this season through Week 11. Skyy Moore set the tone, returning the opening kickoff 98 yards to the 1-yard line, setting up a McCaffrey 1-yard touchdown run. San Francisco maintained control throughout the game, one in which Arizona did itself no favors accumulating a franchise-record 17 penalties. San Francisco did not escape Arizona unscathed though, as kicker Eddy Piñeiro suffered a hamstring injury in the third quarter that could force the team to bring in a new kicker. On this episode of '49ers Talk,' co-hosts Matt Maiocco and Jennifer Lee Chan break down San Francisco's outstanding performance against the Cardinals Sunday at State Farm Stadium. Matt and Jennifer discuss the impact of Purdy's return on the 49ers' offense during a crucial stretch, Kittle and CMC's dominance, and how injuries to both Piñeiro and linebacker Tatum Bethune might affect the team ahead of Monday's showdown with the Carolina Panthers.--(0:00) 49ers did what they had to do to get win vs. Cardinals(3:00) Will the 49ers have to add a kicker because of Eddy Piñeiro's injury?(4:00) Brock Purdy's return dispels any QB controversy from media(12:00) Can CMC achieve 1,000-1,000 season?(14:00) This is the healthiest the 49ers have been on offense all season(17:30) The 49ers' defense forced three takeaways(25:00) What type of team are the 49ers? Can they bring this type of performance on MNF?(28:00) Robert Saleh will really have to earn his money down the stretch this season(30:00) Looking ahead, the 49ers need beat NFC playoff contenders Carolina, Chicago Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.