6,924 research outputs found

    Flight prototype regenerative particulate filter system development

    Get PDF
    The effort to design, fabricate, and test a flight prototype Filter Regeneration Unit used to regenerate (clean) fluid particulate filter elements is reported. The design of the filter regeneration unit and the results of tests performed in both one-gravity and zero-gravity are discussed. The filter regeneration unit uses a backflush/jet impingement method of regenerating fluid filter elements that is highly efficient. A vortex particle separator and particle trap were designed for zero-gravity use, and the zero-gravity test results are discussed. The filter regeneration unit was designed for both inflight maintenance and ground refurbishment use on space shuttle and future space missions

    Copycats, Relax - The Federal Circuit Lightens up on Willful Patent Infringement

    Get PDF
    Willful infringement is alleged in over 90% of patent cases. This is primarily because, under the Patent Act and Federal Circuit case law, a finding of willful infringement gives trial judges the discretion to award treble damages and attorney\u27s fees to the patentee. Given that patent infringement actions can carry litigation fees of two million dollars or more, an award of punitive damages is a serious threat to accused infringers. A common and powerful defense to a willful infringement allegation is reasonable reliance on an opinion of counsel. Using this defense, the accused infringer can prove he acted in good faith and in accordance with his duty of care because he reasonably relied on an attorney\u27s opinion, usually in the form of an opinion letter, that he was not infringing. 6 However, in order to assert this defense, the plaintiff must disclose the relied upon opinion letter and waive attorney- client and work product privileges as to the subject matter of the opinion. District courts differ widely as to the scope of this waiver, with some even holding that this waiver extends to the defendant\u27s communications with trial counsel in addition to opinion counsel. Thus, in these cases, accused patent infringers face a dilemma as to which to forego: a potentially powerful defense to a patentee\u27s claim of willfulness or attorney-client and work product privileges, possibly even as to trial counsel. In In re Seagate Technology, the Federal Circuit was asked to vacate the rulings of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York that allowed the patentee-plaintiff to obtain discovery of the work product of the defendant\u27s trial counsel that was communicated to the defendant. The Federal Circuit, sua sponte, ordered an en banc review of the petition and issued a general rule as to the scope of the waiver affected by the use of an opinion counsel. The court stated that, ordinarily, the scope of the privilege waiver would only extend to opinion counsel, not to trial counsel. The Federal Circuit then elected to overrule its own 24-year-old Underwater Devices decision and lightened the standard of care imposed on a potential infringer to determine whether he is infiinging on another\u27s patent

    Copycats, Relax - The Federal Circuit Lightens up on Willful Patent Infringement

    Get PDF
    Willful infringement is alleged in over 90% of patent cases. This is primarily because, under the Patent Act and Federal Circuit case law, a finding of willful infringement gives trial judges the discretion to award treble damages and attorney\u27s fees to the patentee. Given that patent infringement actions can carry litigation fees of two million dollars or more, an award of punitive damages is a serious threat to accused infringers. A common and powerful defense to a willful infringement allegation is reasonable reliance on an opinion of counsel. Using this defense, the accused infringer can prove he acted in good faith and in accordance with his duty of care because he reasonably relied on an attorney\u27s opinion, usually in the form of an opinion letter, that he was not infringing. 6 However, in order to assert this defense, the plaintiff must disclose the relied upon opinion letter and waive attorney- client and work product privileges as to the subject matter of the opinion. District courts differ widely as to the scope of this waiver, with some even holding that this waiver extends to the defendant\u27s communications with trial counsel in addition to opinion counsel. Thus, in these cases, accused patent infringers face a dilemma as to which to forego: a potentially powerful defense to a patentee\u27s claim of willfulness or attorney-client and work product privileges, possibly even as to trial counsel. In In re Seagate Technology, the Federal Circuit was asked to vacate the rulings of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York that allowed the patentee-plaintiff to obtain discovery of the work product of the defendant\u27s trial counsel that was communicated to the defendant. The Federal Circuit, sua sponte, ordered an en banc review of the petition and issued a general rule as to the scope of the waiver affected by the use of an opinion counsel. The court stated that, ordinarily, the scope of the privilege waiver would only extend to opinion counsel, not to trial counsel. The Federal Circuit then elected to overrule its own 24-year-old Underwater Devices decision and lightened the standard of care imposed on a potential infringer to determine whether he is infiinging on another\u27s patent

    Space transportation systems, launch systems, and propulsion for the Space Exploration Initiative: Results from Project Outreach

    Get PDF
    A number of transportation and propulsion options for Mars exploration missions are analyzed. As part of Project Outreach, RAND received and evaluated 350 submissions in the launch vehicle, space transportation, and propulsion areas. After screening submissions, aggregating those that proposed identical or nearly identical concepts, and eliminating from further consideration those that violated known physical princples, we had reduced the total number of viable submissions to 213. In order to avoid comparing such disparate things as launch vehicles and electric propulsion systems, six broad technical areas were selected to categorize the submissions: space transportation systems; earth-to-orbit (ETO) launch systems; chemical propulsion; nuclear propulsion; low-thrust propulsion; and other. To provide an appropriate background for analyzing the submissions, an extensive survey was made of the various technologies relevant to the six broad areas listed above. We discuss these technologies with the intent of providing the reader with an indication of the current state of the art, as well as the advances that might be expected within the next 10 to 20 years

    Research in NASA History: A Guide to the NASA History Program

    Get PDF
    This monograph details the archival and other related resources held by the NASA History Office at Headquarters, and at NASA's Field Centers and other related government agencies. It also gives information on the NASA History publications, World Wide Web pages and the like
    • …
    corecore