Navigation system and method

In a global positioning system (GPS), such as the NAVSTAR/GPS system, wherein the position coordinates of user terminals are obtained by processing multiple signals transmitted by a constellation of orbiting satellites, an acquisition-aiding signal generated by an earth-based control station is relayed to user terminals via a geostationary satellite to simplify user equipment. The aiding signal is FSK modulated on a reference channel slightly offset from the standard GPS channel. The aiding signal identifies satellites in view having best geometry and includes Doppler prediction data as well as GPS satellite coordinates and identification data associated with user terminals within an area being served by the control station and relay satellite. The aiding signal significantly reduces user equipment by simplifying spread spectrum signal demodulation and reducing data processing functions previously carried out at the user terminals

I\u27m sorry for everything

My work is rooted in the fact that women are practically conditioned to apologize for everything, and tells the intimate story of my life. By recording my apologies for several months and deeply examining my behavior, I noticed themes and made work based on these — work that exposed my private moments. I noticed a disconnect between times I needed to apologize, and this compulsive need to take on the blame for every little thing. I examine the feminine battle of soft and strong, eventually coming to the conclusion that there are occasions calling for both. Women are taught to take the blame, without even thinking about it, and therefore learn that we matter less than the commotion it would make to stand up for ourselves. This plays a direct role in rape culture, where female victims are blamed and often coerced into taking on the blame of their perpetrator. Women are expected to be submissive, to understand and reassure ‘it’s okay,’ and through my work, I argue against this expectation. I expose everything I apologize for, revealing how absurd the vast majority of these apologies are. Elements of handwriting, tearing, and hand-stitching reference the emotional toll this compulsive need to apologize takes, and how exhausting and infuriating it feels that this is expected. Overuse of the words ‘I’m sorry’ detract meaning from when an apology is truly merited

On extending continuous functions into a metrizable AE

AbstractWe say that a subset S of a topological space X is M-embedded (MN0-embedded) in X if every map from S to a (separable) metrizable AE can be extended over X. Characterizations of M-and MNO-embedding are given and we prove that S is M-embedded (MNO-embedded) in X iff(X,S) has the Homotopy Extension Property with respect to every (seperable) ANR space

The double bind theory and gender non-conforming identity development

The aim of this study was to qualitatively investigate the double binding effects of gender oppression on the lives of persons that self-identify as masculine-spectrum gender non-conforming. The qualitative interview used was designed to illuminate early memories of an individual\u27s family of origin and the ways in which parents, siblings, and other primary support systems reacted to gender non-conforming behaviors in a child. The purpose of this study was to answer the following question: Is the identity development of a masculine-spectrum gender non-conforming person built on a relational foundation that is intra-psychically located within a double bind? The definition of a double bind that was used for data analysis is taken from Seikkula and Olson\u27s (2003) interpretation of a double bind in the context of a family system, people caught up in an ongoing system which produces conflicting definitions of the relationship and consequent subjective distress. This study sought to excavate the double binds that might be experienced in a family system when one person in the system is, by nature of developing a gender non-conforming identity, unable to meet the interpersonal expectations of the remaining members of the family. Understanding how the double binds of gender oppression, starting from the earliest stages of identity development, affect an individual\u27s attachments and coping skills is critical in working therapeutically with adults and children who are considered gender non-conforming by societal standards

Recognizing Party and Nonparty Interests in Written Civil Procedure Laws

Since their inception in 1938, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have largely directed civil litigation procedures in American trial courts. The organization of the rules reflects the natural progression of a civil case from filing to enforcement. The rules have been periodically updated. At the outset and through the years, however, the rules have ignored certain party and non-party interests that are regularly considered during civil litigation. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure have always been tailored chiefly to trials, and more recently to settlements of claims between named parties. The rules focus on formal pleadings of alleged breaches of substantive rights involving named parties. Yet many civil cases also concern important party and nonparty interests beyond those in the presented claims. For example, in personal injury cases, the true conflicts are often not over the pleaded claims, but over related interests including attorney's contingency fees; hospital, physician, worker's compensation or other liens; subrogation; insurance coverage; indemnification; and contribution. The absence of written rules governing party and nonparty interest has led to misfortune. Given the continuing recognition and, in many instances, the expansion of nonparty interests in personal injury and other civil cases, it is time to rewrite the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and other American civil procedure laws to better reflect the way the civil justice system truly operates. This Article demonstrates how American trial courts often deal with party and nonparty interests that are outside pleaded claims and are largely unrecognized in written civil procedure laws. The Article illustrates, using Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Company of America, 511 U.S. 375 (1994), a case where the Court set out guidelines for ancillary jurisdiction. Ancillary jurisdiction is relevant to both private party and non-party interests at many stages of civil litigation. This Article explores four stages: (1) the early search for subject matter jurisdiction, (2) the presentation of claims for resolution, (3) the pretrial conference, and (4) the enforcement of judgments. The Article demonstrates the need for written civil procedure laws that better reflect the dispute resolutions occurring in American civil trial courts. In addressing questions arising from Kokkonen, the Article asks: How might ancillary authority, as defined in Kokkonen, govern private party and nonparty interests in subject matter jurisdiction, claim presentation, pretrial conference, and judgment enforcement? When ancillary jurisdiction encompasses private party and nonparty interests beyond presented claims involving named parties, are the necessary procedures set forth in written civil procedures laws? If not, have difficulties resulted? And, how might any such difficulties be addressed by new written civil procedure laws

Expanded Recognition in Written Laws of Ancillary Federal Court Powers: Supplementing the Supplemental Jurisdiction Statute

Ancillary federal district court powers embody more than adjudicatory authority over "factually interdependent" civil claims initially presented within cases or controversies. Ancillary powers are used to facilitate civil case settlement agreements encompassing claims never presented for adjudication, as well as to adjudicate some disputes over settlement agreements long after final judgments. While certain ancillary powers are now recognized in the "supplemental jurisdiction" statute, 28 U.S.C. ý 1367, the range of the statute is quite limited. It chiefly codifies earlier precedents on pendent and ancillary jurisdiction that primarily address initial ancillary adjudicatory authority over state law civil claims without independent jurisdictional bases that arise from the same "common nucleus of operative facts" as the civil claims having independent subject matter jurisdictional bases. Section 1367 should provide clarity for all federal court ancillary powers, eliminating much uncertainty and confusion. Section 1367 should be amended to encompass more fully ancillary adjudicatory and nonadjudicatory federal court authority. This task is facilitated by the 1994 decision in Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Company of America. A reformulated statute should speak for the first time to the ancillary nonadjudicatory powers necessary for courts to function successfully, including management, vindication, and certain enforcement powers. And, it should better recognize the differences between initial and later ancillary adjudicatory powers over nonfederal civil claims that are factually related to federal civil claims. In the absence of Congressional action, judicial decisions should better recognize and differentiate the varying forms of ancillary federal district court powers