Wyoming's Teton Range Provided a Majestic Backdrop for 2020'S Virtual Ceremony
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Operaing the EPON Protocol Over Coaxial Distribuion Networks Call for Interest
Operang the EPON protocol over Coaxial Distribu&on Networks Call for Interest 08 November 2011 IEEE 802.3 Ethernet Working Group Atlanta, GA 1 Supporters Bill Powell Alcatel-Lucent Steve Carlson High Speed Design David Eckard Alcatel-Lucent Hesham ElBakoury Huawei Alan Brown Aurora Networks Liming Fang Huawei Dave Baran Aurora Networks David Piehler Neophotonics Edwin MalleIe Bright House Networks Amir Sheffer PMC-Sierra John Dickinson Bright House Networks Greg Bathrick PMC-Sierra Ed Boyd Broadcom ValenWn Ossman PMC-Sierra Howard Frazier Broadcom Alex Liu Qualcomm Lowell Lamb Broadcom Dylan Ko Qualcomm Mark Laubach Broadcom Steve Shellhammer Qualcomm Will Bliss Broadcom Mike Peters Sumitomo Electric Industries Robin Lavoie Cogeco Cable Inc. Yao Yong Technical Working CommiIee of China Radio & Ma SchmiI CableLabs TV Associaon Doug Jones Comcast Cable Bob Harris Time Warner Cable Jeff Finkelstein Cox Networks Kevin A. Noll Time Warner Cable John D’Ambrosia Dell Hu Baomin Wuhan Yangtze OpWcal Technologies Co.,Ltd. Zhou Zhen Fiberhome Telecommunicaon Ye Yonggang Wuhan Yangtze OpWcal Technologies Co.,Ltd. Technologies Zheng Zhi Wuhan Yangtze OpWcal Technologies Co.,Ltd. Boris Brun Harmonic Inc. Marek Hajduczenia ZTE Lior Assouline Harmonic Inc. Meiyan Zang ZTE David Warren HewleI-Packard Nevin R Jones ZTE 2 Objec&ves for This Mee&ng • To measure the interest in starWng a study group to develop a standards project proposal (a PAR and 5 Criteria) for: Operang the EPON protocol over Coaxial DistribuWon Networks • This meeWng does not: – Fully explore the problem – Debate strengths and weaknesses of soluWons – Choose any one soluWon – Create PAR or five criteria – Create a standard or specificaon 3 Agenda • IntroducWon • Market PotenWal • High Level Concept • Why Now? • Q&A • Straw Polls 4 The Brief History of EPON 2000 EPON Today.. -
USCA Case #97-1524 Document #394723 Filed: 11/06/1998 Page 1 of 10
<<The pagination in this PDF may not match the actual pagination in the printed slip opinion>> USCA Case #97-1524 Document #394723 Filed: 11/06/1998 Page 1 of 10 United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued September 4, 1998 Decided November 6, 1998 No. 97-1524 Time Warner Cable, Petitioner v. National Labor Relations Board, Respondent On Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board Jon W. Tryon argued the cause for the petitioner. Leslie Randolph, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause for the respondent. Linda Sher, Associate General Counsel, Aileen A. Armstrong, Deputy Associate General Counsel at the time the brief was filed, and Peter Winkler, Attorney, were on brief. John D. Burgoyne, <<The pagination in this PDF may not match the actual pagination in the printed slip opinion>> USCA Case #97-1524 Document #394723 Filed: 11/06/1998 Page 2 of 10 Acting Deputy Associate General Counsel, entered an appear- ance. Before: Williams, Henderson and Garland, Circuit Judges. Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge Henderson. Karen LeCraft Henderson, Circuit Judge: Time Warner Cable, Inc. (Time Warner) petitions for review of an order of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) con- cluding that it engaged in an unfair labor practice by refusing to bargain with the Communication Workers of America, Local 1120 (Union). Time Warner Cable, 324 N.L.R.B. No. 25 (Aug. 5, 1997). The NLRB cross-applies for enforcement of its order. Time Warner admitted that it refused to bargain but challenged the validity of the Union's certification based on the NLRB's disqualification of a challenged, and potentially determinative, ballot. -
10/3/00 Vacation-Drainage & Utility Easements
1013100 VACATION - DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENTS - BRENDAN GLENN I City Of Edina, Minnesota DEPARMNT OF AD~TRA'ITON 4801 West 50fhStreet, Edina, Minnesota 554241394 Phone (612) 927-8861 TDD (612)826-0379 Fax (612) 826-0390 Proposed Property,/Area To Be Vacated Brendan Glenn City Engineer by Acceptable Opposed RConditional U Minnegasco by 0Acceptable Opposed c] Conditional NSP by Acceptable 0Opposed c].Conditional Paragon Cable by 0Acceptable Opposed 0Conditional U.S.West by Acceptable Opposed Conditional Location: Please sign and return indicating receipt of notice. Thank you for your cooperation. Return to: City Clerk City of Edina 4801 W. 50" Street Edina, MN 55424 Telephone: 826-0408 Fa: 826-0390 t REPORT/RECOMMENDATION To: Mayor & City Council Agenda Item # 1I.A. From: Francis J. Hoffman Consent City Engineer &d Information Only [7 Date: October 3,2000 Mgr. Recommends [7 To HRA To Council Subject: Vacation of Existing Action Motion Easement over a portion of Resolution the NW %of S6 TI16 R21 Ordinance c] Discussion Recommendation: Vacate existing easement in Document No. 3490171 over a portion of the northwest quarter of Section 6, Township 116, Range 21 with the condition that the existing easement be replaced on the new Brendan Glenn Plat. Info/Backg round: The proposed vacation of the existing easement is requested by the developer of the Brendan Glenn Plat. The new plat will have a new drainage and utility easement which will replace the existing easement. Staff recommends the vacation be approved. NSP (Xcel Energy), US West (Qwest), Time Warner and Minnegasco (Reliant Energy) have all approved the request. -
S: 181 Ent Age Bandwidth Gave Cable Operators the Pole Position
UNICATIONS ENGINEERING & DESIGN GAZINE OF BROADBAND COMMUNICATIONS s: 181 ent age Bandwidth Gave Cable Operators the Pole Position. teenuge ip leg Aire' An*L But in The Race For Cyberspace Only Motorola Can Put You in The Winner's Circle. Take The Checkered Flt The race for cyber space has reached the final lap and the stands are filled with subscribers anxiously waiting at the finish line. They won't notice who finishes second, so it's essential that you choose a vehicle that is second to none, Motorola's CyberSURFRTM cable modem. An exciting product of Motorola's CableComm technologies, the CyberSURFR modem drives data downstream at remarkably high speeds. Turning to the upstream path, it successfully outmaneuvers the inherent 114111Mit. noise ingress in HFC networks, accelerating information through at 768 kilobits per second. Thus connecting personal computers to a transmission system that delivers lightning fast multimedia communica- CyberSURFR' Cable Modem tions to your speed-hungry subscribers. And as these new speeds enable the next generation of applications and content, the protocol adapts to meet the needs. But speed alone is not enough. Unique technologies that economize precious cable spectrum, use of proven frequency agility techniques, forward error correction, and dynamic load balancing, provide your subscribers with ample bandwidth on demand. While standards based encryption protects their sensitive information. Innovation, reliability, quality and attention to detail will allow the winners to pull away from the rest of the pack. And since these characteristics are the hallmark of all Motorola products, no one else is more capable of helping you lap the competition. -
The Book of Broken Promises:$400 Billion Broadband Scandal
THE BOOK OF BROKEN PROMISES: $400 BILLION BROADBAND SCANDAL & FREE THE NET FOR ERIC LEE, AUNT ETHEL, ARNKUSH, AND THE TEAM Author: Bruce Kushnick, Executive Director New Networks Institute February, 2015 Cover Art: Ferrari Wall Paper1, Broken Skateboard by Pr0totyp2 Disclaimer: AT&T, Verizon and CenturyLink are the progeny of the original AT&T. The AT&T logo is the property of AT&T Inc. and the use has not been authorized, sponsored by, or endorsed by the trademark owner. The Verizon logo is the property of Verizon Communications, Inc, and the use has not been authorized, sponsored by, or endorsed by the trademark owner. The CenturyLink logo is the property of CenturyLink, and the use has not been authorized, sponsored by, or endorsed by the trademark owner. All rights reserved. This book has been prepared by New Networks Institute. All rights reserved. Reproduction or further distribution of this report without written authorization is prohibited by law. For additional copies or information please contact [email protected]. © 1997, 2004, 2015 New Networks Institute The Book of Broken Promises 1 What others have said about Bruce Kushnick’s research and previous books: 3 David Cay Johnston, Recipient of the Pulitzer Prize, Author of The Fine Print, 2012 “Kushnick’s estimate comes from his meticulous analysis of disclosure document filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and other regulatory agencies… Kushnick’s estimate might significantly understate how much extra money people paid for an electronic highway they did not get. It seems very likely that Kushnick’s numbers are uncomfortably close to the truth.” Dr. -
Eugene L. Hammer, Et Al. V. Bigband Networks, Inc., Et Al. 07-5825
G> ,( ; 1 Laurence D. King (SBN 206423) p J lking_(a),kaplanfox.com 2 KAPLAN FOX & KILSHEIMER LLP 350 Sansome Street, Suite 400 c ^ ,i^ 3 San Francisco , CA 94104 rte Telephone : 415-772-4700 ^l^F FJ^f^ 4 Facsimile : 415-772-4707 5 Local Counsel for Plaintiff 6 Karen H. Riebel [email protected] 7 Elizabeth R. Odette [email protected] 8 LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN, P.L.L.P 9 100 Washington Avenue, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 10 Telephone.: 612-339-6900 a Facsimile: 612-339-0981 11 11 Additional Attorneys on signature page 12 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT *4,P ^ 14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 15 EUGENE L. HAMMER, on behalf of himself 16 and all others similarly situated, )^ a 17 CL SS AC `IO Plaintiff, N 18 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR vs. VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL 19 SECURITIES LAWS BIGBAND NETWORKS, INC., AMIR 20 BASSAN-ESKENAZI, FREDERICK A. 21 BALL, RAN OZ, LLOYD CARNEY, DEAN GILBERT, KEN GOLDMAN, GAL 22 ISRAELY, BRUCE SACHS, ROBERT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SACHS, and GEOFFREY YANG, 23 Defendants. 24 25 26 27 28 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT 1 Plaintiff, Eugene L. Hammer ("Plaintiff'), individually and on behalf of all other persons 2 similarly situated, alleges the following based upon personal knowledge as to Plaintiff and Plaintiffs' 3 own acts, and upon information and belief as to all other matters, based on, inter alia, the 4 investigation conducted by and through Plaintiff's counsel, which included, among other things: a 5 review of the Defendants' public documents, conference calls and announcements made by 6 Defendants; United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") filings by BigBand 7 Networks Inc. -
| Mo Naman Att Vi Luar Kan Man Hati
|MO NAMAN ATT VI US009961413B2LUAR KAN MAN HATI (12 ) United States Patent ( 10 ) Patent No. : US 9 , 961, 413 B2 Brooks et al. (45 ) Date of Patent: May 1 , 2018 ( 54 ) APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR ( 56 ) References Cited PACKETIZED CONTENT DELIVERY OVER A BANDWIDTH EFFICIENT NETWORK U . S . PATENT DOCUMENTS 5 , 226 , 901 A 7 /1993 Dhallwal et al. (71 ) Applicant: Time Warner Cable Enterprises LLC , 5 ,410 ,344 A 4 / 1995 Graves et al . New York , NY (US ) ( Continued ) ( 72 ) Inventors : Paul D . Brooks, Weddington , NC (US ) ; Tom Gonder , Broomfield , CO (US ) ; FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS Glen Hardin , Charlotte , NC (US ) A - 2005 -519365 6 / 2005 JP A - 2005 - 519501 6 /2005 (73 ) Assignee : TIME WARNER CABLE A -Z00 - 19301 ENTERPRISES LLC , St . Louis , MO (Continued ) (US ) OTHER PUBLICATIONS ( * ) Notice : Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this DOCSIS® 3 . 0 Management Features Differences Technical Report patent is extended or adjusted under 35 CM - TR -MGMTv3 . 0 - DIFF - V01 -071228 pp . 1 -62 . U . S .C . 154 (b ) by 20 days. (Continued ) ( 21) Appl . No. : 14 /663 , 223 Primary Examiner — Cai Chen ( 74 ) Attorney , Agent, or Firm — Gazdzinski & ( 22 ) Filed : Mar. 19 , 2015 Associates, PC (65 ) Prior Publication Data (57 ) ABSTRACT US 2015 /0264447 A1 Sep . 17 , 2015 Methods and apparatus for providing packetized content to Related U . S . Application Data users via a bandwidth -optimized network . In one embodi ment, legacy and IPTV streams are carried over the same (62 ) Division of application No . 12 / 841, 906 , filed on Jul. switched digital infrastructure , and freely intermixed with 22 , 2010 , now Pat. -
Geographical Index to Cable Systems in the US & Canada
Geographical Index to Cable Systems in the U.S. & Canada Middletown Fayetteville Springfield Cablevision Industries - Orange County Division Cablevision of Fayetteville Continental Cablevision of Ohio Inc. (Cablevision Industries Inc.) (Time Warner Cable Group /ATC) (Continental Cablevision Inc.) New York Greensboro Warren Manhattan Cable TV Inc. Cablevision of Greensboro TCI Cablevision of Ohio Inc. (Time Warner /New York City Cable Group) (Time Warner Cable Group /ATC) (Tele- Communications Inc.) Paragon Communications CV! Youngstown (Time Warner /New York City Cable Group) (Cablevision Industries Inc.) Warner Cable Communications Inc: Youngstown Niagara Falls Hickory (Warner Cable Communications Inc.) Adelphia Cable- Niagara Catawba Valley Cable TV (Adelphia Communications) (Prime Cable) OKLAHOMA Oneida Raleigh Oklahoma City Cablevision Industries - Oneida /Seneca Division Cablevision of Raleigh Cox Cable Oklahoma City Inc. (Cablevision Industries Inc.) (Time Warner Cable Group/ATC) (Cox Cable Communications) Ossining OHIO Tulsa Continental Cablevision of New York Akron United Artists Cable of Oklahoma (Continental Cablevision Inc.) (United Artists Entertainment) Inc. Port Jefferson Station Warner Cable Communications (Warner Cable Communications Inc.) OREGON Brookhaven Cable TV Inc. Canton (United Artists Entertainment) Corvallis Warner Cable of Canton Riverhead TCI Cablevision of Oregon (Warner Cable Communications Inc.) (Tele- Communications Inc.) Cablevision's East End System Cincinnati (Cablevision Systems Corporation) Eugene Warner Cable Communications Inc. TCI Cablevision of Oregon Inc. Rochester (Warner Cable Communications Inc.) (Tele- Communications Inc.) Greater Rochester Cablevision Inc. Cleveland Hgts. (Time Warner Cable Group /ATC) Medford Cablevision Saratoga Springs (Cablevision Systems Corporation) TCI Cablevision of Oregon Inc. (Tele- Communications Inc.) Saratoga Cablevision Systems Corp. Cablevision Portland (Cablevision Industries Inc.) (Cablevision Systems Corporation) Schenectady Columbus Paragon Cable (KBLCOM) TCI of New York Inc. -
Of 15 GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1022 GOOGLE V. HAMMOND IPR2020-00080
Stuart J. Lipoff Mr. Lipoff is president of IP Action Partners Inc, a consulting practice in TIME (telecommunications, information technology, media, electronics, and ebusiness) industries and technologies. He draws upon his 50+ years of experience in a wide variety of technologies and industries to assist clients with knowledge based consulting services involving complex business decisions and problem resolution. Mr. Lipoff was employed 25 years by Arthur D Little, Inc (ADL) as VP and Director of Communications, Information Technology, and Electronics (CIE); 4 years by Bell & Howell Communications Company as a Section Manager, and 3 years by Motorola's Communications Division as a Project Engineer. At ADL he was responsible for the firm's global CIE practice in laboratory based contract engineering, product development, and technology based consulting. At both Bell & Howell and Motorola, he had project design responsibility for wireless communications and paging products. Stuart Lipoff has Bachelor’s Degrees in Electrical Engineering and in Engineering Physics, both from Lehigh University. He also has received a Master’s Degree in Electrical Engineering from Northeastern University, and a MBA degree from Suffolk University. Mr. Lipoff is a fellow of the IEEE Consumer Electronics, Communications, Computer, Circuits, and Vehicular Technology groups. He is a member of the IEEE Consumer Electronics Society National Board of Governors, and was the Boston Chapter Chairman of the IEEE Vehicular Technology Society. He served as 1996-7 President of the IEEE Consumer Electronics Society and as Chairman of the Consumer Electronics Society Technical Activities and Standards Committee, and as VP of Publications; he currently is VP of Industry and Standards Activities for The IEEE Consumer Electronics Society. -
Action Pending Index
NYS Register/November 10, 2004 Action Pending Index ACTION PENDING INDEX The action pending index is a list of all proposed rules For additional information concerning any of the which are currently being considered for adoption. A proposals listed in the action pending index, use the proposed rule is added to the index when the notice of identification number to locate the text of the original proposed rule making is first published in the Register.A notice of proposed rule making. The identification proposed rule is removed from the index when any of the number contains a code which identifies the agency, the following occur : (1) the proposal is adopted as a issue of the Register in which the notice was printed, the permanent rule; (2) the proposal is rejected and year in which the notice was printed and the notice’s withdrawn from consideration; or (3) the proposal’s notice serial number. The following diagram shows how to expires. read identification number codes. Most notices expire in approximately six months if the agency does not adopt or reject the proposal within that Agency Issue Year Serial Action code number published number Code time. The expiration date is printed in the second column of the action pending index. Some notices, AAM 01 96 00001 P however, never expire. Those notices are identified by the word “exempt” in the second column. If an agency Action codes: P - proposed rule making; EP - emergency submits a notice of continuation, the letter “c” follows the and proposed rule making (expiration date refers to new expiration date. -
Action Pending Index
NYS Register/August 06, 2003 Action Pending Index ACTION PENDING INDEX The action pending index is a list of all proposed rules For additional information concerning any of the which are currently being considered for adoption. A proposals listed in the action pending index, use the proposed rule is added to the index when the notice of identification number to locate the text of the original proposed rule making is first published in the Register.A notice of proposed rule making. The identification proposed rule is removed from the index when any of the number contains a code which identifies the agency, the following occur : (1) the proposal is adopted as a issue of the Register in which the notice was printed, the permanent rule; (2) the proposal is rejected and year in which the notice was printed and the notice’s withdrawn from consideration; or (3) the proposal’s notice serial number. The following diagram shows how to expires. read identification number codes. Most notices expire in approximately six months if the agency does not adopt or reject the proposal within that Agency Issue Year Serial Action code number published number Code time. The expiration date is printed in the second column of the action pending index. Some notices, AAM 01 96 00001 P however, never expire. Those notices are identified by the word “exempt” in the second column. If an agency Action codes: P - proposed rule making; EP - emergency submits a notice of continuation, the letter “c” follows the and proposed rule making (expiration date refers to new expiration date. -
Record of Prior Testimony
RECORD OF EXPERT TESTIMONY ECONOMICS AND TECHNOLOGY, INC. 2010 California Public Utilities Commission, O1 Communications, Inc. (U 6065 C) v. Verizon California., a California Corporation (U 1002 C), C.08-02-013 and Verizon California., a California Corporation (U 1002 C) v. O1 Communications, Inc. (U 6065 C) C. 09-06-025, on behalf of O1 Communications, Inc., Reply Testimony filed February 3, 2010. Witness: Lee L. Selwyn 2009 Illinois Commerce Commission, Frontier Communications Corporation, Verizon Communications, Inc., et al, Joint Application for Approval of a Reorganization, Docket No. 09-0268, on behalf of the People of the State of Illinois, Citizens Utility Board, Direct Testimony filed October 20, 2009, Rebuttal Testimony filed December 14, 2009. Witness: Lee L. Selwyn Superior Court of California, County of Alameda, James Thomas, on behalf of themselves, the general public, and all those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Global Vision Products, Inc., Antony Imbriolo, Derrike Cope, David L. Gordon, Powertel Technologies, Inc., Craig Dix, Henry Edelson and Robert Debenedictis, Defendants, Case No. RG03-091195, on behalf of the Law Offices of Scott A. Bursor, Oral testimony and cross examination on November 9, 2009. Witness: Colin B. Weir United States District Court, District of New Jersey, Judy Larson, Barry Hall, Joe Milliron, Tessie Robb, and Willie Davis, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. AT&T Mobility LLC f/k/a Cingular Wireless LLC and Sprint Nextel Corporation and Sprint Spectrum L.P. d/b/a Sprint Nextel and Nextel Finance Company, Civ. Act. No. 07-5325 (JLL), on behalf of PinilisHalpern, LLP and Law Offices of Scott A.