Podcasts about protective

In Part 2 of the Ego Mastery series, we break down what an aligned, trained ego actually looks like in elite athletes and peak performers, and how it shows up under real pressure. You'll learn: What's happening internally when an athlete is calm, decisive, and locked in Why aligned performers experience low mental noise and faster decision-making How mistakes become data instead of danger The difference between pressure that sharpens and panic that hijacks Why elite performers conserve energy, adapt in real time, and show up when it matters most We also break down what prevents ego alignment, including: No clear vision or higher purpose Lack of structure, plans, and direction for the ego Corrupted internal rules and meanings (the Superego) Unresolved childhood wounds and trauma Protective mechanisms and body-based stress responses that sabotage performance This episode shows you why you can only ride your ego so far, and why real dominance requires clarity, leadership, and alignment from the inside out. Coaching If you're ready to build true calm, confidence, and consistency under pressure, and train your ego to work for you instead of against you, apply for 1-on-1 coaching. imnotyou.com/coaching

Virgin Birth Theology and Historical Family Reality — James Tabor — Tabor analyzes the Protoevangelium of James, an apocryphal Christian text depicting Mary as a temple-raised perpetual virgin and Joseph as an elderly protective guardian specifically appointed to explain away Jesus's documented siblings mentioned in Gospel narratives. Tabor contrasts this "fantastic story" theological construction with historical reality of a typical Jewish woman—Mary—who likely maintained a large extended family and experienced early widowhood following Joseph's death, situating her within ordinary Jewish family and social structures rather than exceptional sacred status. 1698

Editor's Summary by Preeti Malani, MD, MSJ, and Christopher C. Muth, MD, Deputy Editors of JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, for articles published from November 22 - December 5, 2025.

Grain Company Bankruptcy and Protective Arrangements Vitamin A Cattle Needs and Deficiency Veterinary Programs   00:01:05 – Grain Company Bankruptcy and Protective Arrangements: Roger McEowen, K-State and Washburn law professor, starts the show as he discusses a recent bankruptcy and the differences between full conservatorship and the new option of protective arrangements. Important Information for Kansas Farmers on the Hansen-Mueller Co Bankruptcy Filing Change to Guardianships and Conservatorships in Kansas - Impact on Ag Contracts?   00:12:05 – Vitamin A Cattle Needs and Deficiency: K-State beef systems specialist Emma Briggs keeps the show moving by explaining the importance of vitamin A for cattle and the issues a deficiency can cause. Vitamin A Matters: Supporting Reproduction, Growth, and Immunity in Cattle KSGrainSorghum.org   00:23:05 – Veterinary Programs: Concluding the show is part of the Beef Cattle Institute's Cattle Chat podcast with Brad White, Bob Larson and Fred Gingrich as they highlight the American Association of Bovine Practitioners and the Academy of Veterinary Consultants.  BCI Cattle Chat Podcast Bovine Science with BCI Podcast Email BCI at bci@ksu.edu     Send comments, questions or requests for copies of past programs to ksrenews@ksu.edu.   Agriculture Today is a daily program featuring Kansas State University agricultural specialists and other experts examining ag issues facing Kansas and the nation. It is hosted by Shelby Varner and distributed to radio stations throughout Kansas and as a daily podcast.   K‑State Extension is a short name for the Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Service, a program designed to generate and distribute useful knowledge for the well‑being of Kansans. Supported by county, state, federal and private funds, the program has county Extension offices statewide. Its headquarters is on the K‑State campus in Manhattan. For more information, visit www.ksre.ksu.edu. K-State Extension is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

A clear, practical overview of indirect fire prevention on Shabbos in the Mishnah Berurah. This episode clarifies when one may prevent a fire's spread through indirect actions, such as placing wet materials, vessels of water, or protective barriers near a blaze. We examine extinguishing when clothing catches fire, using plates to block flames, concerns of laundry when wetting garments, and distinctions between acceptable indirect causation vs. direct extinguishing.Additionally discussed: when a non-Jew may extinguish a fire on Shabbos for a Jew, why a child must be stopped, and how intention affects halachic status. Essential guidance for applying the laws of Shabbos during fire-related emergencies, property loss, or safety concerns.

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.

Join us for today's Our Daily Bread devotional by Anne Le Tissier, taken from Proverbs 25:28. Today's devotional is read by Rebecca. Meet the team at odb.org/meet-the-team. God bless you.We hope that you have enjoyed today's reading from Our Daily Bread. You can find more exciting content from Our Daily Bread Ministries by following @ourdailybreadeurope on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and TikTok. You can even sign up to receive Our Daily Bread Bible reading notes sent straight to your door for free: odb.org/subscribe

If you've ever found yourself deep in Google searches trying to work out whether your ex is a covert narcissist, a malignant narcissist, or something in between… this episode is for you.Because here's the truth:Understanding “narcissism” won't help you protect your children.Understanding coercive control will.In this episode, Danielle Black explains why protective parents get stuck in the narcissism rabbit hole - and how it can keep them overwhelmed, confused, and focused on the wrong problem.You'll learn:Why terms like “narcissist,” “covert,” “grey rock,” and “yellow rock” can keep you stuck, and reactive, instead of strategicWhy the family law system doesn't care about personality labels - and what it does care aboutThe key differences between narcissistic traits and pattern-based coercive controlWhy identifying patterns of behaviour matters far more than diagnosing the personWhat you should be tracking insteadHow to shift from chaos → clarity, and from labels → evidenceIf you're exhausted from trying to decode their personality, stop.The problem isn't who they are - it's what they do, the pattern, and the harm it causes your children.This episode gives you the lens professionals actually respond to - and the one that puts you back in your power.If you're feeling overwhelmed right now - good. It means your instincts are working.But instinct isn't enough if you're navigating the court system with a controlling co-parent. You need structure, strategy, and language.That's what the Post-Separation Parenting Blueprint gives you.And starting Friday 28 November 2025, you can get:$300 off4 months of AI Danielle to support you 24/7Take advantage of this special offer.Your future self will thank you.More information about the blueprint: https://www.danielleblackcoaching.com.au/the-post-separation-parenting-blueprint-1About Danielle Black: Danielle Black is a respected authority in child-focused post-separation parenting in Australia. With over twenty years' experience in education, counselling and coaching - and her own lived experience navigating a complex separation - she helps parents advocate strategically and protect their children's safety and wellbeing. Learn more at danielleblackcoaching.com.au. This podcast is for educational purposes only and not legal advice. Please seek independent legal, medical, financial, or mental health advice for your situation.

This week on Relic Radio Science Fiction, X Minus One brings us their story from October 3, 1956, Protective Mimicry. Listen to more from X Minus One https://traffic.libsyn.com/forcedn/e55e1c7a-e213-4a20-8701-21862bdf1f8a/SciFi908.mp3 Download SciFi908 | Subscribe | Spotify | Support Relic Radio Science Fiction Your support makes this show possible. If you'd like to help, visit donate.relicradio.com for more information. Thank you.

http://www.mofpodcast.com/http://www.pbnfamily.comhttps://www.facebook.com/matteroffactspodcast/https://www.facebook.com/groups/mofpodcastgroup/https://rumble.com/user/Mofpodcastwww.youtube.com/user/philrabhttps://www.instagram.com/mofpodcasthttps://twitter.com/themofpodcasthttps://www.cypresssurvivalist.org/Support the showMerch at: https://southerngalscrafts.myshopify.com/Shop at Amazon: http://amzn.to/2ora9riPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/mofpodcastPurchase American Insurgent by Phil Rabalais: https://amzn.to/2FvSLMLShop at MantisX: http://www.mantisx.com/ref?id=173*The views and opinions of guests do not reflect the opinions of Phil Rabalais, Andrew Bobo, Nic Emricson, or the Matter of Facts Podcast*Tonight on Matter of Facts Phil unpacks the process of unpacking, after having shot eight hours with a combination of unloading a truck, laundry, and charging devices following a family camping trip. Nic tosses in clothing preparedness, spares, sources of sturdy outerwear, and protective gear.Matter of Facts is now live-streaming our podcast on our YouTube channel, Facebook page, and Rumble at 7:30 PM Central on Thursdays . See the links above, join in the live chat, and see the faces behind the voices. Intro and Outro Music by Phil Rabalais All rights reserved, no commercial or non-commercial use without permission of creator prepper, prep, preparedness, prepared, emergency, survival, survive, self defense, 2nd amendment, 2a, gun rights, constitution, individual rights, train like you fight, firearms training, medical training, matter of facts podcast, mof podcast, reloading, handloading, ammo, ammunition, bullets, magazines, ar-15, ak-47, cz 75, cz, cz scorpion, bugout, bugout bag, get home bag, military, tactical Get Prepared with Our Incredible Sponsors! Survival Bags, kits, gear www.limatangosurvival.comEMP Proof Shipping Containers www.fardaycontainers.comThe Prepper's Medical Handbook Build Your Medical Cache – Welcome PBN FamilyPack Fresh USA www.packfreshusa.comSupport PBN with a Donation https://bit.ly/3SICxEq

Sfinga and Key strategize over the art of decoy magic - protection charms that send malefica and evil eye intended for you elsewhere. Whether as potent solitary wards, made in the Koschei the Deathless style layering of shells that hide and obscure, or as large, simple groups that disperse misfortune across a web, the Dragon and Owl cover various possibilities for their use, including for the protection of relationships and jobs. Support us on patreon.com/TheFrightfulHowls .

http://www.mofpodcast.com/http://www.pbnfamily.comhttps://www.facebook.com/matteroffactspodcast/https://www.facebook.com/groups/mofpodcastgroup/https://rumble.com/user/Mofpodcastwww.youtube.com/user/philrabhttps://www.instagram.com/mofpodcasthttps://twitter.com/themofpodcasthttps://www.cypresssurvivalist.org/Support the showMerch at: https://southerngalscrafts.myshopify.com/Shop at Amazon: http://amzn.to/2ora9riPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/mofpodcastPurchase American Insurgent by Phil Rabalais: https://amzn.to/2FvSLMLShop at MantisX: http://www.mantisx.com/ref?id=173*The views and opinions of guests do not reflect the opinions of Phil Rabalais, Andrew Bobo, Nic Emricson, or the Matter of Facts Podcast*Tonight on Matter of Facts Phil unpacks the process of unpacking, after having shot eight hours with a combination of unloading a truck, laundry, and charging devices following a family camping trip. Nic tosses in clothing preparedness, spares, sources of sturdy outerwear, and protective gear.Matter of Facts is now live-streaming our podcast on our YouTube channel, Facebook page, and Rumble at 7:30 PM Central on Thursdays . See the links above, join in the live chat, and see the faces behind the voices. Intro and Outro Music by Phil Rabalais All rights reserved, no commercial or non-commercial use without permission of creator prepper, prep, preparedness, prepared, emergency, survival, survive, self defense, 2nd amendment, 2a, gun rights, constitution, individual rights, train like you fight, firearms training, medical training, matter of facts podcast, mof podcast, reloading, handloading, ammo, ammunition, bullets, magazines, ar-15, ak-47, cz 75, cz, cz scorpion, bugout, bugout bag, get home bag, military, tactical 

Navigating the Complex World of Civil Procedure: Discovery and Its ImpactThis conversation provides a comprehensive overview of discovery in law, focusing on the rules and strategies essential for law students preparing for exams and practicing attorneys. It covers the scope of discovery, the tools available, mandatory disclosures, the importance of expert testimony, and the implications of electronically stored information (ESI). The discussion also delves into the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine, as well as the potential sanctions for failing to comply with discovery rules. The conversation concludes with practical exam strategies and reflections on the justice system's approach to truth and proportionality.In the realm of civil litigation, discovery is often where the real battle is fought. As law students and practitioners alike know, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, particularly Chapter Five, can make or break a case long before it reaches the courtroom. This blog post delves into the critical aspects of discovery, offering insights and strategies to navigate this complex terrain.Understanding the Scope and ProportionalityThe foundation of discovery lies in Rule 26B1, which governs the scope of what can be requested. Historically, discovery aimed to eliminate trial by ambush, ensuring full disclosure. However, the rise of electronically stored information (ESI) has transformed the landscape, leading to a paradigm shift in 2015. The focus has shifted from mere relevance to proportionality, requiring that requests be non-privileged, relevant, and proportional to the needs of the case.The Six Factors of ProportionalityTo determine proportionality, courts consider six factors: the importance of the issues at stake, the amount in controversy, the parties' relative access to information, the parties' resources, the importance of the discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit. Understanding these factors is crucial for any legal professional navigating discovery disputes.The Role of Privilege and Work ProductTwo critical shields in discovery are attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. While privilege protects confidential communications between a lawyer and client, work product safeguards materials prepared in anticipation of litigation. These doctrines are essential for protecting sensitive information and ensuring a fair adversarial process.Sanctions and ComplianceFailure to comply with discovery rules can lead to severe sanctions under Rule 37. From exclusion of evidence to default judgments, the consequences of non-compliance underscore the importance of adhering to discovery obligations. Understanding the nuances of these rules is vital for avoiding costly mistakes.As you prepare for exams or practice law, remember that discovery is not just about gathering information—it's about strategy, compliance, and understanding the rules that govern the process. By mastering the intricacies of discovery, you can effectively navigate the legal landscape and achieve favorable outcomes for your clients.Subscribe now to stay updated on the latest legal insights and strategies.TakeawaysDiscovery is crucial for case outcomes.Understanding proportionality is key in discovery.The burden of proof lies with the resisting party.Mandatory disclosures streamline the discovery process.Interrogatories help clarify facts and contentions.Corporate depositions require thorough preparation.ESI has transformed litigation practices.Attorney-client privilege is easily waived.Work product doctrine protects legal strategies.Sanctions enforce compliance with discovery rules.law school, discovery, civil procedure, bar exam, legal education, attorney-client privilege, ESI, sanctions, legal strategy, exam preparation

Benny's Liquor, Fireworks & Gunpowder Emporium went up in flames last night. Motion-detector alarms caught the fire and automatically notified the police, who found the fire and called the local fire chief, but by the time they arrived it was too late. Now his insurer claims he violated his Protective Safeguards Endorsement by installing burglary alarms instead of actual fire alarms. Benny doesn't recall anything about this, but apparently it's some paper he signed when he bought the policy. Key Takeaways [ 00:37 ] - Benny's shop burned down, and his insurer denied the claim due to a protective safeguards endorsement violation. [ 01:05 ] - Benny had a motion detector burglar alarm instead of the required fire alarm and does not recall agreeing to the protective safeguards endorsement. [ 06:09 ] - Protective safeguards endorsements require the insured to maintain the specific safeguards named in the policy schedule as a condition of insurance. [ 06:59 ] - If the insured knows of any suspension or impairment in the safeguards, they must notify the insurer or risk losing coverage. [ 08:29 ] - If a safeguard is shut off due to breakage or leakage, repairs must be completed within 48 hours for notification to the insurer not to be necessary. [ 10:47 ] - Courts often follow the strict policy language; simply having a different type of alarm, even if it detected the fire, is not considered compliant. [ 12:04 ] - The protective safeguards endorsement is often found in commercial property or farm coverage, and courts tend to enforce strict compliance. [ 15:15 ] - Coverage can be denied even if the breach of the safeguard duty did not affect the outcome of the loss because compliance is a condition of the insurance. [ 18:11 ] - Beth provides a summary of the key takeaways. Your PLRB Resources Coverage Question: Fire Loss Involving Protective Safeguards Endorsement - https://www.plrb.org/documents/fire-loss-involving-protective-safeguards-endorsement/ Law Review: New Hamilton Liquor Store, Inc. v. Amguard Ins. Co. - https://www.plrb.org/documents/new-hamilton-liquor-store-inc-v-amguard-ins-co-2020/ Employees of member companies also have access to a searchable legal database, hundreds of hours of video trainings, building code materials, weather data, and even the ability to have your coverage questions answered by our team of attorneys (https://www.plrb.org/ask-plrb/) at no additional charge to you or your company. Subscribe to this Podcast Your Podcast App - Please subscribe and rate us on your favorite podcast app YouTube - Please like and subscribe at @plrb LinkedIN - Please follow at "Property and Liability Resource Bureau" Send us your Scenario! Please reach out to us at 630-509-8704 with your scenario! This could be your "adjuster story" sharing a situation from your claims experience, or a burning question you would like the team to answer. In any case, please omit any personal information as we will anonymize your story before we share. Just reach out to scenario@plrb.org.  Legal Information The views and opinions expressed in this resource are those of the individual speaker and not necessarily those of the Property & Liability Resource Bureau (PLRB), its membership, or any organization with which the presenter is employed or affiliated. The information, ideas, and opinions are presented as information only and not as legal advice or offers of representation. Individual policy language and state laws vary, and listeners should rely on guidance from their companies and counsel as appropriate. Music: "Piece of Future" by Keyframe_Audio. Pixabay. Pixabay License. Font: Metropolis by Chris Simpson. SIL OFL 1.1. Icons: FontAwesome (SIL OFL 1.1) and Noun Project (royalty-free licenses purchased via subscription). Sound Effects: Pixabay (Pixabay License) and Freesound.org (CC0).

New game-changing headgear has been developed to protect junior rugby players. After more than a decade of study into the causes and consequences of head collisions by rugby players, Canterbury University researchers have developed new soft shell protective headgear for juniors. It could be on sale early next year. Professor Nick Draper told Mike Hosking that all the money they generate from sales will be reinvested into research. He says their focus is on how they can make the game safer for young people. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This episode covers the halachic details of performing circumcision on Shabbat, focusing on how to protect the infant after the procedure, what types of coverings may be used, and how to transport necessary materials within halachic limits. We review when hot-water washing is permitted, both before and after the circumcision, and how changing medical norms impact current practice. The discussion includes when one may rely on a non-Jew for assistance, how to handle concerns of squeezing or washing cloths on Shabbat, and the status of the infant regarding potential danger.We also examine the rules for a mohel performing the procedure on Shabbat—especially if it is his first time—along with the division of the circumcision steps among multiple practitioners. The episode concludes with the opening of Siman 332 regarding assisting an animal in birth on Shabbat and the limits of permissible involvement.

Eastern red cedar has long been used to line chests and closets to protect wool items.

Lee our first guest describes his close observation of a puma stalking fallow deer in Buckinghamshire. He watched the circling deer behaviour as they responded as a protective group to the advancing  predator, and he describes the fear he felt at finding himself so close to the scene.John our second guest returns after episode 125, with more big cat stories from the Scottish Borders, including lynx in Kielder Forest and night-time encounters with staring and stalking animals that were potential big cats. John also gives his perspective on living with predators in the area.  John has caught up with the podcasts as a  recently joined listener, and gives his overview of the trends he spots in all the content. John and Rick also discuss the role of art and music in communicating British big cats, and John has written and performed another outro song for the podcast. This new one is ‘Stumbling Blind', about a mother and cub – lyrics are displayed on the BCC website under ep 133. Word of the week:   interpretation11 November 2025

The Government says it is taking significant steps to improve police oversight after a damning IPCA report on the handling of complaints against former Deputy Police Commissioner Jevon McSkimming - before his recent trial. Instead of investigating anonymous complaints accusing McSkimming of being a sexual predator, police prosecuted the woman for digital harassment. Police Commissioner Richard Chambers says the watchdog report made appalling reading - and showed a clear lack of leadership and integrity at the highest level. Last week, McSkimming pleaded guilty to having child sexual exploitation and bestiality material on work devices NZ Herald investigative reporter Jared Savage says the then-Commissioner, Andrew Coster, knew some details of the relationship. "Essentially, they've just accepted McSkimming's version of events, that this was an extra-marital affair that went wrong and this woman's out to get revenge." LISTEN ABOVESee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When a murder destroys a family, the world often focuses on the killers, the trials, and the endless courtroom drama. But in the case of Dan Markel and the Adelson family, the most important victims aren't in prison or on TV — they're two children quietly living in the wreckage. In this episode, Tony Brueski takes a deep dive into the psychological trauma faced by the children of Wendi Adelson and Dan Markel — the victims of a murder-for-hire plot that shattered two families and left the kids trapped between love and truth. Imagine growing up knowing your father was murdered — and the people accused of orchestrating it are your own family.  Your grandmother, your uncle… now convicted.  Your mother… testifying under immunity.  And you, stuck in the middle — surrounded by people trying to convince you that what the world says is true… is actually a lie. This episode explores how children process trauma in these impossible circumstances: Loyalty conflicts — the psychological tug-of-war between love for caregivers and love for a lost parent. Protective dissonance — the brain's survival mechanism that rewrites reality to preserve attachment. Ambiguous loss — mourning people who are still alive but emotionally gone. Identity trauma — how kids in these situations struggle to trust, attach, and build a sense of self. It's not just grief — it's fragmentation. And while the trials may be over, the emotional sentence for these kids has only begun. This isn't about guilt or innocence anymore — it's about the long-term scars of murder within a family, and what happens to the children who have to live in the echo.

When a murder destroys a family, the world often focuses on the killers, the trials, and the endless courtroom drama. But in the case of Dan Markel and the Adelson family, the most important victims aren't in prison or on TV — they're two children quietly living in the wreckage. In this episode, Tony Brueski takes a deep dive into the psychological trauma faced by the children of Wendi Adelson and Dan Markel — the victims of a murder-for-hire plot that shattered two families and left the kids trapped between love and truth. Imagine growing up knowing your father was murdered — and the people accused of orchestrating it are your own family.  Your grandmother, your uncle… now convicted.  Your mother… testifying under immunity.  And you, stuck in the middle — surrounded by people trying to convince you that what the world says is true… is actually a lie. This episode explores how children process trauma in these impossible circumstances: Loyalty conflicts — the psychological tug-of-war between love for caregivers and love for a lost parent. Protective dissonance — the brain's survival mechanism that rewrites reality to preserve attachment. Ambiguous loss — mourning people who are still alive but emotionally gone. Identity trauma — how kids in these situations struggle to trust, attach, and build a sense of self. It's not just grief — it's fragmentation. And while the trials may be over, the emotional sentence for these kids has only begun. This isn't about guilt or innocence anymore — it's about the long-term scars of murder within a family, and what happens to the children who have to live in the echo.

Sponsored by Bellami Professionalhttps://www.bellamiprofessional.com/https://www.bellamihair.com/https://www.instagram.com/Bellamihair/Use code TEASE for 25% OFFInterview with Sabrina PorscheSabrina Porsche is a highly sought-after professional hairstylist known for her expertise in creating flawless, red-carpet-ready looks. Based in Los Angeles, she has worked with some of the biggest names in the entertainment industry, styling A-list celebrities, musicians, and influencers for major events, editorials, and brand campaigns. With a passion for hair artistry that blends precision and creativity, Sabrina has built a reputation for her ability to craft everything from sleek, polished styles to voluminous, textured looks. Her work has been featured on high-profile red carpets, magazine covers, and fashion spreads, solidifying her status as a go-to stylist in Hollywood.Links:https://www.instagram.com/sabrina.porsche/https://highlightartists.com/artist/sabrina-porsche/News from TheTease.com:https://www.thetease.com/ashanti-lation-talks-lizzos-flirty-vogue-world-bob/https://www.thetease.com/my-salon-suite-raises-over-129k-for-st-jude-childrens-research-hospital/More from TheTease.com:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/readthetease/ (readthetease)Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/volumeupbythetease/ (volumeupbythetease)Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kellyehlers/ / (KellyEhlers)Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/eljeffreycraig/ (eljeffreycraig)Web: https://www.thetease.com (TheTease.com)Email: VolumeUp@TheTease.comCredits: Volume Up is a Tease Media production. This episode was produced by Monica Hickey and Madeline Hickey. James Arbaje is our editor and audio engineer. Thank you to our creative team for putting together the graphics for this episode.Thank you to the team who helped create our theme song. Show them some love and check out their other work!Josh Landowski: https://www.instagram.com/josh_landowski/

Wow, did I learn so very much during this education-packed conversation with Meri McCoy-Thompson, executive director of Dovetail Learning and author. Please join us as we discuss: her insights on resilience: personal resilience reactive resilience cultural resilience relational resilience group resilience her philosophies on the 6 protective patterns: distrusting hyper-caretaking hyper-vigilance avoiding defending attacking cultural patterns her book The Heart of Resilience: Nurturing Your Inner Strength for a Joyful Life and so much more! Welcome to The Healing Place Podcast! I am your host, Teri Wellbrock. You can listen in on Pandora, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, iHeartRadio, Deezer, Amazon Music, and more, or directly on my website at www.teriwellbrock.com/podcasts/. You can also catch our insightful interview on YouTube. Bio: Meri McCoy-Thompson As Executive Director of Dovetail Learning, Meri shares with clients how the We Are Resilient approach might help with healing and helping them both get back up again and thrive.  In their most recent book, The Heart of Resilience: Nurturing Your Inner Strength for a Joyful Life, Meri and her colleague Chuck describe the universal patterns that get in the way of resilience (Cultural Patterns and Protective Patterns) and teach others how to access Resilient Mindsets and Centering Skills. These practical skills transform us from a victim mentality into whole, authentic human beings with agency, autonomy, and compassion. The book captures more than 100 personal stories of resilience challenges and transformation!  Website: https://dovetaillearning.org/ Social media links: https://www.linkedin.com/company/dovetail-learning/ https://www.facebook.com/DovetailLearning/ https://www.instagram.com/dovetaillearning/ Teri's #1 best-selling books and #1 new-release book can be found here. Teri's inspirational audiobook productions can be found here. Teri's monthly newsletter can be found here. Teri's book launch team can be found here. AMAZON AFFILIATE Teri Wellbrock and Unicorn Shadows are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. In other words, I make commission off of purchases made using any affiliate links on my site.

Unscripted: Conversations about Sexual and Domestic Violence is a podcast featuring employees and subject matter experts from Domestic and Sexual Violence Services and partner organizations discussing all aspects of interpersonal violence, plus solutions. On this episode of Unscripted, host Kendra Lee speaks with Domestic and Sexual Violence Services Senior Victim Advocate Vanessa Cullers, and Domestic Relations Unit Supervisor Marwa Hajahmed from the Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court, about protective orders -— the good, the bad, and the misconstrued. If you or someone you know has experienced interpersonal violence, call the Domestic and Sexual Violence 24-Hour Hotline at 703-360-7273, or visit fairfaxcounty.gov and search for domestic and sexual violence. To listen to other county podcasts, visit fairfaxcounty.gov/podcasts

You've heard it all: “The truth about carbs,” “The truth about hormones,” “The truth about fasting.” But here's the real truth—context matters, and no single “truth” out there applies to every woman, every body, or every season of life.In this episode, I break down why most health advice is only a sliver of the full picture—and why lasting change doesn't come from copying and pasting what worked for someone else. Instead, you'll learn how to approach your health like a scientist: with curiosity, patience, and small, consistent actions that actually get down into your cells. You're not broken. You're just stuck in the wrong story.Here's what we cover:Why most “truths” about health are missing contextThe real reason your results aren't changingHow long it actually takes to see change at the cellular levelThe drip-drip-drip method vs. the bucket approach to health5 evidence-based habits to start today: walk, track, sleep, plan, eat proteinWhat your biology needs (and what it doesn't)There's no magic protocol. Just consistent inputs over time. Start anywhere. Because anywhere is better than “someday.”Get Weekly Health Tips:  thrivehealthcoachllc.comLet's Connect:@‌ashleythrivehealthcoach or via email: ashley@thrivehealthcoachingllc.comPodcast Produced by Virtually You!Sources: • Barrès, R., Yan, J., Egan, B., Treebak, J. T., Rasmussen, M., Fritz, T., & Zierath, J. R. (2012). Acute exercise remodels promoter methylation in human skeletal muscle. Cell Metab, 15(3), 405–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2012.01.001 • Baumeister, R. F., & Tierney, J. (2011). Willpower: Rediscovering the greatest human strength. Penguin. • Berg, J. M., Tymoczko, J. L., & Gatto, G. J. (2019). Biochemistry (9th ed.). W. H. Freeman. • Cohen, A. A., Milot, E., Yong, J., Seplaki, C. L., Fülöp, T., & Fried, L. P. (2016). Multi-system physiological dysregulation during aging. Mech Ageing Dev, 156, 86–94. • Guyton, A. C., & Hall, J. E. (2021). Textbook of medical physiology (14th ed.). Elsevier. • Lee, I.-M., Shiroma, E. J., Kamada, M., Bassett, D. R., Matthews, C. E., & Buring, J. E. (2020). Steps, intensity, and mortality in older women. JAMA Intern Med, 180(8), 1103–1112. • Lichtman, S. W., Pisarska, K., Berman, E. R., Pestone, M., Dowling, H., & Heymsfield, S. B. (1992). Self-reported vs actual caloric intake and exercise. N Engl J Med, 327(27), 1893–1898. • McEwen, B. S. (1998). Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators. N Engl J Med, 338(3), 171–179. • Morton, R. W., Murphy, K. T., McKellar, S. R., Schoenfeld, B. J., Helms, E., & Phillips, S. M. (2018). Protein supplementation and resistance training. Br J Sports Med, 52(6), 376–384. • Richter, E. A., & Hargreaves, M. (2013). Exercise, GLUT4, and muscle glucose uptake. Physiol Rev, 93(3), 993–1017. • Spiegel, K., Tasali, E., Penev, P., & Van Cauter, E. (2004). Sleep curtailment lowers leptin, raises ghrelin. Ann Intern Med, 141(11), 846–850. • Turnbaugh, P. J., Ley, R. E., Mahowald, M. A., Magrini, V., Mardis, E. R., & Gordon, J. I. (2007). Obesity-associated gut microbiome. Nature, 444(7122), 1027–1031. • Van Cauter, E., Holmback, U., Knutson, K., Leproult, R., Miller, A., Nedeltcheva, A., & Spiegel, K. (2008). Sleep loss and metabolic function. Horm Support the show

This week on Blonde Highlights Podcast with Kris Yeo & Kyle Hennessy, Madison Timmons, co-host of the 'Most Haunted City on Earth' podcast, shares her insights into the world of the paranormal. From discussing the haunted history of cities like Savannah and New Orleans to her personal experiences with clairvoyance and demonic possession, Madison provides a captivating look into the supernatural. The conversation also explores methods of spirit communication, the role of Ouija boards, and how to protect oneself from unwanted paranormal encounters. This episode is a blend of spooky stories, personal anecdotes, and practical advice for those interested in the paranormal.Follow Madison on IG & TikTok @madisonraetimmons @hauntedcitypodcast YouTube @HauntedcitypodcastTakeawaysSavannah is considered the most haunted city in America.The ghost industry is thriving in Savannah, with many ghost stories.Small towns often have eager spirits wanting to communicate.Children are more open to paranormal experiences than adults.Demonic possession can manifest in various ways, including affecting a house.Personal experiences with spirits can vary greatly from person to person.Tarot can be a useful tool for communicating with spirits.Ouija boards can be dangerous if not used with caution.Spirits can communicate through dreams and other non-traditional methods.Protective measures, like smoke cleansing, can help clear spaces of unwanted spirits.

Former Chattanooga and Nashville Police Officer Steven Meador sits down with Brink and Adam to share what it's like to respond to two active shooter events during his law enforcement career, including the 2015 Chattanooga military recruiting center attack and the 2023 Covenant School shooting in Nashville. Steven reflects on those days, brotherhood that forms in moments of danger, and the lasting impact of trauma that first responders carry long after the scenes clear. He speaks with honesty about what he saw, what he felt, and how therapy has helped him continue forward.   1:10 – Introducing Officer Steven Meador 4:00 – Early career First Shooting of His Career 6:10 – First active shooter response in law enforcement 20:00 – Shots fired directly at Meador 22:45 – Training and teamwork—how officers came together under pressure 23:20 – The importance of standards and preparation in crisis  The 2015 Chattanooga Military Attack 26:30 – Hearing the call come over the radio 30:00 – Protective gear limitations and risk 31:30 – Encountering the first victims on scene 32:45 – Searching for potential car bombs and additional shooters 35:15 – Realizing four Marines had been killed 35:25 – Confusion over the suspect's vest—possible explosives 37:15 – Processing the day alongside fellow officer Sean O'Brien 38:00 – Brotherhood amidst danger The 2023 Covenant School Shooting 45:15 – Recognizing the call wasn't another false alarm 47:25 – Calling his wife and father before heading to the scene 53:00 – Reconciling cognitive dissonance of children's backpacks and books amidst violence Aftermath and Advice 1:03:50 – Reflections as a father—walking past his daughter's room that night 1:06:53 – The unseen aftermath of response work 1:09:20 – Advice for those facing trauma 1:11:00 – Finding someone you trust—both a professional and a friend who's been through it too

"Have you been pining for me as you sit in the lecture hall watching me speak?"---He suddenly showed up at bar. You professor. Helped you get rid of that random guy who was getting too close, then whisked you in his arms to bring you to his car and safely drive you home.Inviting him for coffee was a no brainer. As you are chatting, he suggests reenacting what happened at the bar to help you with setting boundaries.But… it's him though. You don't want to set firm boundaries with him. What if you… got close up instead?---IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE FULL SPICY VERSION OF THIS AUDIO, YOU CAN LISTEN HERE Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When we try to protect others from our pain, we often end up isolating ourselves. In this episode, Laura Lummer, The Breast Cancer Recovery Coach, shares her concept of the protective barrier — the invisible wall that forms when we hold our emotions in and pretend everything is “normal.” Through the lens of radical transparency and supported by research on emotional expression, Laura explains how honest communication reduces stress, strengthens immunity, and builds trust with our champions — the people who love and support us through it all. Listen and learn how vulnerability can be one of the most healing tools in your recovery.   Explore more support: Better Than Before Breast Cancer Life Coaching Membership: https://www.thebreastcancerrecoverycoach.com/lifecoaching   Let's Connect! If this episode helped you breathe a little easier, please share it with a friend or leave a review. Every share helps spread this message of hope, healing, and whole-person wellness.

Click here to send us a topic idea or question for Weekend Wisdom.What strategies can parents and caregivers implement in their homes to help reduce the risk that their children may be sexually abused? Learn practical parenting tools from this conversation with Dr. Eliana Gil, the founder of the Gil Institute for Trauma Recovery and Education. She specializes in the assessment and treatment of trauma in children, especially those who have been sexually abused.In this episode, we discuss:Why should adoptive and foster parents and relative caregivers learn about the risks for sexual abuse of children in our community and how to prevent it?How can parents or caregivers tell the difference between normal childhood curiosity and behaviors that may signal a problem?What are some warning signs that might give parents or caregivers a clue to dig deeper into problematic behaviors they observe?If a child is showing some of these concerning behaviors, what are some practical and supportive ways caregivers can respond?Why is it preventative for parents and caregivers to use correct anatomical terms with kids?Can you offer a few practical suggestions for parents and caregivers to get more comfortable with correct terminology, if they find this an obstacle to equipping and educating their kids?What signs should parents and caregivers be on the lookout for – things that may suggest a child has been abused?5 categories: fear/anxiety, depression, sexual acting out, attachmentEmphasize that no single sign proves abuse but patterns and context matter.If a caregiver suspects abuse, what steps should they take?What is the parents' or caregiver's role once they have reported to the proper authorities?What are some everyday preventative practices families can put in place to keep kids safe while also allowing them to grow in healthy ways?Protective, not paranoidOpen communication in the homeSupervision by safe adultsSafe boundaries in the homeTeaching consent and respectModeling healthy relationshipsAny last words of advice for adoptive parents, foster parents, or relative caregivers about protecting their kids from sexual abuse? Support the showPlease leave us a rating or review. This podcast is produced by www.CreatingaFamily.org. We are a national non-profit with the mission to strengthen and inspire adoptive, foster & kinship parents and the professionals who support them.Creating a Family brings you the following trauma-informed, expert-based content: Weekly podcasts Weekly articles/blog posts Resource pages on all aspects of family building

Do you have a family recipe you refuse to share? Find out the crazy things people do to protect their famous recipes! See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this highly requested AMA, Dr. Gabrielle Lyon addresses the most critical questions surrounding male hormone health. Dr. Lyon tackles the fear, stigma, and misinformation surrounding Testosterone Replacement Therapy (TRT), revealing why a low testosterone level is a major predictor of serious health issues like heart disease, bone fracture, and obesity.She breaks down the current medical consensus on TRT, the risks of replacement, the truth about dosing, and what every man over 40 needs to know about their hormone health. This is a must-watch to separate the bodybuilding myths from the medical facts.Chapter Markers0:00 - Intro: Low Testosterone is a Predictor of Heart Disease1:12 - The Penile Shrinking Myth: What Caused the Viral Frenzy2:20 - Testosterone Levels: The Truth About Aging in Men3:44 - The First Step: What Labs to Ask Your Doctor for4:22 - Why Men Need to Check Their Estrogen (Estradiol)6:13 - The Medical Cutoff for Low T and Androgen Sensitivity7:27 - Low T is Linked to Fatigue, Depression, and Fat Deposition9:27 - TRT and Cardiovascular Health: Is it Protective or a Risk?10:36 - Erectile Dysfunction Predicts Heart Attack Within 3-5 Years12:30 - The Stigma: Why Doctors Don't Check Testosterone13:00 - TRT vs. Steroids: Defining the Line14:21 - Infertility and TRT: What You Must Know15:18 - Safety: What are the Risks of TRT for Men?16:33 - The Stigma: Why Doctors Don't Treat Low T17:15 - TRT and Obesity: Treat Concurrently or Wait?18:10 - Menopause vs. Andropause: Why Men Don't Have to Decline19:34 - Testosterone Boosters (Ashwagandha, Tongkat Ali)26:11 - Different Forms of Testosterone Administration28:09 - Intranasal Testosterone for Less Impact on Fertility30:38 - Managing Expectations: How Long Until You Feel Better?33:00 - TRT and Muscle Gain: The Highs and Lows of Dosing36:47 - The Win-Win: Low Risk, High Reward39:00 - Blood Flow & Erectile Function: Cialis and Exercise40:17 - Semen Quality as a Marker for Overall Male Health41:29 - Parenting and the Cost of Unhealthy Humans41:45 - How to Raise Testosterone Naturally (The Pillars)42:29 - Low-Dose Cialis for Cardiovascular Health (Preemptive Strategy)43:59 - Dr. Lyon's TRT Journey and Early Concerns46:00 - OutroKey Takeaways:Low Testosterone is a major health risk. Low T is linked to an increased risk of bone fracture, heart disease, obesity, and diabetes.TRT is often protective. Contrary to the long-standing myth, replacing low testosterone to a healthy range does not increase the risk of cardiac events. It is, in fact, protective against cardiovascular disease.Erectile Dysfunction (ED) is a canary in the coal mine. ED can predict a heart attack within 3 to 5 years.Men can maintain high T levels. Testosterone levels in a healthy 75-year-old can be just as good as in a man in his 20s.The solution is often concurrent. For an obese or overweight man with low T, concurrent treatment with TRT and a lifestyle intervention is often the most responsible approach to provide the motivation needed for weight loss.Low-dose daily Cialis (2.5mg to 5mg) may be a viable preemptive strategy for cardiovascular health due to its blood flow benefits.This episode is brought to you by:Manukora - Get $25 off your Starter Kit at

Raising Expectations with Pastor Joe Schofield, Stefanie and Dr Craig Thayer, Dr Paul Hall, and Ron Greer Joined by Guest, Frank Roberson, with The Black Rhino Protection Agency - Situational Awareness We are so glad to have our dear friend and special part of our family back with us this week! Founder and CEO of Black Rhino Group, Protective Services, Counterintelligence Threat and Protective intelligence specialists, Frank Roberson is the best in this field! “Situational Awareness” is critically important in the world we find ourselves in today! Does your family understand what this means? Lives could depend upon it and in the least case stress and worries could be relieved! Hear Frank share insights and give wisdom for us to learn and impart clarity that we might better understand the dangers inherent in the battle between good and evil all around us today. The Team! Pastor Joe Schofield,  Dr. Paul Paul Hall,  Stef Stefanie Shaw Thayer,  Dr. Craig Craig Tank Thayer,  Pastor Ron Ron Greer.

Two protective service officers were assaulted overnight at Pakenham train station.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Jeff speaks with Andy Gilley and legendary Pro Wrestler and Hendersonville resident Jeff Jarrett about Pig Fest and the entertainment that will happen. We continue with the show as we find out about Tn Adult Protective Services.

Jeff Speaks with Andy Gilley and Legendary Pro Wrestler and Hendersonville Resident , Jeff Jarrett. We will then learn from Tn Adult Protective Services.

HOUR 2: Is it time to start sporting protective eye wear for pickle ball? full 2113 Fri, 17 Oct 2025 20:00:00 +0000 fISkpQJwIst77LhLOvzOceFhE72wWgi8 news The Dana & Parks Podcast news HOUR 2: Is it time to start sporting protective eye wear for pickle ball? You wanted it... Now here it is! Listen to each hour of the Dana & Parks Show whenever and wherever you want! © 2025 Audacy, Inc. News False https://player.ampe

10-14-25 - Reactions To Brent's Angry Email - Silverback Cracks Protective Glass At Zoo Reminds Us Of Zoo Dangers - Tennis Player Banned For Testing Positive For Meth Reminding John Of His Meth Girl EncounterSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

10-14-25 - Reactions To Brent's Angry Email - Silverback Cracks Protective Glass At Zoo Reminds Us Of Zoo Dangers - Tennis Player Banned For Testing Positive For Meth Reminding John Of His Meth Girl EncounterSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of Becoming Witchy, we explore the magical properties of rue (Ruta graveolens)—a powerful herb long associated with protection and cleansing. Known for its ability to ward off negativity, rue carries a potent, boundary-setting energy. I share how growing this herb in my own garden has deepened my connection to it and strengthened my understanding of its protective magic.Keep in touch and up to date by signing up for our newsletter for monthly rituals and shop updates. Support the creation of the podcast on Patreon where you'll get my tarot cheat sheet. Visit our Bramble & Brimstone ⁠shop⁠ and ⁠website⁠  where you can shop our wares. Follow us on ⁠⁠instagram⁠⁠ and ⁠Bluesky⁠ for updates and more witchy content!  

Tobacco companies introduced cigarette filters in the 1950s because of growing public concerns about…

Trauma is not a single moment. It is an ongoing dialogue between your brain, body, and environment. In this conversation, Dr. Mbemba Jabbi explains how neuroplasticity and affective neuroscience help us understand protective patterns like hypervigilance, shutdown, and dissociation. We explore the roles of the insula, amygdala, and cingulate networks in sensing threat, shaping emotions, and connecting brain states with bodily signals such as heart, gut, and breath. Dr. Jabbi also discusses research that associates early childhood trauma, including sexual trauma, with higher inflammatory markers like C-reactive protein, while emphasizing that biology interacts with environment and change is possible. You will hear how sensory training, co-regulation, psychotherapy, and supportive practices may help repattern responses over time. This is a grounded, science-informed look at why survival strategies make sense in context and how compassionate, skills-based work can support nervous system health. If you or your clients live with complex developmental trauma, this episode offers language, frameworks, and first steps that respect lived experience and prioritize safety.   Timestamps: 0:00 Protective patterning and repeating environments 1:00 Meet Dr. Jabbi and her research lens 7:10 Brain circuits in emotion and stress 13:20 Insula, interoception, and body-brain links 18:00 Survival values and environmental context 26:00 Adaptive suppression vs. underdevelopment 40:00 Inflammation and childhood trauma (C-reactive protein) 49:00 Treatment implications and tracking biomarkers 56:00 Fast and slow fear pathways, behavior outputs 59:50 Key takeaways for practitioners and individuals 1:02:00 Repatterning for joy and post-traumatic growth 1:03:30 Where to practice the tools in the community Key Takeaways: Emotions are functional survival signals that reflect whole-body states. The insula, amygdala, and cingulate form networks that integrate sensory input with bodily responses. Protective outputs like numbness or shutdown are learned adaptations that supported safety. Studies associate early childhood trauma with elevated inflammation markers, while outcomes are shaped by environment and support. Neuroplasticity means skills, relationships, and practice can help repattern responses over time. Resources Mentioned: BrainBased community: https://BrainBased.com Neurosomatic Intelligence Coaching Certification (NSI) Explore classes and community trial: https://rewiretrial.com Dell Medical School, The University of Texas at Austin Call to Action: If this episode resonates, follow and review Trauma Rewired so more people can find trauma-informed education. Ready to practice the tools we discussed? Start your free trial at rewiretrial.com Disclaimer: Trauma Rewired podcast is intended to educate and inform but does not constitute medical, psychological or other professional advice or services. Always consult a qualified medical professional about your specific circumstances before making any decisions based on what you hear. We share our experiences, explore trauma, physical reactions, mental health and disease. If you become distressed by our content, please stop listening and seek professional support when needed. Do not continue to listen if the conversations are having a negative impact on your health and well-being. If you or someone you know is struggling with their mental health, or in mental health crisis and you are in the United States you can 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline. If someone's life is in danger, immediately call 911. We do our best to stay current in research, but older episodes are always available. We don't warrant or guarantee that this podcast contains complete, accurate or up-to-date information. It's very important to talk to a medical professional about your individual needs, as we aren't responsible for any actions you take based on the information you hear in this podcast. We invite guests onto the podcast. Please note that we don't verify the accuracy of their statements. Our organization does not endorse third-party content and the views of our guests do not necessarily represent the views of our organization. We talk about general neuro-science and nervous system health, but you are unique. These are conversations for a wide audience. They are general recommendations and you are always advised to seek personal care for your unique outputs, trauma and needs. We are not doctors or licensed medical professionals. We are certified neuro-somatic practitioners and nervous system health/embodiment coaches. We are not your doctor or medical professional and do not know you and your unique nervous system. This podcast is not a replacement for working with a professional. The BrainBased.com site and Rewiretrail.com is a membership site for general nervous system health, somatic processing and stress processing. It is not a substitute for medical care or the appropriate solution for anyone in mental health crisis. Any examples mentioned in this podcast are for illustration purposes only. If they are based on real events, names have been changed to protect the identities of those involved. We've done our best to ensure our podcast respects the intellectual property rights of others, however if you have an issue with our content, please let us know by emailing us at traumarewired@gmail.com. All rights in our content are reserved.  

Meeting your girlfriend's mom for the first time, you're welcomed with tea, cookies, and warm hospitality—or so it seems. Beneath her polite demeanor, she's a fiercely protective mother determined to ensure you're worthy of her daughter. Through casual conversation that gradually turns intense, she tests your intentions, loyalty, and resolve. With her sharp wit and probing questions, she makes it clear that her daughter's happiness is her top priority—and that she's not afraid to protect her at all costs. Can you hold your own under the watchful gaze of this loving but intimidating mom? Edited by The Dark Side!

Fear and anxiety can feel overwhelming, especially in seasons when uncertainty presses in. As our daily prayer and devotional remind us, the psalmist reminds us that God is not distant or indifferent—He is our shield, our refuge, and our covering. Amanda shares a personal story of repeating the phrase “God protects me like a shield” in a dark, fearful moment. That simple truth became a lifeline when fear threatened to take over. Psalm 91:4 gives us a powerful picture of God’s nearness—like a parent bird sheltering its young beneath protective wings, our Father covers us in His love and strength. Romans 8:31 affirms this reality: “If God is for us, who can be against us?” When we face anxiety, fear, or uncertainty, we can lean into the truth that God’s presence is bigger than the darkness. His protection extends over our families, our homes, our work, and our hearts. No matter what storms surround us, we are never unprotected. God’s shield is not fragile—it is steadfast, faithful, and unshakable. Today's Bible Reading: "He will cover you with his pinions, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness is a shield and buckler." – Psalm 91:4 (ESV) Key Takeaways God is our shield and refuge, covering us in His protection (Psalm 91:4). Fear may whisper that we are alone, but God’s Word declares that His presence surrounds us. Romans 8:31 reminds us that nothing can ultimately prevail against those who belong to Him. When anxiety rises, we can replace fearful thoughts with the truth of Scripture. Let’s Pray Together Dear Lord, thank You for covering me with Your protective shield. When fear threatens to overwhelm me, remind me that You are with me, that Your love and faithfulness are stronger than any darkness. Guard my family, my heart, and my mind. Replace my anxious thoughts with Your peace, and let my life bring glory to Your name. Amen. Related Resources How to Pray When You Feel Anxious – Crosswalk.com What Psalm 91 Teaches Us About God’s Protection – iBelieve.com Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

Send us a textThis time we're really in the kitchen. Leandra Witchwood and Elyse Welles invite you into a cozy, hands-on “Kitchen Witch's Hearth” session to make quick pickled red onions two ways—while weaving intention, protection, and cleansing into every step. From knife skills and jar-charging to stirring deosil and widdershins, you'll hear how intuitive cooking becomes spellcraft, why onions and garlic are powerhouse allies, and how ingredients like vinegar, caraway, and even a lemon-and-salt ward can support energetic hygiene. It's tactile, candid, a little teary (thanks, onions), and full of practical witchery you can taste. If you love hearth magick, seasonal pantry projects, and turning everyday food into living ritual, this one's for you.Video coming soon!

In this episode of Healthy Waves, host Avik Chakraborty sits down with Greg Vorst and Michael Nolan, co-founders of Embodied Recovery, to explore the deeper roots of addiction and mental health struggles. Together, they unpack the powerful idea that “the illness is often in the personality,” and how true recovery requires more than abstinence—it demands transformation of how we live, breathe, and relate to ourselves and others. The conversation covers the role of learned helplessness, how body-based practices like Sundo breathing can loosen ingrained patterns, and why recovery is not just coping but awakening into aliveness, peace, and purpose. This dialogue is direct, thought-provoking, and filled with practical insights for anyone navigating healing, trauma, or transformation. About the Guests   Greg Vorst is a licensed therapist, recovery mentor, and practitioner of Sundo—an ancient Taoist breathing and meditation practice. With decades of experience, he bridges psychology, spiritual wisdom, and embodiment work to create practical tools for everyday healing. Michael Nolan is a recovery leader and transformational teacher whose lived experience fuels his work. He helps people move beyond abstinence into awakening—shifting from helplessness to empowerment, and from survival to authentic living. Together, they founded Embodied Recovery, a pioneering treatment center in Silicon Valley. Key Takeaways   Healing is not only about treating symptoms but reshaping personality patterns that keep us stuck. Learned helplessness can keep people trapped, but small nudges from community and structure restore agency. Abstinence is only the foundation—true recovery comes from transforming how we live and relate. The body holds psychological defenses; breathwork and embodiment practices can release stored tension and unlock healing. Protective personality traits (like armoring or judgment) may once have been survival mechanisms but can block intimacy and growth if left unchecked. Recovery is not just coping—it's awakening to aliveness, responsibility, spiritual connection, and empowered choice. A practical first step: share your struggle with a safe friend, guide, or community—truth-telling begins the healing journey. Connect with the Guests   Embodied Recovery Treatment Center: www.embodiedrecovery.com Join Daily Sundo Practice or Empowered Living Teachings: www.meloscenter.org Upcoming Workshop with Master Jin Mok (Oct 4): Details available on meloscenter.org Phone: 888-372-3610 Want to be a guest on Healthy Mind, Healthy Life? DM on PM - Send me a message on PodMatch DM Me Here: https://www.podmatch.com/hostdetailpreview/avik Disclaimer   This video is for educational and informational purposes only. The views expressed are the personal opinions of the guest and do not reflect the views of the host or Healthy Mind By Avik™️. We do not intend to harm, defame, or discredit any person, organization, brand, product, country, or profession mentioned. All third-party media used remain the property of their respective owners and are used under fair use for informational purposes. By watching, you acknowledge and accept this disclaimer. Healthy Mind By Avik™️ is a global platform redefining mental health as a necessity, not a luxury. Born during the pandemic, it's become a sanctuary for healing, growth, and mindful living. Hosted by Avik Chakraborty—storyteller, survivor, and wellness advocate—this channel shares powerful podcasts and soul-nurturing conversations on: • Mental Health & Emotional Well-being• Mindfulness & Spiritual Growth• Holistic Healing & Conscious Living• Trauma Recovery & Self-Empowerment With over 4,400+ episodes and 168.4K+ global listeners, join us as we unite voices, break stigma, and build a world where every story matters.

Brea and Mallory talk about reading signed books and debate how precious you need to be with them. Plus, they review Book Beau book covers and discuss how much protection books really need. Email us at readingglassespodcast at gmail dot com!Reading Glasses MerchRecommendations StoreLinks -Reading Glasses Facebook GroupReading Glasses Goodreads GroupAmazon Wish ListNewsletterLibro.fmTo join our Discord channel, email us proof of your Reading-Glasses-supporting Maximum Fun membership!www.maximumfun.org/joinForest of ReadingBook BeauReadathon - 9/13Glasser Book Club Pick - The BewitchingBooks Mentioned -Esperance by Adam OyebanjiForest Euphoria by Patricia Ononiwu Kaishian

In This Hour:--  Armies of activists seed Wikipedia with propaganda. Why aren't gun rights forces using this tool?--  Learning to clean a gun can mean springs flying across the room.--  Develop a protective mindset in order to react instantly to an attack.Gun Talk 08.31.25 After ShowBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/gun-talk--6185159/support.