Get instant access to must-read content today!To access hundreds of features, subscribe today! At a time when the world is forced to go digital more than ever before just to stay connected, discover the in-depth content our subscribers receive every month by subscribing to gasworld.Don’t just stay connected, stay at the forefront – join gasworld and become a subscriber to access all of our must-read content online from just $270. Subscribe
Greece-based dry bulk shipping company Star Bulk Carriers Corp. has breached the minimum bid price requirement of USD 1 per common share on the Nasdaq Global Select Market.The company received a letter from Nasdaq, dated January 6, 2016, stating that its minimum bid price was below the requirement for a period of 30 consecutive business days.Star Bulk Carriers now has 180 days to regain compliance, or until July 5, 2016. According to the statement, compliance would be regained if the bid price were to be at or above USD 1 per share for a minimum of 10 consecutive business days.The company added that if it does not regain compliance in the set period, “it may be eligible for an additional grace period if it satisfies the continued listing requirement for market value of publicly held shares and all other initial listing standards, with the exception of the bid price requirement, and provides written notice of its intention to cure the deficiency during the second compliance period.”Star Bulk Carriers’ common shares will continue to be listed and trade on Nasdaq under the symbol “SBLK”, as the notification letter does not result in the immediate delisting of the company’s common shares.The company’s said that its business operations are not affected by the letter.Due to the tough dry bulk market conditions and the company’s recent losses, Star Bulk entered into an agreement to sell further four newbuilding Capesize vessels under construction in China for an aggregate gross price of USD 148 million.The announcement came only a month after the company decided to sell two Capesize vessels and two Kamsarmax vessels for an aggregate gross price of USD 122 million.
Trademark – Infringement – Passing off – Confusion Michael Hicks QC (instructed by Wallace) for the claimants; Mark Platts-Mills QC and Jessie Bowhill (instructed by Manches) for the defendants. Fine & Country Ltd and other companies v Okotoks Ltd and another company: ChD (Mr Justice Hildyard): 31 July 2012 The claimant companies were in the business of providing services to estate agents, operating under and licensing to independent estate agencies the use of the name and logo ‘Fine & Country’ (F&C). The claimants provided a marketing umbrella and vehicle for the various independent estate agency businesses that had taken on licences. Under the licence, licensees were entitled to market properties in the upper quartile of the market under the F&C brand. The F&C brand became and remained well known to members of the public and the trade, especially those interested in the sale and purchase of domestic properties at the upper end of the market. The F&C name and device was a UK registered trademark and community trademark (the F&C marks). The defendants were companies in a group which operated a number of national estate agency brands, including ‘haart’ and ‘fine’. In 2007, the ‘fine haart’ brand was launched, but the defendants subsequently adopted new branding under the name and logo ‘FINE’ (the defendants’ mark). The defendants’ mark, like the F&C mark, was in capitals, with a font with serifs, gold underlining of the word, and a strapline which included the word ‘country’. The claimants issued proceedings claiming that as a result of the extensive use, advertisement and publicity made of the F&C name and logo by the claimants and their licensees, the F&C marks had acquired a reputation such that the provisions of section 10(2) & (3) of the Trade Marks Act 1994 and article 9(1)(b) & (c) of Council Regulation (EC) 40/94 (on the community trademark), as amended (replaced by Council Regulation (EC) 207/2009 on the community trademark (OJ 2009 L78, p1)) (the regulations) applied. Further, a valuable goodwill and reputation was attached to the F&C name and logo, and such goodwill and reputation belonged to the claimants. The claimants submitted that the result of the defendants adopting the defendants’ mark and use of the name ‘Fine’ had been very substantial confusion among members of the public and those involved in the property business, that the defendants were passing off or attempting to pass off their services as services of, or connected with, the claimants’, and that the first defendant was infringing the trademarks and the second defendant had procured or conspired with it to do so. Accordingly, the claimants sought injunctive and remedial relief. The defendants submitted that the F&C marks and the defendants’ mark were descriptive, and that there was no likelihood of confusion or deception such as to find a claim for passing off. Further, the defendants sought revocation of the F&C marks on the ground that they were deceptive. The issues for determination were, inter alia, first, whether the claimants had established the necessary elements for their claim in passing off, namely, goodwill or reputation, a misrepresentation, and damage or its likelihood. The defendants submitted, inter alia, that any goodwill which had accrued, had accrued to the licensees and not to the claimants; the goodwill had related to and was developed in the course of the licensees’ businesses as estate agents, and not the claimants’ business in licensing the use of the F&C brand and providing the other facilities. Second, whether the F&C marks were liable to revocation or were invalid. The defendants submitted, inter alia, that the F&C marks were devoid of any distinctive character and/or consisted exclusively of indication which might have served to designate the kind of quality of services, and accordingly breached section 3(1)(b) and (c) of the act and article 9(1)(b) and (c) of the regulations. Further, the defendants contended that as a consequence of the manner in which the licensees had used the marks, they had become deceptive as to their origin and had not been used with the consent of their true owner, namely the first claimant. Third, whether there had been infringement under section 10(2) and/or section 10(3) of the act and article 9(1)(b) and/or article 9(2) of the regulations. The court ruled: (1) The claimants’ goodwill had, at least in substantial part, been generated by the services and brand provided by the claimants and had accrued to the claimants as the source of those services and that brand. The claimants had developed an attractive force which had brought custom to the services that they had offered and the brand that they had made available on licence. It had been that attractive force that had enabled the claimants to charge significant licence fees. Accordingly, the claimant had plainly shown goodwill accrued to them such as to have maintained a claim in passing off. The evidence adduced by the claimants had been indicative of confusion, although part of it had not been compelling of it. However, the defendants had decided to ‘live dangerously’; the risk of confusion had clearly been present, and the defendants had appreciated it even if they had thought that they had done enough to have avoided deception. The defendants had been well aware of the resemblance between the F&C marks and the defendants’ mark and had been aware of the possibility that customers would have mistaken one for the other. The newly branded business of the defendants had been intended to compete directly with F&C, and obtained for the defendants’ local agencies the same kind of up-market business that the claimants’ brand had secured for its licensees, using a logo so designed as to carry a real risk of reasonably foreseeable result, of which the defendants had been aware, that customers might have assumed it to have been connected with, or a new version of, the claimants’ brand and logo. Therefore, the defendants’ brand had been calculated to put customers in mind of the F&C brand and have assumed a connection between the two. The evidence as a whole had been consistent with potential customers going beyond wondering and into making false assumptions; and that had been such as to cross over to deception, even if it had not been so deep-rooted that it could not have been dispelled or corrected. The similarities between the F&C marks and the defendants’ mark had been confusing and deceptive and/or had been likely to confuse and deceive. Erosion and damage to the claimants’ business had been likely in consequence. The licensing operations, conducted by the claimants and the other facilities and products they had made available, had generated goodwill which the claimants, as its owners, had been entitled to protect. Even if support in the evidence had not been strong, it had been, in the round, strong enough, and it had been consistent with, and indeed supportive of, that assessment. Accordingly, on the balance of probabilities, if the defendants were not restrained, a substantial number of potential customers or licensees of the claimants would have been misled into dealing with the defendants in the belief that they had been dealing with the claimants. It had followed that the claimants had demonstrated the required ingredients of reputation/goodwill, deception/confusion and damage (see , , , , , , ,  of the judgment). The claimants’ common law claim in passing off would succeed (see ,  of the judgment). (2) The F&C marks had been, on registration, and had remained, sufficiently distinctive to have warranted and continued to have warranted registration. The marks had recognisable and recognised separate existence apart from the descriptive and laudatory nature of the words themselves. The words in that context had called to mind the relevant business, not their semantic meaning, in the manner and context in which they had appeared; they had served to identify and distinguish the business. Further, the consent of the registered proprietor of the F&C marks, if not express, had plainly been implicit, and had been formally ratified. All parties to the various contractual arrangements had made clear and confirmed their consent. The defendants had not established that the F&C marks were not being used by or with the consent of the proprietor, namely the first claimant. Nor had the defendants established that the use made of the F&C marks had rendered them deceptive as to trade origin and they had failed to show any grounds for a declaration of invalidity, or for revocation, of the F&C marks and their claim would accordingly be dismissed (see , ,  of the judgment). Accordingly, the defendants’ claims for declarations of invalidity and revocation of the claimants’ marks had not been well founded (see  of the judgment). (3) Having already found, in the context of the claim for passing off, confusion and deception sufficient to have made good that claim, infringement of article 9(1)(b) and section 10(2) had necessarily followed. However, in addition, as a matter of overall impression, the defendants’ mark and the F&C marks had been sufficiently similar to have likely to have led, and had led, to confusion on the part of the average customer. In particular, the same font, the gold underlining, the capitalisation, and the overall impression created by the two marks had made it all too easy to have mistaken the one as the other, at least when the two had not been laid out together for simultaneous comparison. The two marks had been easily confused. Further, even had the evidence fallen short of confusion or deception, there would nevertheless have been confusion. The imitation in the defendants’ mark of the first part of the claimants’ name, including the font, capitalisation and underlining alone and in conjunction with the use of the word ‘country’ in the strapline and elsewhere had led to an unjustified association with the claimants’ business. There had been unfairness in the intentional adoption of a sign which the defendants had well appreciated had been plainly similar in appearance to the F&C mark. Accordingly, the claimants had establish infringement of the F&C marks in terms of article 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(c) of the regulations and, correspondingly, of section 10(2) and (3) of the act (see , , , , ,  of the judgment). The elements of a successful claim for breach of articles 9(1)(b) and (c) of the regulations and section 10(2) and (3) of the act had been established (see ,  of the judgment).
API Technologies has introduced a new series of pre-filtered GPS Low Noise Amplifiers (GPS LNAs) designed to amplify signals while filtering out interferers. The cost-effective 312 Series is smaller, lighter and offers improved performance, replacing the existing line of standard parts. The 312 Series of amplifiers are ideal for use in satellite and marine navigation as well as surveying and mapping, these integrated filter amplifiers present a more economical solution for a variety of military and commercial applications. These integrated filter amplifier modules give the customer the ability to choose between a single or dual output while increasing functionality and complexity. The 312 Series is offered with several bias configurations giving the customer maximum flexibility. Gain can be set from 16 to 40 dB in 3 dB increments. Customers can choose between SMA, N-Type or TNC connectors. The module is packaged in nickel plated aluminum housing and is hermetically sealed. See All API Technologies Amplifiers listed on everything RF.
Want to see it in action? Both the ThingMagic EL6e and ThingMagic Elara will be demoed at the RAIN Alliance group meeting on March 5 – 7 in Memphis, TN and will be available at the JADAK booth at the RFID Journal Live event on April 2 – 4 in Phoenix, AZ. Built around proven ThingMagic technology SAM 4S architecture, 1 GB processor and 256K of flash memory Optional integrated antenna with read range up to 2 meters Standard USB or Serial RS232 interface, with optional SPI, I2C, and RS485 capability Support for EPC global Gen 2V2 Protocol (ISO 18000-63) Pre-loaded Autonomous Workflows simplify integration RAIN Communication Interface supports RAIN RFID technology standards Medical Equipment for Healthcare and Pharmaceutical Industries Kiosks and vending machines Access gates in parking garages, ski lift gates, and other applications JADAK has announced the availability of the ThingMagic EL6e UHF RFID smart module for OEM customers. The EL6e is the ideal all-in-one embedded RFID solution for short- to mid-range applications that require a quick path to integration. The EL6e supports autonomous workflows permitting rapid creation of solutions without RFID expertise. It is one of the few available RFID solutions that does not mandate the use of SDKs and integration tools, and it’s among the first products in the market to support a new developer-friendly interface between applications and RAIN RFID readers, the RAIN Communication Interface (RCI).Key Features: Applications:
Again the Hotshots slowly pulled away in the second period with baskets from Travis, Barroc and Ian Sangalang, and made their largest lead 77-49 on a fast-break hit by Herndon.The Dyip made their run in the final quarter and managed to come to as close as 16 points but baskets from Barroca, Lee and Rome dela Rosa reestablished a 20-point advantage for the Hotshots.Jackson Corpuz led the Dyip with 20 points. Akeem Wright and Jay-R Reyes added 19 and 15 points, respectively. With their 0-7 card, the Dyip bowed out of the playoff contention.In the succeeding game, the Aces trailed 75-79 at the onset of the final quarter before going with a 16-0 run on inside and outside hits from Harris, Vic Manuel and Chris Exciminiano, all toward a 91-79 advantage.After the Painters cut the deficit to 10 points, the Aces pulled away for good with 5 straight points from Harris and a triple by Simon Enciso for their largest lead 106-86.Harris finished the match with 39 points and 25 rebounds while Manuel, Enciso and Chris Banchero had 16 points each for the Aces. Beau Belga led the Painters (0-3) with 20 points./PN Romeo Travis of Magnolia Hotshots (left) easily scores inside with the defending Jay-R Reyes of Columbian Dyip far behind. PBA MANILA – Magnolia Hotshots moved to a share of the No. 1 spot in the 2018 PBA Governors’ Cup after manhandling Columbian Dyip 113-95 on Wednesday night at the Smart Araneta Coliseum.The Hotshots tied with Barangay Ginebra San Miguel Kings on top with a 5-1 win-loss card. Romeo Travis led its scoring with 32 points, 14 rebounds and seven assists while Andy Mark Barroca and Paul Lee added 16 and 13 points, respectively.In the second game, Alaska Aces banked on the hot shooting of Mike Harris in the fourth quarter for a 106-89 domination of Rain or Shine Elasto Painters and to improve to a 4-1 win-loss record.Baskets from Travis, Lee and Robbie Herndon let the Hotshots surge to a 12-2 start. The lead went up 20-8 after back-to-back inside hits by Travis but the Dyip countered with triples to cut the deficit to 8.
“The second goal before half-time was a real kick in the teeth, but I thought we started the second half very brightly and we were the better team. “The last thing my players need is me talking about any other players. I’ll keep working with them because they’ve all improved massively – we’re just not seeing that at the moment in the league table”. “They keep playing and they keep going because they’re honest, but they’re playing with broken hearts then. “In the first half we were only okay – that slope is quite strong and we had to keep them at bay a little bit,” the manager told Bristol City Player HD. “They’ll be better for it, but in the meantime we’re going to have days like today and we’re going to have sleepless nights – probably throughout the season. The game was goalless until the 37th minute, yet City went in at half-time trailing 2-0 to two goals from Andre Gray. “Collectively, we don’t have enough out there when the game gets a little bit scary for us. And that’s tough at the moment. Gray, a summer transfer target of Cotterill, completed his hat-trick after Scott Arfield struck Burnley’s third in the second period, as the hosts ran out 4-0 winners. “Had we got to half-time 0-0, I’d have fancied us. “Deep down, whether we like it or not, even the players know we’re not going to come back and score three or four goals because we haven’t had a record of doing that this year – there haven’t been enough goals in the team for that to happen. “As the through ball happened (for the third goal), I need to look at it again but I think Frank (Fielding) needs to come out and take that – I think he was the closest to the ball – and that one was a real sickener.
Session ID: 2020-09-18:5c6090cde709d3426a1f19b6 Player ID: videojs-brightcove-player-526872-4597299258001 OK Close Modal DialogCaption Settings DialogBeginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.TextColorWhiteBlackRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentBackgroundColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyOpaqueSemi-TransparentTransparentWindowColorBlackWhiteRedGreenBlueYellowMagentaCyanTransparencyTransparentSemi-TransparentOpaqueFont Size50%75%100%125%150%175%200%300%400%Text Edge StyleNoneRaisedDepressedUniformDropshadowFont FamilyProportional Sans-SerifMonospace Sans-SerifProportional SerifMonospace SerifCasualScriptSmall CapsDefaultsDoneClose Modal DialogThis is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button.Safety Marcus McWilson thrives in new role fro the Cats. Play VideoPlayMuteCurrent Time 0:00/Duration Time 0:00Loaded: 0%0:00Progress: 0%0:00 Progress: 0%Stream TypeLIVERemaining Time -0:00 Playback Rate1ChaptersChaptersdescriptions off, selectedDescriptionssubtitles off, selectedSubtitlescaptions settings, opens captions settings dialogcaptions off, selectedCaptionsAudio TrackFullscreenThis is a modal window. The Video Cloud video was not found. Error Code: VIDEO_CLOUD_ERR_VIDEO_NOT_FOUND
1080p HD 1/1 360p Auto (360p) About Connatix V56892 MINNEAPOLIS — The Minnesota Twins were pounded again by the Baltimore Orioles 9-2 this (Wednesday) afternoon at Target Field.Twins starter Phil Hughes was roughed up in his sixth loss of the year. Hughes allowed five runs in four innings, including three home runs — one by Chris Davis and two by Mark Trumbo. 720p HD In all, Twins pitchers were knocked around by the Orioles lineup — allowing 16 hits in the game and four total home runs.Minnesota’s lone offensive highlight came in the second inning from Miguel Sano, who blasted his fourth home run of the season — a towering shot to left-center field that, at the time, cut the Baltimore lead to 2-1.With the loss, the Twins fall to a league-worst 8-25 on the season. Minnesota has now lost 11 of the past 12 games.The Twins mercifully have tomorrow off before starting a weekend series in Cleveland against the Indians on Friday night. Ricky Nolasco (1-1) will get the start against Cleveland’s Josh Tomlin (5-0). First pitch is scheduled for 6:10 p.m. About Connatix V56892 Visit Advertiser website GO TO PAGE Skip
Fulham midfielder Lasse Vigen Christensen will need to be managed back to full fitness slowly, according to manager Kit Symons.The Dane aggravated a hamstring injury in last Saturday’s goalless draw with Wolves, lasting only 32 minutes on his return before limping off.Christensen had been declared fit after just one day of full training but Symons said this time he will ensure the in-form midfielder is up to speed before throwing him back in.AdChoices广告The Whites boss said: “Lasse Christensen is a bit of a frustrating one.“It’s not too bad, it’s very similar to what he did against Bournemouth.“It’s certainly a less serious one but we’ll make sure we get him right and build him up slowly and make sure he’s going to be right to come back in.”While Christensen will miss Saturday’s trip to Cardiff, Fulham’s midfield numbers are swelled by the return of Alex Kacankilic and Ryan Tunnicliffe, who have been recalled from loan spells.Kacaniklic played 45 minutes of a behind-closed-doors friendly win over Portsmouth on Tuesday. Follow West London Sport on TwitterFind us on Facebook See also:Fulham boss rules out Christensen saleFulham face replay after draw with WolvesSymons ‘kicking himself’ over Christensen