20 Feb 2012

A former trainee corporate lawyer who spent three months in a coma is to finally see her novel in print after completely forgetting she had written it.

Now a Master’s student at The University of Manchester, Alexandra Singer suffers from long-term memory loss following a near fatal attack of cerebral lupus in 2008.

Her brother Joshua had discovered the notes to her novel while clearing out her London flat.

Twenty-nine-year-old Alex  spent much of the following two years in hospital teaching herself to write again to work on the book.

And after defying the odds, Tea at the Grand Tazi is published by Legend Press next month.

She had been told by doctors she might never be able to walk again, and spent months fighting paralysis, breathing through a tracheotomy tube.

Even today, she still relies on a wheelchair to a large extent, although with intensive physiotherapy her mobility is improving and she is beginning to walk at her home in Cheadle where she lives with her family.

She said: “My experience was horrendous: the doctors thought I would be brain damaged and for six months I was paralysed and couldn’t speak.

 “But it was the book that helped me to pull through:  I apparently had the idea before the illness, but was too busy working to write it.

 “I was excited when my bother brought the script to me in hospital and the prospect of finishing it inspired me to relearn to write.

 “The book is set in the evocative landscape of Marrakech, Morocco and follows a young expat Maia who struggles to take control of her life, after succumbing to the seedy underbelly of the city.

 “I was travelling a lot before I fell ill and met many unusual people, expatriates running away from their lives in the UK, which is what influenced the book.’

“I am so lucky to have such a supportive family and to have an amazing University on my doorstep. They thought I was going to die but have supported me in every way.”

Alex won runner up prize in the  Luke Bitmead Bursary competition, which was established to support young novelists in the memory of Legend Press author Luke Bitmead, who died too young.  The publishing deal with Legend soon followed.

Following her experiences in the NHS, she chose to take  the MA in Health Care Law and Ethics at the University’s School of Law in Sept 2011.

She also does freelance legal translation and research as well as lots of physio in the hope of walking again.

She added: “I still have spasticity in my legs: the doctors still don’t know what they are dealing with though I am not in pain anymore.

“If I wasn’t so bored with it all, I suppose I would be scared.

“If I walk again, I will take the next plane to Brazil: travelling was something I loved to do.

“But I cannot live without writing and I am so relieved to have recovered full movement in my hands.”

‘I was thrilled to get the bursary and to know that people enjoyed my writing, but I never thought I would be published. I had to read the offer email five times to make sure.’

Notes for editors

Tea at the Grand Tazi is published by Legend Press.

Visit http://www.legendpress.co.uk/ and http://www.alexandrasinger.co.uk/ for more details

Images are available

Alex is available for comment

For media enquiries contact:

Mike Addelman
Press Officer
Faculty of Humanities
The University of Manchester
0161 275 0790
07717 881567
Michael.addelman@manchester.ac.uk
 

SOURCE

Article source: http://www.biosciencetechnology.com/News/Feeds/2012/02/sections-international-news-remarkable-student-sees-lost-novel-in-print/

Having just extricated itself from a lawsuit from Topps, Leaf now finds itself in another lawsuit, this time with Panini.

On February 23, Panini sued Leaf and its founder and president, Brian Gray, for tortious interference with a contractual relationship. Leaf was planning on releasing autographed stickers from Kevin Durant, one of Panini’s exclusive athletes.

Legal translation: Durant is exclusive to Panini now. You can’t have him.

From a review of the complaint and attached materials, it seems Leaf was in possession of 750 stickers signed by Kevin Durant. According to the exhibits filed by Panini, the signatures are on Upper Deck holograms. Leaf approached Panini to see if they would like to buy the stickers. Panini declined, and argued that future use of the stickers should be impermissible.

The complaint and exhibits (especially the exhibits) do a good job of telling the story for those who would like to read them. (Editor’s note: Although these documents are now on public record, the original exhibits include personal email address and phone numbers. Out of respect to the parties involved, we have blacked out these personal numbers and email addresses, although the document and comments within them remain in tact.)

After Panini refused to buy the Durant autographs, it appears Leaf intends to use the Durant stickers in its upcoming 2012 Leaf Best of Basketball product. This could be what triggered Panini into filing the suit.

I called Brian Gray to comment on the lawsuit and he indicated that a hearing was already held on a motion by Panini for a temporary restraining order (TRO).

Legal translation: Panini told the court “We need a court ruling immediately!”

Basically, to succeed on a motion for a TRO, you need to prove to the court that you 1) are likely to win the case and 2) are currently being harmed in such a fashion that just receiving money is just not good enough.

Gray also indicated that Panini’s motion was denied by the judge.

Legal translation: The court said, “Sorry, Panini…I can’t give you immediate relief…we’ll need to hear more from both sides.”

So, although Leaf has been sued, it has won the first victory.

Does this mean Leaf will win the suit? Not necessarily. TROs are very difficult to get because it’s hard to prove you are likely to win a lawsuit (it’s a higher standard than what Panini would need to meet to win the lawsuit). So long as the other side has legitimate defenses and support for those defenses, TROs are typically declined.

That being said, it is a good indicator that Leaf may be in the driver’s seat, at least for the time being.

How will this case turn out? I’d like to see Leaf’s response before I fully speculate on that. Tortious interference claims are tricky and require proof that the defendant was purposefully trying to interfere with a contractual relationship and harmed the value of that contract or the business relationship.

It would seem to me that if Leaf is lawfully in possession of these signed stickers, then Panini’s suit isn’t strong. From reviewing the exhibits to the complaint, it appears that Leaf had the stickers in July, 2011. Durant’s contract with Panini was not signed until December, 2011. This makes it unclear how Leaf’s prior possession of such materials (if lawful) would interfere with a later contract.

But that’s all information we will get from later filings.

From my experience, if a defendant obtains a denial of a TRO, typically those lawsuits wrap up pretty quick. Lawsuits run on momentum, and, as one of my mentors taught me, “Your lawsuit is strongest on the day you file it. It only falls apart from there.” Since Panini lost the first round, it might be reassessing the strength of its case, and may want to seek a business solution to wrap the matter up.

What’s also interesting is that the industry really is targeting Leaf’s “Best of” products. The Topps lawsuit had to do with 2011 Leaf Best of Baseball. Nowthe Panini lawsuit appears to touch on Best of Basketball. I guess if Leaf wants to determine when it’ll be sued next, it should begin preparing another “Best of” product for release.

We contacted both Panini and Leaf. Panini declined further comment at this time. Leaf’s Gray said they will have an official comment soon.

The information provided in Paul Lesko’s “Law of Cards” column is not intended to be legal advice, but merely conveys general information related to legal issues commonly encountered in the sports industry. This information is not intended to create any legal relationship between Paul Lesko, the Simmons Browder Gianaris Angelides Barnerd LLC or any attorney and the user. Neither the transmission nor receipt of these website materials will create an attorney-client relationship between the author and the readers.

The views expressed in the “Law of Cards” column are solely those of the author and are not affiliated with the Simmons Law Firm. You should not act or rely on any information in the “Law of Cards” column without seeking the advice of an attorney. The determination of whether you need legal services and your choice of a lawyer are very important matters that should not be based on websites or advertisements.

4 CARD ROOKIE LOT 07-08 KEVIN DURANT Topps RC #112 BV $65
$24.95

NWT- KEVIN DURANT OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDER SEWN BLACK JERSEY #35- MENS XL
$32.62

Kevin Durant 24KT Gold and Color Coin
$34.95

Kevin Durant Autographed Jersey with COA
$99.99

KEVIN DURANT Thunders 2007-08 Bowman “Copper” RC #111 #’d 399
$39.99

Kevin Durant Oklahoma City Thunder OKC Autographed Signed basketball NBA AllStar
$99.99

5 CT LOT KEVIN DURANT THUNDER 2007-08 TOPPS ROOKIE CARDS RC #2 MINT! TEXAS
$19.99

Kevin Durant Oklahoma City Thunder Titanium Caged Player Soft Hand Pigment-Dy…
$29.99

Article source: http://www.cardboardconnection.com/panini-sues-leaf-autographed-kevin-upper-deck

For a fictional character, John Henry, the steel-driving man, is causing a very real headache for Topps. It turns out the alleged model for the card was a former Topps employee who was relieved of his duties before he gave explicit permission that his image could be used.

2011 Topps Triple Threads Baseball had a trio of gimmick cards for fictional characters John Henry, Leif Ericson and Pecos Bill. While just five of each were made, many collectors felt they didn’t have a place in a high-end product. They didn’t want “relics” for a figure from a tall tale in a third-grade reader.

Even  Mark Sapir, Topps’ Vice President of Marketing for Sports Entertainments, voiced some concern about the card’s inclusion during a Cardboard Connection Radio interview last fall. At the time, his comments made me chuckle.

The card was, if anything, just a minor headache for Topps. Their low production run probably meant that they sold well on the secondary market. The detractors forgot about them and moved on.

But now that minor headache has the potential to become a full-blown PR migraine. Former Topps employee Christopher Holmes, the alleged model for the card, just filed a lawsuit against the card maker.

According to the lawsuit, Topps took a picture of Mr. Holmes for a “trading card promotion that Topps was contemplating,” but did not tell him exactly what it was for. In his complaint, Mr. Holmes states that he did not give Topps permission to use the picture, especially when they portray him as a former slave. To make matters more interesting, Mr. Holmes alleges that he was fired before the card was printed.

Legal Translation: Mr. Holmes’ argument boils down to this: They took my picture. They fired me. And then to humiliate me, they used the picture without my permission, and called me a slave.

I could see that getting traction with a jury. Obviously, Topps’ position will likely be, “Heck, we made him a legend!” I can see that getting traction with a jury, too.

Normally, a case like this boils down to a close analysis of the worker’s employment agreement. Add in claims of disparagement with racial undertones, however, and this case becomes more complex.

It’s too early to predict a winner since we have yet to learn Topps’ position. Hopefully, in the next filing, Topps will give its side of the story.

Regardless, I can’t help to think that, somewhere in the Topps marketing and legal departments, there are a few people slapping their heads right now saying, “Who thought that card was a good idea?”

Headaches may be contagious at Topps over the next few days.

The information provided in Paul Lesko’s “Law of Cards” column is not intended to be legal advice, but merely conveys general information related to legal issues commonly encountered in the sports industry. This information is not intended to create any legal relationship between Paul Lesko, the Simmons Browder Gianaris Angelides Barnerd LLC or any attorney and the user. Neither the transmission nor receipt of these website materials will create an attorney-client relationship between the author and the readers.

The views expressed in the “Law of Cards” column are solely those of the author and are not affiliated with the Simmons Law Firm. You should not act or rely on any information in the “Law of Cards” column without seeking the advice of an attorney. The determination of whether you need legal services and your choice of a lawyer are very important matters that should not be based on websites or advertisements.

Darryl Strawberry 2011 Topps Triple Threads Auto Jersey 18 Mets
$42.25

2011 Topps Triple Threads Auto Jersey Mike Stanton 49 75
$36.00

2011 TOPPS TRIPLE THREADS CODY ROSS UNITY JERSEY AUTO 75 REDEMPTION
$10.76

2011 TOPPS TRIPLE THREADS BOB GIBSON LEGENDS TRIPLE JERSEY 36
$11.50

2011 TOPPS TRIPLE THREADS JONATHAN PAPELBON TRIPLE JERSEY AUTO 18
$12.59

2011 TOPPS TRIPLE THREADS DAVID FREESE UNITY JERSEY AUTO REDEMPTION
$46.77

2011 TOPPS TRIPLE THREADS JUAN MARICHAL TRIPLE JERSEY AUTO 9
$26.00

2011 Triple Threads Alex Rodriguez Jersey 01 36
$15.50

Article source: http://www.cardboardconnection.com/john-henry-card-leads-legal-headache-topps

By
Lauren Paxman

Last updated at 12:31 PM on 20th February 2012

An author who survived a three month coma is celebrating the publication of her first novel – after completely forgetting she had written it.

Alexandra Singer was struck down with the crippling nerve condition cerebral lupus in 2008, while she writing her debut Tea At The Grand Tazi.

She was left with long-term memory loss and
had completely forgotten about the novel until her brother found the
half-finished manuscript while clearing her London flat.

Mission accomplished: Alexandra Singer, who survived a three month coma, is celebrating the publication of her first novel – after completely forgetting she had written it

Miss Singer’s story mirrors that of S J Watson’s
best-seller Before I Go To Sleep. In the novel the protagonist also
forgets she was a writer until she comes across her novel.

Despite being left unable to walk by the illness, determined Miss Singer has spent the last two years in hospital teaching herself to write again so she could complete on the book.

The 29-year-old, a former trainer corporate lawyer from Cheadle, Manchester, said: ‘My experience was horrendous.

‘The doctors thought I would be brain damaged and for six months I was paralysed and couldn’t speak.

‘But it was the book that helped me to pull through. I apparently had the idea before the illness, but was too busy working to write it.

‘I was excited when my bother brought the script to me in hospital and the prospect of finishing it inspired me to relearn to write.’

Alex was warned by doctors she might never be able to walk again and spent months fighting paralysis, breathing through a tracheotomy tube.

Singer said: ‘The book is set in the evocative landscape of Marrakech, Morocco and follows a young expat Maia who struggles to take control of her life’

She still relies on a wheelchair to get about but has started walking slowly at home.

The determined writer said her novel became her focal point as she battled to regain her health following her illness.

The story draws on Alex’s own experiences of travelling and tells the tale of an expat in Morrocco struggling to make her way in the world.

It book is being published by Legend Press next month after Alex won the runner-up prize in the Luke Bitmead Bursary competition, set up to support young novelists in the memory of Legend Press author Luke Bitmead.

The Masters student at the University of Manchester, said: ‘The book is set in the evocative landscape of Marrakech, Morocco and follows a young expat Maia who struggles to take control of her life, after succumbing to the seedy underbelly of the city.

‘I was travelling a lot before I fell ill and met many unusual people, expatriates running away from their lives in the UK, which is what influenced the book.

‘I am so lucky to have such a supportive family and to have an amazing University on my doorstep. They thought I was going to die but have supported me in every way.’

Following her experiences in the NHS, she chose to take the MA in Health Care Law and Ethics at the University’s School of Law in Sept 2011.

She also does freelance legal translation and research as well as lots of physiotherapy in her bid to walk again.

Share this article:

Article source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2103698/Author-novel-print--brain-condition-FORGET-written-it.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

There’s been a hole in the world since the NFL season ended. And it’s not because football is over. It’s because we have not been inundated with continuous stories, updates and speculation about Tim Tebow. But now, there’s no longer any need to worry because Tim Tebow is moving his competitive spirit from the football field to the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

The battle over the Tebow brand has begun!

Sure, it may not as exciting as watching him complete nine of 26 passes for a total of 136 yards. Actually, maybe it is. Because now he’s taking on multiple opponents at once! And his front line is made up of attorneys and trademark examiners–his Te-bros!

OK, that sounds even geekier than I intended.

Regardless, unlike the critics of his passing game, the critics here should agree that Tebow is going to run over his competition at the Trademark Office.

As I previously wrote, a number of people beat Tebow to the Trademark Office with filings for such marks as:

• Tebow Time
• It’s Tebow Time
• Tebow Towel
• There is no I in Tebow
• What Would Tebow Do?, and
• Winning is IneviTEBOW

Yes, that last one is TErriBOW.

Luckily for Tebow, the Trademark does not grant trademark registrations to the first people who happened to file applications, there is an examination process.

Starting with a no-huddle offensive strategy, Tebow’s attorneys have already submitted “Letters of Protest” to the trademark examiners who will review these marks. The letters note, “[T]he applications of the third parties noted above were all filed as a result of the notoriety Tim Tebow has achieved this past fall as he became the successful lead quarterback of the National Football League franchse the Dnever Broncos.”

Legal translation: Mr. or Ms. Examiners, if you don’t know who Tim Tebow is, we’re going to summarize it for you.

Tebow’s attorneys also summarize why Tebow is so popular, “The notoriety encompasses his deep religious faith and the particular physical stance that he takes when he prays on the football field. That physical stance has been designated “TEBOWING.”

Legal translation: We’d say Tebow is a god if it wasn’t a sin against our client’s religion to say so.

And if the Trademark Office thought Tebow might be sponsoring these imitators, his attorneys make it clear that Tebow does not, “Neither Tim Tebow nor the Tim Tebow Foundation have given their approval for such use, and, therefore, there is no bona fide ‘afiiliation, connection, or association’ of the applicants with Tim Tebow, nor is Tim Tebow sponsporing these cited applicants in any of their activities.”

Legal translation: These guys Te-BLOW.

So far, the Trademark Office agrees. It has initially rejected third-party filings for “TEBOWING” and “IT’S TEBOW TIME.” As one Trademark Examiner noted, “Registration is refused because the applied-for mark consists of or includes matter which may falsely suggest a connection with Tim Tebow.  Although Tim Tebow is not connected with the goods and/or services provided by applicant under the applied-for mark, Tim Tebow is so famous that consumers would presume a connection.”

Legal translation: Note how the Examiner says “so famous”? I think he meant “sooooooo famous.”

Here, the Trademark Office is doing its job correctly in rejecting these applications because they included “a name, portrait, or signature identifying a particular living individual whose written consent to register the mark is not of record.”

Legal translation: You can’t get a free ride on someone else’s reputation without that person’s permission.

To support the rejection, the Trademark Examiner cited to In re Hoefflin a case that a party could not register OBAMA PAJAMA, OBAMA BAHAMA PAJAMAS, and BARACK’S JOCKS DRESS TO THE LEFT because the applicants lacked Obama’s permission. And, I think you’ll agree with me, that last one should just be barred because, well, yeah.

So what does this mean? It’s IneviTEBOW, Tebow will win and be the sole owner of Tebow marks, including those marks for Tebow with trading cards.

I have one concern though. One of my favorite points of this NFL season was when Stephen Tulloch sacked, and then TEBOWED Tebow.

Here’s where a potential problem comes in. If Tebow owns the TEBOWING trademark, and asserts ownership over the TEBOWING stance, well, the next time someone sacks and then TEBOWS Tebow, the defensive player could be sued by Tebow for trademark infringement and trademark dilution.

Legal translation: If you don’t have permission, you can’t use someone else’s trademark. And if you do something to hurt the value of the trademark (like tarnish it by mocking it in front of millions of viewers), you could be liable for that too.

Sounds like a professional wrestling storyline I know, but, it could happen.

While Tebow should be able to run over his competition at the Trademark Office, I don’t think he should be able to run over the competition that ran over him and then TEBOWED over him.

Rest assured poor, defenseless NFL linemen. If you sack and then TEBOW Tebow, and he sues you later for trademark infringement, give me call. I’ll take your case pro bono.

Legal translation for NFL linemen: Pro bono is where a lawyer represents you for free.

The information provided in Paul Lesko’s “Law of Cards” column is not intended to be legal advice, but merely conveys general information related to legal issues commonly encountered in the sports industry. This information is not intended to create any legal relationship between Paul Lesko, the Simmons Browder Gianaris Angelides Barnerd LLC or any attorney and the user. Neither the transmission nor receipt of these website materials will create an attorney-client relationship between the author and the readers.

The views expressed in the “Law of Cards” column are solely those of the author and are not affiliated with the Simmons Law Firm. You should not act or rely on any information in the “Law of Cards” column without seeking the advice of an attorney. The determination of whether you need legal services and your choice of a lawyer are very important matters that should not be based on websites or advertisements.

Tim Tebow Fathead Teammates – Denver Broncoes 13″ x 13.5″ NEW NFL! Tebowing
$14.95

Tim Tebow Sports Illustrated Poster – Denver Broncos – Tebow Time!
$22.99

TIM TEBOW FLORIDA GATORS COLLEGE BOBBLEHEAD NEW
$18.95

Tim Tebow copper pipe statue
$29.99

REEBOK Denver Broncos TIM TEBOW nfl Jersey YOUTH KIDS BOYS CHILDRENS xl
$59.77

REEBOK Denver Broncos TIM TEBOW nfl Jersey YOUTH KIDS BOYS CHILDRENS s
$59.77

REEBOK Denver Broncos TIM TEBOW nfl Jersey YOUTH KIDS BOYS CHILDRENS (L)
$59.77

REEBOK Denver Broncos TIM TEBOW nfl Jersey YOUTH KIDS BOYS CHILDRENS m
$59.77

Article source: http://www.cardboardconnection.com/football/law-cards-tim-tebow-trademark-battle

Each Sunday, and hopefully more often, we come together as Catholics to share in the Eucharist and celebrate our beliefs with one another. When we leave Mass, we take our experience of communion with God out into the world. As a Church, we share our beliefs by, among many other things, aiding refugees, educating children, and serving meals to those who would otherwise go without.

In some countries, our Church works in the shadow of an oppressive government, operating with the knowledge that, for example, a health care unit could be shut down at any time. In the United States, we enjoy the freedom to practice our faith without fear of government coercion. Or we did, until a recent rule revision by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Of course, President Obama “accommodated” this recent HHS ruling last week and it remains to be seen how this will all play out. Nonetheless, the mere fact that the regulation was put into place raises grave concern because the rule requires all employers, except the very narrow subset of houses of worship, to provide prescription contraceptive coverage in their health plans. The reason our concern is so great is that a government agency is limiting religious organizations’ right to “freedom of conscience.”

For me, the concerns are not purely about legal and constitutional matters, though those questions are important. My bigger concern is the message the rule sends to organizations that have participated with our federal government for years to provide vital services to vulnerable populations.

In our diocese, for example, Catholic Community Services of Utah (CCS) is one of many Catholic organizations that contract with the federal government to provide housing, legal, translation, and other transition services for refugees. CCS serves roughly 300 refugee families a year.

On the international front, Catholic Relief Services (CRS) has been actively involved in the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) since its 2003 inception. CRS provides life-saving medications and care to tens of thousands of individuals in Africa each year. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops was also instrumental in ensuring PEPFAR funding was reauthorized in 2008, and that it was done without a requirement that organizations receiving funds provide contraception as part of their services.

Similarly, Catholic Charities in various states and the USCCB’s Migration and Refugee Services office have long provided crucial services to victims of human trafficking in America. Until 2011, Catholic Charities regularly received federal grant money to provide a safe environment, basic needs such as food, health care, and legal services to victims. The groups were denied grants in 2011, in favor of organizations with lower scores on the grant assessments, in what is seen as a reaction to an ongoing lawsuit by the ACLU. The ACLU claims that the government must choose contractors that provide abortion and contraceptive services in order to fully serve the victims of trafficking.

The lawsuit may also be part of the reason the government has adopted the most restrictive religious exemption in any federal rule or regulation. While lawsuits are expensive and time-consuming, there is no certainty the ACLU will win and the federal government has everything to lose by discouraging Catholic organizations from continuing to work with it on behalf of those most in need.

The federal government has a long history of recognizing rights of conscience, drawing an appropriate balance between the First Amendment rights of individuals and organizations to practice their beliefs, and government’s interest in delivering services or enforcing rules in an orderly manner. With a little Catholic advocacy, perhaps HHS will once again fully recognize the fundamental rights of the Catholic Church to provide health care to its employees, without violating its long-held beliefs.

Article source: http://www.icatholic.org/article/why-the-hhs-debate-matters-to-catholics-7663861

WHITE PLAINS, N.Y., Feb 13, 2012 (GlobeNewswire via COMTEX) –
Fifth Street Finance Corp.


/quotes/zigman/7506997/quotes/nls/fsc FSC
-1.63%



(“Fifth Street”) today announced a follow-on transaction in support of Riverside Partners’ portfolio company, Welocalize, Inc. (“Welocalize”).

The $40.5 million expansion of the credit facility and commitment, which helped fund Welocalize’s combination with Park Translations LLC and supports future business expansion, demonstrates Fifth Street’s affinity for facilitating long term company growth. Fifth Street had previously provided a $43.4 million investment in a one-stop facility to support Riverside Partners’ initial acquisition of Welocalize in November 2010.

While Fifth Street served as the Administrative Agent and Lead Arranger on the deal, the firm also brought in two syndication partners as part of the transaction. Previously the sole lender in Welocalize’s one-stop senior credit facility, Fifth Street was awarded these titles in the follow-on transaction based on the firm’s performance as the incumbent lender.

“This transaction reflects the conscious path that Fifth Street has pursued over the past year. We have deliberately set out to participate in larger deals in order to take our well-earned reputation as a flexible, long-term lending partner to the next level,” said Leonard Tannenbaum, Fifth Street’s Chief Executive Officer.

“From the outset, we regarded Welocalize as one of the best positioned players in the localization services marketplace and looked forward to assisting the company in its next phase of growth,” said David Belluck, a General Partner at Riverside Partners. “In Fifth Street, we knew we had a reliable financing partner who shared our vision and had the wherewithal to help us execute a strategic, multi-year expansion plan.”

Welocalize, founded in 1997 and headquartered in Frederick, Maryland, is a technology-enabled translation provider to large multinational corporations. Park Translations LLC, founded in 2005 and based in New York, NY, is a legal translation provider specifically focused on patent translations.

About Fifth Street Finance Corp.

Fifth Street Finance Corp. is a specialty finance company that lends to and invests in small and mid-sized companies, primarily in connection with investments by private equity sponsors. Fifth Street Finance Corp.’s investment objective is to maximize its portfolio’s total return by generating current income from its debt investments and capital appreciation from its equity investments.

The Fifth Street Finance Corp. logo is available at

http://www.globenewswire.com/newsroom/prs/?pkgid=5525

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release may contain certain forward-looking statements, including statements with regard to the future performance of Fifth Street Finance Corp. Words such as “believes,” “expects,” “projects,” “anticipates,” and “future” or similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are subject to the inherent uncertainties in predicting future results and conditions. Certain factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in these forward-looking statements, and these factors are identified from time to time in Fifth Street Finance Corp.’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Fifth Street Finance Corp. undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

This news release was distributed by GlobeNewswire,
www.globenewswire.com

SOURCE: Fifth Street Finance Corp.

        CONTACT: Investor Contact:
        Stacey Thorne, Executive Director, Investor Relations
        Fifth Street Finance Corp.
        (914) 286-6811
        stacey@fifthstreetfinance.com
        Media Contact:
        Brendan McManus
        CJP Communications
        203-254-1300 ext. 216
        CJP-FifthStreet@CJPCom.com

(C) Copyright 2010 GlobeNewswire, Inc. All rights reserved.

/quotes/zigman/7506997/quotes/nls/fsc

Add FSC to portfolio

FSC

Article source: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/fifth-street-finance-corp-and-riverside-partners-close-follow-on-transaction-2012-02-13

Legal industry veteran joins viaLegal team to guide sales operations and business development

viaLanguage, a leading provider of multilingual communications services for global businesses, announced today it has selected Derrick Moore as vice president of its viaLegal division. With close to two decades of experience, Moore adds significant sales and analytical skills in the high-tech and legal support fields to the leadership team.
 
At viaLanguage, Moore will be responsible for developing and executing strategic sales and marketing plans, initially focusing on building and developing a sales and customer service team that will ensure viaLegal’s growth objectives are achieved going forward.

“We are enthusiastic to have Derrick join our team. He joins us with extensive sales and management expertise and years of experience working with outside and in-house counsel at Fortune 500 companies,” EVP Scott Herber, says. “As we continue to grow the organization, it is critical that we have the support of a strong strategic leader. We look forward to Derrick’s contribution to our ongoing success.”

Moore joins viaLanguage after an accomplished career in high-tech and legal support industries working with Fortune 500 companies processing data forensics and providing database management litigation solutions.  He was most recently the senior sales manager for EthicsPoint, a governance, risk and compliance firm.
 
Moore has also worked at IKON Legal Documents as the Regional and General Manager of the West Coast as well at BI Worldwide where he focused on eLearning. Moore has worked in most major legal markets in the United States, where his strong commitment to providing the highest level of customer service has led to successful relationships with his large client base. Additionally, Moore holds a BA from Pomona College in Claremont, CA.
 
About viaLanguage            
viaLanguage provides multilingual solutions for the global needs of businesses today.  viaLanguage’s solutions include Product and Digital Marketing, viaLegal™(legal translation), Global eLearning and Healthcare and Life Sciences initiatives.  Through the unique combination of its Online Language System (OLS), expert linguists around the globe and technology integration capabilities, viaLanguage offers organizations comprehensive, scalable, affordable solutions for meeting today’s increasing global language needs. Since 2000, the company has earned a reputation among its clients for reliability, quality and professionalism. Clients include: Nokia, Microsoft, Cisco, Walmart, Blue Shield California, Regence, Disney, Nike, Citibank; as well as many hospitals, school districts and state governments. Corporate Headquarters are located at 700 SW Taylor Street, Suite 310 Portland, OR 97205-3016. For more information, visit www.vialanguage.com or call us at 503-243-2007.

Related Links
viaLanguage
viaLegal

WebWireID152629

Tweet

 
legal translation
viaLegal
Contract translation

Contact Information Rachel Weikum Press Contact Weikum Communications Contact via E-mail

This news content may be integrated into any legitimate news gathering and publishing effort. Linking is permitted.

News Release Distribution and Press Release Distribution Services Provided by WebWire.

Article source: http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=152629

Abu Dhabi: Translators who do not pass a certification test and have licence from the Ministry of Justice will either face a jail term of up to two years or fine of not more than Dh100,000 or both, according to a draft law.

However, courtroom translators would be exempt and can do translation only after they take oath before the judge.

The bill, which was passed yesterday by the Federal National Council, is meant to ensure all translations and interpretations are performed by skilled and qualified individuals.

The draft law requires approval of the Cabinet and the President’s signature before it is enforced as law.

Article continues below

Under the draft law, which consists of 3 articles, translators who are already licensed and registered with the Ministry of Justice have to adjust their legal status within a year from the date the law is enforced.

According to the bill, governmental and non-governmental organisations can request from the Justice Ministry to register translators from among their staff, provided that they do the job in their organisations only.

Grace period

No authority would be allowed to attest or recognise a translated document unless the translation is done by a certified translator.

Translator licences will be renewed every three years, and translators will be provided a grace period of 90 days to get their licences renewed, failing which the registration of a translator will be cancelled.

An ad hoc committee said in a report the bill was prompted by the fact that nearly 7.3 million foreigners of more than 200 nationalities are living in the UAE.

The report estimated that more than 13,000 labour disputes were filed with the labour courts in Abu Dhabi and Dubai in 2010.

The bill, which would replace regulations that varied among emirates, also requires translation firms to obtain an operating permit from their emirate and to have insurance.

Courts which often suffer from a shortage of translators would be entitled to assign uncertified translators after they take oath.

Shortage

The house’s committee said the UAE was suffering a severe shortage of translators, with only 345 translators registered with the Justice Ministry, 37 of them are Emiratis.

Translators will also be required to take an oath, undergo a certification test at the Justice Ministry and have professional training.

Translation firms would also need to be operated by a licensed translator.

Under the law, a translation firm’s manager has to prominently post the certification licence and the firm’s permit, inform the Justice Ministry of translators working in the firm and any change in the staff within a month of its occurrence, and keep a record of translation jobs, their dates and names of clients. The House has amended the law to include simultaneous translation, legal translation, and sign-language translation.

Article source: http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/uae/government/fnc-passes-law-on-translators-1.977430

The never-ending cycle of Upper Deck v Upper Deck continues!

On January 17, Nico Blauw joined the Upper Deck v. Upper Deck suit, namely to try to keep himself out of it. Mr. Blauw, the head of Upper Deck International (UDI), the company that first sued Upper Deck California. Blauw was personally countersued in that same suit by Upper Deck California’s business partner, Upper Deck Nevada (yes, this is still confusing even after four articles).

Mr. Blauw basically argues that because he lives in the Netherlands, works in the Netherlands, and because UDI is in the Netherlands (and the purchase agreement through which he bought UDI says that any lawsuit about the purchase of UDI should be brought in the Netherlands), that having him and a suit in California makes no sense.

Legal translation: Mr. Blauw has nothing to do with California, and UD Nevada’s counterclaims only have to do with the Netherlands. Because of this, the claims against Mr. Blauw (and UDI ) will likely be removed from the California action.

OK, now that we have the legalese and legal analysis out of the way, let’s get to the good stuff: the name-calling.

And Mr. Blauw’s attorneys comply.

UD Nevada is trying to keep Mr. Blauw in the lawsuit because of Mr. Blauw’s trips to California. Mr. Blauw argues this is an unfair argument because these trips were made at the request of UD California and Mr. McWilliam:

In fact, the FACC alleges that those trips were not made of Mr. Blauw’s own choosing but were allegedly thrust upon him because Mr. McWilliam, who was supposed to be running things, had allowed himself to fall into serious troubles with his drug addiction.  FACC 53 (“Mr. McWilliams did not have the capacity to manage requested Mr. Blauw [do so] in Carlsbad, California.”), 55, 65 (“Mr. Blauw was fully aware of Mr. McWilliam’s impaired state; in fact, it was the very reason why Mr. Blauw was even present in the United States at the time.  During this time, Mr. Blauw was again in California managing UDC and UDI remotely because Mr. McWilliam’s health issues prohibited him from running the businesses himself.”). It would be unpalatable indeed to say that Mr. Blauw had made his “home” in California for general jurisdiction purposes simply by making emergency trips to California at Mr. McWilliam’s urging.” (emphasis added).

Mr. Blauw also argues that “If there was any purposeful injection by Mr. Blauw into California, it was very limited and necessitated by Mr. McWilliam’s drug abuse, which forced Mr. Blauw to come to California to deal with Mr. McWilliam’s problems.”

Legal translation: Well, besides repeatedly calling Mr. McWilliam a drug addict, Mr. Blauw’s trips to California shouldn’t count against him because they were in response to UD California and Mr. McWilliam’s request. It would be unfair to now hold those trips against him.

UD Nevada’s defamation claim also gets trashed as “incoherent” (to be fair, the defamation claim does not identify the defamatory statements, so it is difficult to assess whether the defamatory claim is valid or not), and it is pointed out that although “McWilliam was somehow incapacitated when he entered into that agreement,” it should be noted that he “apparently just realized that now, a year later….”

Everything else in Mr. Blauw’s motion is overly technical and legal–and because of that boring. So, we won’t cover it here beyond saying Mr. Blauw’s motion will likely succeed. Should the litigation move to the Netherlands, he’ll likely win another lawsuit.

And really, given the Jerry Springer experience the rest of the lawsuit has been, simply calling someone a “drug addict” may seem tame. But fret not. UDI and Mr. Blauw’s attorneys also filed a motion to strike the defamation claim with better name-calling.

You can tell it’s going to be good when it starts off by pointing out, “This suit is a personal vendetta by McWilliam to attempt to slap Mr. Blauw for statements he allegedly made while CEO of UDI.”

Vendetta!

I love this motion because, while it tries to kick the defamation claim out of the lawsuit, it gives us a chance to re-hash what the potential defamatory statements might be. For example, “McWilliam seeks to punish UDI and Mr. Blauw for allegedly stating that McWilliam is dishonest and/or a bad or incompetent owner or business executive.” I’ve added the emphasis.

The “allegedly” language is great (one of my favorite words) because there is no admission that Mr. Blauw actually stated that McWilliam was “dishonest.”  But if he did, the motion provides support to back up the alleged statement like, “regarding McWilliam’s honesty, he is the leader and owner of an adjudicated counterfeiter…orchestrated the Yu-Gi-Oh! counterfeiting scheme…[a]nd McWilliam even signed…a declaration…in which McWilliam admitted he lied to Mr. Blauw about UDC’s central involvement in this counterfeiting scheme.”

Legal translation: I never called him a liar, but the shoe just might fit.

I also love this motion for more personal reasons: it cites Cardboard Connection articles about Upper Deck, including one of mine.

7. Attached hereto as Exhibit 6 is a true and correct copy of an article entitled Upper Deck’s Legal Battle With Konami Heats Up, by Mike Smeth, dated January 12, 2010…

…

13. Attached hereto as Exhibit 12 is a true and correct copy of an article Upper Deck International Sues Upper Deck, by Paul Lesko, dated August 11, 2011…

Legal translation: Guess someone at one of the Upper Deck companies (or their attorneys) actually reads our stuff.

Wait a second.

Does that mean I’ve somehow been brought into the Jerry Springer experience that is the Upper Deck v. Upper Deck suit? I’ve finally arrived!

Beyond the name-calling, the motion to strike will likely work. The defamation claim is too vague to determine what it’s about. Plus, it was procedurally brought too late. There are a lot of facts provided that support any “alleged” statements about “dishonesty” or an “incompetent” business owner. If, of course, such “alleged” statements were actually made.

The best news out of all of this, there’s a hearing set on February 21 on these issues. Let’s hope there’s a publicly available transcript from these hearings so we can get more name-calling!

The information provided in Paul Lesko’s “Law of Cards” column is not intended to be legal advice, but merely conveys general information related to legal issues commonly encountered in the sports industry. This information is not intended to create any legal relationship between Paul Lesko, the Simmons Browder Gianaris Angelides Barnerd LLC or any attorney and the user. Neither the transmission nor receipt of these website materials will create an attorney-client relationship between the author and the readers.

The views expressed in the “Law of Cards” column are solely those of the author and are not affiliated with the Simmons Law Firm. You should not act or rely on any information in the “Law of Cards” column without seeking the advice of an attorney. The determination of whether you need legal services and your choice of a lawyer are very important matters that should not be based on websites or advertisements.

2004-05 SP Signature TONY ALLEN Auto Jersey RC # 25
$64.95

1994 UPPER DECK ELECTRIC DIAMOND #24 ALEX “AROD” RODRIGUEZ
$12.99

SHAQUILLE ONEAL RARE 92 93 UPPER DECK UD ROOKIE RC CARD #1 CX682
$14.99

2005 Reflections Duel Signature AUTO Dan Orlovsky Andrew Walters 11 70
$25.00

2006 BRANDON WILLIAMS EXQUISITE ROOKIE SIGNATURE AUTO
$49.99

2010 UPPER DECK – - SAN FRANCISCO GIANTS Team Set ** Buster Posey RC **
$34.50

10-11 UD Ultimate Rookies Jamie McBain Very Nice 2 colour Auto Patch RC SP 35
$25.00

2006 BRANDON WILLIAMS EXQUISITE ROOKIE SIGNATURE AUTO
$49.99

08-09 Upper Deck EXCLUSIVE YG xx 100 Made! Patrick DAVIS #477
$10.00

09 10 UD Young Guns John Tavares card
$50.00

NFL 2006 30 CARD SET OF ROOKIES UPPER DECK – HAWK ,BUSH, HOLMES, JONES-DREW, ETC
$17.00

08-09 Upper Deck EXCLUSIVE YG xx 100 Made! Brett SKINNER #480
$10.00

Article source: http://www.cardboardconnection.com/law-cards-calling-in-upper-deck-v-upper-deck