nike womens free run flyknit 40 t9libyE

SKU337453578
nike womens free run flyknit 4.0
nike womens free run flyknit 4.0
M aple Grove 15517 Grove Circle N 55369 M-F 6a - 7p; Sat 7a - 5p; Sun 8a - 4p 763-657-0919 Brooklyn Park 9578 Noble Parkway 55443 763-762-8104

*** Now offering delivery through AMAZON RESTAURANTS ***

Thank you for your interest in Daily Dose, an independent and locally owned coffee shop and cafe proudly calling Maple Grove and Brooklyn Park home.

If you are looking for a great place to grab that great cup of coffee from a friendly barista, enjoy a delicious lunch, relax with friends or hold your book club, look no further than Daily Dose. Enjoy!

Delivery now available 8am - Close through Amazon!

More Articles ...

Page 1 of 2

Daily Dose

in the

Community!

**Maple Grove Magazine "Best Coffee Shop" 2015**

**Best Cup of Coffee,Osseo-Maple Grove Press Readers' Choice Awards 2014**

**Maple Grove Magazine "Best of Maple Grove" Finalist2013, 2014 2015**

Maple Grove Store

15517 Grove Circle North

Monday - Friday 6am - 7pm

Saturday 7am - 5pm

Sunday 8am - 4pm


Park Nicollet Kiosk Location

9555 Upland Lane North

Monday - Friday 7:30am - 2:30pm

Learn about the causes and complications of strep throat infections, rheumatic fever, rheumatic heart disease.

Information for people and family members recently diagnosed or living with RF or RHD

Information about preventing RHD through socioeconomic development, early diagnosis and novel research.

Information for health workers, clinicians and specialists caring for people with RF and RHD.

Information for Governments and policy makers can contribute to control of RF and RHD through programs and policy.

Meet the organisations, countries and country partners working together to end RHD

The major cause of death and disability from RHD is heart failure. Over time, scarred and damaged heart valves make it impossible for the heart to pump blood effectively. Without a well-functioning heart, fluid builds up in the lungs and body, causing symptoms like breathlessness, swelling and fatigue. These symptoms tend to become worse over time without treatment.

A ‘stroke’ occurs when a part of the brain does not receive adequate blood supply.

Strokes can be from clot which blocks a blood vessel (ischemic) or from a burst blood vessel (hemorrhagic). People with RHD are at risk of ischemic stroke because of blood clots which can form in the heart and subsequently block blood flow to parts of the brain.

Some people living with RHD need to take ‘blood thinning’ medication ( anticoagulation ) to reduce the risk of stroke.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an abnormal heart rhythm. People with RHD are at risk of AF because heart valve damage changes the shape of the heart and increased the risk of AF. AF tends to make heart failure worse, increasing shortness of breath, and may cause palpitations. AF also significantly increases the risk of stroke.

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a bacterial infection on the valves of the heart. Valves that are already scarred or damaged by RHD are more likely to have IE than undamaged valves.

People with IE have fevers and the heart may be unable to pump blood effectively. It can be difficult to diagnose IE and, even when IE can be diagnosed, antibiotic treatment may be ineffective.

Minimising the risk of IE is an important part of managing RHD. The bacteria that cause IE tend to come from the mouth, so good dental hygiene is an important way to minimize risk. Giving prophylactic antibiotics before dental work and some other procedures is standard in many countries.

In order for patent owners to garner the benefits the ITC has to offer, the alleged infringer must import “articles that infringe” a valid U.S. patent or copyright. As clear as this may sound, recently there has been litigation about what exactly constitutes an “article that infringes.” For example, if a patent claim requires a scanner for scanning fingerprints and software for analyzing the prints, is the scanner –-without the completed software- an article “that infringes”? Or, if a patent claim requires obtaining a series of digital data sets representing dental aligners, are the digital data sets “articles” that infringe?

The Federal Circuit recently took up these two issues. The cases help define the term “articles that infringe,” and thus, the jurisdiction of the ITC in a 337 investigation. In one case, Suprema v. ITC , the Federal Circuit held en banc that the ITC has the authority to block the importation of a part of a patented article if it is imported for a downstream use that would infringe the claim of a patent. More recently, in ClearCorrect v. ITC , a Federal Circuit panel ruled that the ITC does not have the authority to block importation of digital transmissions, even if the digital transmissions infringe a patent.

Suprema v. ITC

In Suprema, a South Korean company imported fingerprint scanners along with software development kits into the United States. U.S. companies then used the software development kit in a manner that allowed the fingerprint scanner to become functional, and resultantly infringe the U.S. patent. The owner of the patent asked the ITC to halt the importation of the fingerprint scanners. The manufacturer argued that because the patent required that the software be activated, there were no “articles that infringe ” at the time of importation. Furthermore, the importing company argued that the scanners have substantial non-infringing uses, i.e ., that the scanners are “staple articles.” Essentially, the issue was whether importing a part of a patented article qualifies as an “article that infringes”, and thus, whether the ITC has jurisdiction over the imported items.

The Federal Circuit found that Section 1337’s “articles that infringe” language does not limit the ITC’s jurisdiction to end-products that infringe a patent. As long as the other requirements of induced infringement are met ( i.e ., knowledge or willful blindness of infringement of a patent), a staple article that is imported as component of a patented article falls under the jurisdiction of the ITC.

Helen Zhao responds to the claim that it is unacceptable to retain personal wealth.

According to journalist A.Q. Smith, you’re probably living an immoral life.

In his recent article in Current Affairs , Smith outright condemns the obscenely rich for their wealth, but the article is not only an attack against the millionaires and billionaires of the world—in arguing that keeping any amount of wealth is immoral, it is an assault against the lifestyle enjoyed by the majority of Western society.

Smith’s logic can be boiled down to the following excerpt: “Because every dollar you have is a dollar you’re not giving to somebody else, the decision to retain wealth is a decision to deprive others.”

What follows is a condemnation of the wealthy’s most outrageous spending habits. There is nothing scandalous about critiquing the rich; there are few among us who would find nothing incongruous about seeing in succession on one’s Facebook feed an article on the world’s most expensive pair of earrings ($57 million) and a video on the famine in Yemen.

This line of reasoning is not new. It has perhaps been examined most thoroughly by utilitarian philosopher Peter Singer, who offers the following thought experiment: suppose a child is drowning in a pool, and you are walking by on your way to class. Are you not morally obliged to step in and save the child? Most people agree that a moral obligation exists, and inaction is thus morally wrong. Singer then points to the “drowning children” of the world for example, the thousands across the world who die each day from malaria. The charity Nothing But Nets notes on their webpage that sending a bednet costs just ten dollars. Is donating a small sum to save a child from malaria not equivalent to pulling a drowning child out of a pool? If it is, then it follows that a refusal to donate said ten dollars is as morally reprehensible as walking past a drowning child without offering to help.

The natural conclusion to both Smith and Singer’s arguments is that all of us who live lives of comfort and frivolity are living immorally. Both protest this. Smith attempts to defend the assertion that moral duty becomes greater the more wealth you have, claiming the existence of some “maximum moral income” above which it is morally wrong to keep any money one may earn. First, there is the obvious fact that any such “maximum moral income” would be impossible in practice to determine. Should it be based upon what a person needs to survive? To flourish? To self-actualize? All of these are nebulous concepts with no universal dollar amounts attached. Second, this runs contrary to his most important line of reasoning: that it is wrong to use money for any purpose other than helping those who need it more. To illustrate this point, let us consider an amendment to Singer’s analogy.

A good educational system should have three purposes: provide all who want to learn with access to available resources at any time in their lives; empower all who want to share what they know to find those who want to learn it from them; and, finally, furnish all who want to present an issue to the public with the opportunity to make their challenge known.”
… interested to see more of what inspires us? Check out our tumblr , a scrapbook of visions of the future of learning.
Ivan Illich
elsewhere
follow us
drop us a line