redmond oregon hotels

We couldn't find the page you requested, either because it is temporarily unavailable, has had its name changed, or no longer exists on FindArticles.

This error occurred at: 2009-12-20 02:10:16

If you'd like to forge ahead here are some ideas:

Thank you for visiting FindArticles.

| | | |

Barack Obama is a master at grabbing and keeping his audience's attention, which is the number one goal of any public speaker. How does he do it? Here are five key lessons from Obama's rhetorical playbook.

Hybrids and small cars are the hot ticket in today's market, right? Wrong. On the other hand, the stampede continues, away from minivans, big pickups and SUVs and into cars and crossovers.

Recession, government spending, and demographics are transforming the workforce right before your eyes. To protect your career, make sure you’re on the right side of history.

Articles | Graham & Dunn PC
Keep track of all the latest Graham & Dunn articles.

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Announces its New Green Technology Pilot Program

by Kathleen T. Petrich ,
December 11, 2009
On December 7, 2009, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) announced, in conjunction with the United Nations Framework Conference on Climate Change being currently held in Copenhagen, Denmark, an expedited procedure for pending “Green Technology” patent applications called the Green Technology Pilot Program (“Pilot Program”). This announcement was greeted with a bit of fanfare and eager anticipation, as the normal pendency for examination of the application can be up to 30 months. But the pilot program is limited to the first 3000 petitions. Here are the specifics:
- Must have a pending patent application as of December 8, 2009 (effective date of Pilot Program)
- The subject invention must be for a “Green Technology,” which includes applications pertaining to environmental quality, energy conservation, development of renewable energy resources or greenhouse gas emission reduction)
- The normal government petition fee of $130 is waived
- Do not need to meet all of the requirements to make the application “special for purposes of expedited
- All petitions must be filed by December 8, 2010 or until the first 3000 petitions are received
- The petition must be filed through the PTO's electronic filing system (PAIR)
- Petition must be filed meeting the following:
The petition is a great thing if the invention clearly falls in the correct technology classifications, directed to a unitary invention, and has no greater than the maximum claim set allowed for the petition. If the petition to make special is approved, the Application will be examined out of turn on a fast track basis. This can cut a significant amount of time off an otherwise long few years of waiting for examination.
An applicant will need to contact its patent counsel as soon as possible to review the application and to see whether the application meets the requirements or if a preliminary amendment to cancel claims makes sense. While the U.S. Government has graciously waived the petition fee, the Applicant should expect a fair fee from counsel to review/counsel/prepare and file such a petition. Plus, there will be a government fee of $300 for the request of early publication, but this fee would have to be paid in any event. But under current practice, the Applicant is generally not hit with this fee until the Issue Fee is paid, thereby knowing that the application has been allowed. Thus, the PTO would get its publication fee early whether the patent application is allowed or not. Still, it may be a fair trade off for obtaining a patent in a green technology on a fast track.
For more information on the newly announced Pilot Program, go to: http://www.uspto.gov/news/pr/2009/09_33.jsp or http://www.uspto.gov/patents/law/notices/2009.jsp . For counseling regarding whether it makes sense to file a petition, contact your Patent Attorney.
Don't Play With Fire Boys and Girls

By Stephen M. Klein
November 18, 2009

The Proposed Restructure

Well, Senator Dodd, bless his heart, has come out with yet another proposal to restructure the financial regulatory system. If you haven't seen it, at its heart is a new oversight body called the “Financial Institutions Regulatory Agency” or “FIRA.” I think a more appropriate name would be the “Financial Institutions Regulatory Entity” or “FIRE."

While it probably has zero chance of passing as proposed, the bill is telling. By stripping the FDIC and Federal Reserve of their bank regulatory oversight functions – making the FDIC just an insurance agency and the Federal Reserve a monetary policy agency and eliminating the OCC and OTS as we know them, I interpret Senator Dodd to be saying “You all messed up – so we are going to start over again.”

Actually, the concept of a new, single financial regulatory agency is intriguing. At least it would centralize power and create some consistency. The downside is that word power – and the fear of its abuse.

Where Are We Anyway?

Unfortunately we are still in the middle of this mess. With real estate values still dropping in many locales, we are far from done. The implications are far reaching. Because of archaic accounting pronouncements, banks, steered straight off a cliff by the accountants, appraisers and regulators, are forced to write down “distressed” assets to fire sale values. Why no OTTI standards have been adopted for real estate is beyond me. We just continue to privatize the upside on real estate and publicly swallow the downside in large gulps.

The Scary Regulatory Environment

Folks, I am here to tell you things have only gotten worse. With each succeeding Inspector General Report, the regulators get more dogmatic and risk averse. Enforcement actions are flying. Three CAMELS ratings are embraced. The whole process and its aftermath are overwhelming to boards and management and the regulators themselves, who simply don't have the resources or necessary experience to properly address all the issues, many of which are self-created.

There is huge frustration on the part of management teams, including many good bankers just trying to survive this nightmare. Solutions that are an iota out of the box are shot down with no apparent thought or explanation. The mantra now is for common equity in capital raises, and failure is being considered over preferred stock injections.

Eliminating the Hostile Regulatory Environment

In hindsight, many banks took on too much risk and real estate concentrations. And, yes the regulators have a very tough job to do. However, the hostile environment we are operating under serves no one well.

The regulators , legislators, banks and their lobbyists must all take a step back and reconsider where we are at now, where we want to get and how best to get there without further scorching the earth.

The Irony of It All

The irony is that the banks are supposed to be at the heart of the economic recovery. However, with reduced lending limits, concentration ratios and tolerance for regulatory criticism, the banks just aren't lending much nowadays. Why a broad-based government guaranteed lending program has yet to be adopted is beyond me.

From the outside looking in on that “island surrounded by reality” which is known as Washington, D.C., Congress, the administration and the bank regulatory agencies all are on different C-SPAN channels. The disconnect is frightening.

Let's Put Out the Fire

So before adopting any new regulatory reform, let's figure out just what went wrong, put a meaningful plan together to fix it and go about the business of returning our banking system and economy to some semblance of stability. Otherwise, we truly are playing with FIRE!
Incentive Compensation: The Federal Reserve Speaks

By Casey M. Nault
November 17, 2009

Overview

On October 22, 2009, the Federal Reserve Board issued proposed guidance designed to ensure that incentive compensation practices and policies at Fed-regulated institutions, including U.S. bank holding companies, state member banks and certain other categories of institutions, do not undermine the safety and soundness of those institutions. The Fed explained its action in part by noting that corporate governance structures related to compensation practices may not be sufficient to protect the safety and soundness of institutions, since the federal “safety net” may lead shareholders to tolerate a degree of risk that is inconsistent with safety and soundness. Like the Treasury rules applicable to institutions participating in the Troubled Asset Relief Pr

redmond oregon hotels

Category