7184 research outputs found
Sort by
Stewardship of the Built Environment in a Changing World
Get PDFStewardship of the built environment emerged in the mid-1990s (Young 1994) when preservationists and conservationists needed to broaden their qualitative emotion-based arguments and adopt quantitative environmental and economic evidence to counter proposals that threatened the viability of both the built and natural environments. Social, environmental, and economic (SEE) concerns at the turn of the twenty-first century formed the triptych of the metrics found within the philosophy which: “…recognizes that the preservation, rehabilitation, and reuse of existing older and historic buildings contributes to sustainable design; respects the past, present, and future users of the built environment; and balances the needs of contemporary society and its impact on the built environment with the ultimate effects on the natural environment” (Young 2008a, p. 3; Young 2012, p. 2).
This philosophy moves beyond the singularity of defining benefits in just financial economic terms and expands the now necessary holistic perspective to include social and environmental benefits. The wealth-borne origins of the preservation movement in the United States still cast a long shadow on appropriate efforts towards stewardship of SEE resources today. Despite numerous advances in the past 50 years, the public perception of historic preservation and building reuse limits preservation’s effectiveness as a SEE planning tool. Many people view preservation and reuse as (1) being accessible and worthwhile only to wealthier citizens; (2) having little influence on more important issues like climate change; and (3) creating a hindrance to economic revitalization efforts focused on new construction only. Quite frankly, they are wrong
Does Size Matter? Nanoscale Particle Size as an Indicator of Inherency in Nanopharmaceutical Patent Validity
Get PDFScientific and technological advances in nanopharmaceuticals bring the doctrine of inherent obviousness to a head. On the one hand, nanotechnology promises to offer novel ways to target and treat traditionally incurable diseases by operating at a scale that is comparable to the scales that most biological systems use. On the other hand, nanotechnology inventions that result in improved pharmacokinetic properties are susceptible to validity challenges based on inherent obviousness.
Inherency and obviousness are two independently recognized and well-understood principles in United States patent law. Inherency refers to a claimed limitation or feature that is either necessarily present in, or the natural result of, the features expressly disclosed by the prior art. Obviousness, in contrast, refers to whether the claimed invention as a whole was readily apparent in the prior art based on a combination of references. Because inherency turns on whether something was necessarily present in the prior art at some earlier time, the analysis implicates hindsight. But because obviousness turns on what would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made, the analysis forbids hindsight.
Despite the seemingly mutual exclusivity between inherency and obviousness, the two principles have been increasingly applied together in the context of pharmaceutical and biotechnology inventions. Patent challengers frequently rely on the argument that improved pharmaceutical concentration and bioavailability at the target site is implicit in prior art teachings concerning how pharmaceutical particles behave at decreased sizes despite the novelty of the particle’s size alone. Rather than engage in an arbitrary analysis focusing on how unexpected some pharmacokinetic response is, courts and the USPTO should eradicate the concept of inherent obviousness in its entirety
Activismitis
No full textProtests are usually organized, mobilized, and amplified by the parties for whom the change is sought. Women marching for reproductive rights, against misogyny and for the right to vote. Black people organizing to lead demonstrations against police brutality and to bring attention to racism. Throughout the process of fighting for comprehensive change, the activists rarely have the time and space to contemplate how to properly care for their own health and well-being. Although being entrenched in a cause that aligns with one\u27s passion can provide a positive mood change, often times activists suffer from mental and physical health complications as a direct result of being exposed to stress. Violent and racist incidents reproduce horrifying images and cause communities of color to relive trauma while championing their cause. Due to the urgent nature of most protests, it is rare that advocates have the luxury of considering the long-term health effects of their actions or incorporating health-related protections in their demands. However, if legislators, politicians, and other leaders recognize the validity of the cause and take advantage of the opportunity to support the movement, they should likewise support those who sacrifice their health and put themselves in harm\u27s way to initiate and advance these causes
Erasure: The Conceptual Disappearance of Criminalized Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders
No full textHB 1150: Freedom to Farm Act
Get PDFThe Act protects agricultural facilities, agricultural operations, and forest landowners from nuisance lawsuits after two years of operation. If a facility converts to a confined animal feeding operation, the two-year time period restarts
HB 517: Amendments Relating to Student Scholarship Organizations
Get PDFThe Act extends the annual revenue received by student scholarship organizations to include interest earned on deposits and investments of scholarship funds or tuition grants. The Act expands the scope of auditing that student scholarship organizations are subjected to and compels the organizations to submit Form 990 to the Department of Revenue. Further, the Act allows certain insurance companies to partake in the tax program and increases the tax credit available to participating taxpayers. Lastly, the Act increases the aggregate amount of tax credits allowed per year to $120 million
Abortion Rights and Disability Equality: A New Constitutional Background
No full textAbortion rights and access are under siege in the United States. Even while current state-level attacks take on a newly aggressive scale and scope-- emboldened by the United States Supreme Court\u27s June 2022 decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women\u27s Health Organization to overturn Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey--the legal landscape emerging in the wake of Dobbs is decades in the making. In this Article, we analyze the pre- and post-Roe landscapes, explaining that after the Supreme Court recognized a right to abortion in Roe in 1973, anti-abortionists sought to dismantle that right, first thread by thread and now whole cloth. As we explain, these concerted efforts impose unique and uniquely burdensome harms on those living at the intersections of historically marginalized and vulnerable identities, including persons of color, low-income populations, persons with disabilities, and individuals in LGBTQ+ communities. This Article examines the deeply troubling--and now successful--efforts to dismantle Roe and the legal attacks on reproductive freedom. It foreshadows continuing legal efforts to gut abortion rights and new battlefronts related to disability justice and LGBTQ+ equality emerging from the same efforts. Focusing on persons with disabilities, this Article argues that the political movement to deny abortion rights will eviscerate gains made toward disability justice, as well as many other social justice gains such as LGBTQ+ equality