text: STATE OF MAINE MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Case No. 98-07 Issued: June 12, 1998 __________________________________ ) UNITED PAPERWORKERS ) INTERNATIONAL UNION, ) ) Complainant,) INTERIM ORDER ON ) RESPONDENTS' MOTIONS TO ) DISMISS V. ) ) AUSTIN J. DECOSTER d/b/a DECOSTER ) EGG FARMS; MAINE CONTRACT FARMING,) LLC; NORTHERN TRANSPORTATION, LLC;) TURNER MAINTENANCE AND SERVICES, ) INC.; L&L CLEANING, INC.; and PFS ) LOADING, INC., ) ) Respondents. ) __________________________________) On October 8, 1997, the Complainant United paperworkers International Union (hereinafter referred to as "Complainant" or "Union") drafted a prohibited Practice Complaint to be filed with the Maine Labor Relations Board ("Board" or "MLRB") and a substantially identical charge to be filed with the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB"). The Prohibited Practice Complaint was received by the Board on October 9, 1997. Both the complaint and the charge named the current Respondents as the charged parties, except that PFS Loading, Inc., was not named in either document and both documents named Maine Ag, LLC, and Quality Egg of New England, LLC, as additional Respondents. Joint Exhibit 1 indicates that the charge mentioned above was filed with the NLRB on October 14, 1997. On October 14, 1997, the Executive Director of the Board sent a letter to Complainant's attorney, advising him of the jurisdictional proof of service requirement and noting certain insufficiencies in the submission received on October 9. The executive director sent copies of the letter to the attorney for Respondents A..J. Decoster d/b/a Decoster Egg Farms and Maine Contract Farming and to the agents for service of process -1- registered with the Secretary of State's Office for the other named Respondents. On October 16, 1997, the Complainant prepared an amended charge for filing with the NLRB, adding a discrimination charge to its original complaint. In response to the notice of insufficiencies, the Complainant filed an Amended Prohibited Practice Complaint with the Board on October 29, 1997. This complaint charged the same conduct against the same Respondents as the October 9 submission. On November 20, 1997, the several Respondents filed separate responses to the prohibited practice complaint. Respondents Turner Maintenance and Services, Inc.; Northern Transportation, LLC; and L&L Cleaning, Inc., each filed a separate response. While the three responses were not all identical, they all asserted that: (1) each Respondent is not an "agricultural employer" within the meaning of the Agricultural Employees Labor Relations Act ("AELRA"), 26 M.R.S.A. ch. 16, because: (a) each employs fewer than 100 employees, much less 100 agricultural employees, (b) none of the Respondents operates an egg processing facility that has over 500,000 laying birds, and (c) respectively, the Respondents are engaged in the following business pursuits: vehicle repair and maintenance and property upkeep; transportation and trucking services; and industrial cleaning; (2) the Board's jurisdiction over each Respondent is preempted by federal labor laws and assertion of jurisdiction by the Board would violate the supremacy clause of the Constitution of the United States; (3) application of AELRA to any of the Respondents would violate their rights under Article I, 6-A of the Constitution of Maine and Article XIV of the Constitution of the United States; and (4) none of the Respondents promulgated the workplace -2- rule which is the subject of the complaint. Respondents Maine Ag, LLC, and Quality Egg of New England, LLC, filed a joint response to the complaint. These Respondents denied the substantive allegations contained in the complaint and listed the following defenses: (1) The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (2) The complaint is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act. (3) The Board lacks jurisdiction over the Respondents. (4) The Respondents are not agricultural employers within the meaning of the AELRA. (5) The Respondents do not employ agricultural employees within the meaning of the AELRA. (6) The AELRA is unconstitutional. (7) The AELRA violates the Respondents' equal protection and due process rights. (8) The AELRA violates the impairment of contracts clause in the Constitution. (9) The Respondents' actions were undertaken in good faith. Respondents Austin J. Decoster, Decoster Egg Farms and Maine Contract Farming, LLC, filed a joint response to the complaint and a motion to dismiss. These Respondents denied the substantive allegations contained in the complaint and listed the following defenses: (1) The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (2) The Board lacks jurisdiction over the Respondents. (3) The Respondents are not agricultural employers within the meaning of the AELRA. (4) The AELRA is unconstitutional. -3- (5) The AELRA violates the Respondents' equal protection and due process rights. (6) The AELRA violates the impairment of contract clause in the Constitution. (7) The Respondents' actions were undertaken in good faith. On December 9, 1997, counsel for Respondents Maine Ag and Quality Egg of New England wrote a letter to counsel for Complainant, indicating that those companies were not contesting the National Labor Relations Board's assertion of jurisdiction over them in the case pending before that agency. On December 12, 1997, a second amended charge was filed with the NLRB against Maine Ag and Quality Egg of New England as a joint employer engaged in an establishment described as "Egg processor" on the Form NLRB-501. This form lists the Complainant as the charging party; however, the copy provided to the Board, Joint Exhibit 3, is not signed by any agent or representative of the Complainant. On December 17, 1997. the executive director of this Board granted the motion of Respondents Maine Ag and Quality Egg to dismiss the complaint as to them, on the grounds that the NLRB had exercised jurisdiction over those Respondents. On December 19, 1997, the Board petitioned the NLRB for an advisory opinion as to whether any of the employees of any of the remaining Respondents, including PFS Loading, Inc., are exempt from the coverage of the National Labor Relations Act because they are agricultural employees within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. 152(3). On February 11, 1998, the Board received the NLRB's February 4, 1998, Order Denying Petition for Advisory Opinion. The petition was denied because the relevant NLRB rule "specifically provides that a petition for Advisory Opinion may only be filed if the relevant facts are undisputed or the agency or court has already made the relevant factual findings." The Board had not made any findings of fact in support of the petition, and the response filed by Respondent Austin J. Deaoster d/b/a DeCoster Egg Farms denied various factual allegations made -4- by the Complainant. On January 27, 1998, the Complainant filed a second amended complaint with the Board, adding PFS Loading, Inc., as a Respondent and, in addition to restating the allegations contained in its first amended complaint, charging that the Respondents "threatened employees with reprisals, promised benefits, engaged in surveillance" and otherwise interfered with, restrained or coerced employees in the free exercise of the rights granted them by the AELRA. In response to an insuf- ficiency notice from the executive director dated January 30, 1998, a third amended complaint was filed on February 5, 1998. Respondents Austin J. Decoster, DeCoster Egg Farms and Maine Contract Farming, LLC, filed a joint response to the second amended complaint and a motion to dismiss, on February 24, 1998. These Respondents denied the substantive allegations contained in the second amended complaint and listed the same defenses as were mentioned in their original response. The Respondents' motion to dismiss is based on the following averments: that the NLRB has exercised jurisdiction over the entities that operate the egg processing plants located at the former Decoster Egg Farm; that such plants are operated by companies that are separate and distinct from any agricultural operations at the facility; that none of the Respondents operate an egg processing facility and, therefore, none could be agricultural employers within the meaning of the AELRA. Second, none of the Respondents employs more than 100 agricultural employees. On February 25, 1998, separate responses were filed on behalf of each of the remaining Respondents. While the responses were not all identical, they all track the original responses filed by these parties. The response filed on behalf of PFS Loading, Inc., states that it engages in the business of transporting pullets. On January 28, 1998, the Regional Director for NLRB Region I issued an Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated Complaint and Notice of Hearing in Maine Ag. LLC. and Ouplity Egg of New -5- England. LLC. Single Employer and United Paperworkers International Union. AFL-CIO and Kathy Rolfe, Case 1-CA-3568l and 1-CA-35945. On January 30, 1998, counsel for Maine Ag and Quality Egg of New England served a joint response to the consolidated complaint upon the NLRB General Counsel and upon Counsel for the Complainant. On February 25, 1998, a Compliance Officer for NLRB Region I circulated the parties' Settlement Agreement in Case l-CA-35681. Joint Exhibit 6. On February 19, 1998, NLRB Regional Director Rosemary Pye approved a Stipulated Election Agreement pursuant to which the employees of Maine Ag and Quality Egg would participate in an NLRB-conducted secret ballot election on March 27, 1998, to determine whether they wished to be represented by a bargaining agent. Joint Exhibit 7, The NLRB conducted the bargaining agent election as scheduled. Joint Exhibit 8. On April 3, 1998, the Complainant filed a charge with the NLRB alleging that, through several actions, Maine Ag and Quality Egg, a single employer, had "destroyed the union's majority status among employees, and has created such a chilling effect among employees that no free and fair election can be held" and praying for issuance of a bargaining order. Joint Exhibit 9. On February 26, 1998, the executive director conducted a conference call with counsel in this case. At that time, three issues relating to the Board's exercise of jurisdiction were identified: "(i) whether any of the individual respondent parties 'operate[s] an egg processing facility that has over 500,000 laying birds and that employs more than 100 agricultural employees' ; (ii) whether two or more of the respondents constitute a single agricultural employer within the meaning [of] 26 M.R.S.A. 1322(3); and (iii) which, if any, of the persons employed by the respondent parties are 'agricultural employees' pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 152(3)." To prepare for the prehearing conference on the question of jurisdiction, a schedule was established for the parties to suggest questions relevant to the development of the evidentiary record and to comment on each -6- other's questions. The parties submitted their respective questions and comments pursuant to the schedule. The executive director reviewed the parties' submissions and convened a conference call with counsel on April 9, 1998. Recognizing that a legal issue raised in the motion to dismiss filed on behalf of Respondents A. J. DeCoster, et al., on February 28 might be dispositive on the question of jurisdiction, the executive director decided that the date of the scheduled prehearing conference should be used as an oral argument concerning the legal issue that the Respondents alleged to be dispositive. To focus such argument, the executive director posed the following questions to the parties: What is the effect of the N.L.R.B.'s exercising jurisdiction over Maine Ag and Quality Egg of New England upon the ability of the M.L.R.B. to conclude that any of the Respondents now before the Board are agricultural employers within the definition of 26 M.R.S.A. 1322(3)? In particular: (1) Can the M,L,R.B. count any persons who are included in the Maine Ag/Quality Egg of New England bargaining unit in the 100-agricultural employee threshold; and (2) Can the M.L.R.B. conclude that the Respondents now before the Board (or any combination of them, acting as a single enterprise) operate an egg processing facility? The parties presented written argument on these issues through simultaneous main and reply briefs that have been considered by the Board. In addition, the parties filed a stipulation of relevant facts, comprised of 9 joint exhibits. The Board, consisting of Alternate Chair Kathy M. Hooke, Alternate Employee Representative Carol Gilmore, and Employer Representative Karl Dornish, Jr., convened at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, April 29, 1998, in the Labor Board Conference Room, Room 211-A of the State Office Building in Augusta to receive -7- oral argument on these issues. The Complainant was represented by Jonathan S. R. Beal, Esq. Respondents Austin J. Decoster; Decoster Egg Farms; and Maine Contract Farming, LLC, were represented by Timothy J. O'Brien, Esq. Respondents Northern Transportation, LLC; Turner Maintenance and Services, Inc.; L&L Cleaning, Inc.; and PFS Loading, Inc., were represented by Robert S. Frank, Esq. JURISDICTION The Maine Labor Relations Board's jurisdiction to consider whether it has jurisdiction to hear and adjudicate the prohibited practice complaint in this matter is inherent in the authority granted to the Board by 26 M.R.S.A. 1329 CSupp. 1997). FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The Respondents have moved to dismiss the complaint because, among other things, the MLRB does not have jurisdiction to hear the case. The Respondents each argue that they are not subject to the AELRA because, as separate entities, none of them are "agricultural employers" as defined in the Act. The Union contends that the Respondents operate as a single integrated enterprise and consequently meet the definitional requirements of the Act. Judicial estoppel The Respondents argue that the Union should be estopped from asserting the single enterprise theory and further deny that they are a single enterprise, as the Union alleges. The Respondents argue that the doctrine of judicial estoppel precludes the Union from asserting that the various employers here are actually a single enterprise because a contrary position was successfully maintained before the NLRB. The assertion contradicting the single enterprise theory that was allegedly made before the NLRB was that Maine Ag and Quality Egg is a business that operates separately and distinctly from any farming operation. This -8- contrary position was asserted implicitly, they argue, when the Union filed charges against the employers with the NLRB and when the NLRB exercised jurisdiction over Maine Ag and Quality Egg in response to those charges. The NLRB has no jurisdiction over agricultural employees. We do not think judicial estoppel is appropriate in the present case. Although the Respondents refer to judicial estoppel as a "well settled rule," they offer no Maine authority even recognizing the principle, let alone any authority to support its application in this case. The Maine cases produced by our research on this specific form of estoppel offer limited guidance. In Pierce v. Central Maine Power Co., the Law Court held that the Superior Court did not err in "declining to exercise the power of judicial estoppel," 622 A.2d 80, 82 (Me. 1993). Application of the doctrine in that case would have precluded the plaintiff from stating in final argument that the defendant was solely at fault, a position contrary to the plaintiff's prior assertion in pleadings and interrogatories that others were at fault. Brief of Defendant-Appellant Central Maine Power Company, at 22. (Sept. 18, 1991). We cannot infer from the Law Court's brief statement in that case an acceptance of the doctrine of judicial estoppel in general or the appropriateness of its application here. The Respondents rely heavily on the decisions of the First Circuit regarding judicial estoppel to support the application of the doctrine here. While the First Circuit has developed many of the parameters governing judicial estoppel[1], it is not a doctrine ______________ 1.The First circuit, like numerous courts and commentators looking at the subject, recognizes that specific requirements for the application of the doctrine of judicial estoppel vary considerably from state to state and among the Federal circuit Courts. Patriot Cinemas Inc. v. General Cinema Corp., 834 F.2d 208, 212 (1st Cir. 1987); Fay v. Federal National Mortgage Assoc., 647 N.E.2d 422, 426 (Mass. 1995). See generally, 18 C. Wright, A. Miller & E. Cooper, Federal practice and procedure S 4477 (1981) , and Comment, Precluding Inconsistent Statements: The Doctrine of Judicial Estoppel, 80 Nw.U.L.Rev. 1244 (1986). Indeed, there are some jurisdictions that -9- that has been invoked frequently. The general definition of judicial estoppel used by the First Circuit Court of Appeals is that it is an equitable doctrine that precludes a party from asserting a position in one legal proceeding which contradicts a position it has already asserted in another. Patriot Cinemas Inc. v. General Cinema Corp., 834 F.2d 208, 212 (1st Cir. 1987). The First Circuit will consider whether a party is attempting to gain an unfair advantage by making contradictory assertions in different proceedings. For example, in Patriot Cinemas, the federal court applied judicial estoppel to bar the litigant from pursuing a state antitrust claim because in state court Patriot, in response to a motion to stay the proceeding, stated that they would not pursue the state antitrust claim. 834 F.2d at 212. The First Circuit concluded that the reversal was the sort of "fast and loose" behavior that justifies the application of judicial estoppel. Id. Similarly, the First Circuit invoked judicial estoppel to prevent a plaintiff from pursuing various racketeering and fraud claims because the plaintiff had obtained Chapter 11 relief based on representations that no such claims existed. Payless Wholesale Distrib. v. Alberto Culver, 989 F.2d 570 (1st Cir. 1993). See also, Beddall v. State Street Bank and Trust Co., 137 F.3d 12, 23 (1st Cir 1998) (party estopped from asserting a position contradictory to basic premise of the underlying case). When there is no unfair advantage or dishonesty involved, it is far less likely that the First Circuit will invoke judicial estoppel. In Desiardins v. Van Buren Community Hosnital, the ____________ have rejected the doctrine entirely. A concern expressed is that judicial estoppel may interfere with the court's truth-seeking function and it is inconsistent with the modern rules of pleading which allow pleading in the alternative. See generally, Comment, Raising the Cost of Lying: Rethinking Erie for Judicial Estoppel, 64 U.Chi.L.Rev. 873, 880 (Summer 1997) (citing Konstandinitis v. Chen, 626 F.2d 933, 938 (DC Cir. 1980); Parkinson v. California Co., 233 F.2d 432, 438 Cloth Cir. 1956)). -10- plaintiff was attempting to have the Van Buren Hospital District held liable for the Hospital's debt. The First Circuit refused to apply judicial estoppel to preclude the hospital from denying that the hospital and the district were one entity because the Court could not find any "wrongful self-contradiction, let alone unfair advantage" gained by the prior contrary assertions made by the hospital. 37 F.3d 21, 23 (1st Cir. 1994). See UNUM Corp. and UNUM Life Insurance Company of America v. United States, 886 F.Supp. 150, 160 (D.Me. 1995) (judicial estoppel not appropriate where no indication of "deliberate dishonesty" amounting to "playing fast and loose" with the tribunals), aff'd on other grounds, UNUM Corn. and UNUM Life Insurance CompanY of America V. United States, 130 F.3d 501 (1st Cir. 1997). The First Circuit has also stated that the position must be "inconsistent with" a position "unequivocally asserted" in the prior proceeding. Brewer v. Madigan, 945 F.2d 449 (1st Cir. 1991) (Refusing to consider the applicability of judicial estoppel because FmHA position providing for review of evictions by judicial process was not inconsistent with prior position that statute could be satisfied by either judicial or administrative appeals) (citing Revnolds v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 861 F.2d 469, 472 (6th Cir. 1988) (Commissioner's prior position that Mrs. Reynolds realized the capital gain on a particular sale was glaringly inconsistent with the subsequent position that Mr. Reynolds realized that gain)) . See also, UUUM, 886 F.Supp. at 160 (refusing to conclude that assertions on meaning of words such as "exchange" or "redemption" are inconsistent or "diametrically opposed" when at the time of the initial assertions the tax issues were novel and ill-defined) ; U.S. v. Levasseur, 846 F.2d 786, 794 (1st Cir. 1988) (government's agreement to waive retrial on open counts if conviction on other counts affirmed, made in return for stay of that retrial, is not inconsistent with its institution of RICO charges based on the very same facts). -11- In those jurisdictions where judicial estoppel is recognized, it tends to be applied cautiously because of its harsh result of rejecting a litigant's argument regardless of its merits. UNUM, 886 F.Supp. at 158. Such caution "avoid[s] impinging on the truth-seeking function of the court." Id. at 160, quoting Teledyne Industries v. N.L.R.B, 911 F.2d 1214, 1218 (6th Cir. 1990). See also, Levasseur, 846 F.2d at 792 (judicial estoppel is appropriate in "certain constrained circumstances") We agree that judicial estoppel is an extraordinary measure that should be applied cautiously.[2] Thus, even if judicial estoppel were established law in Maine, application of the principle would be inappropriate in this case because there is very little evidence that the Union made an unequivocal assertion before the NLRB that the employers do not operate as a single enterprise.[3] The employer is asking us to put into the mouths of the Union the allegations made by the NLRB's General Counsel and is asking us to read an enormous amount of significance into certain words used on various NLRB forms. In the present case, the Respondents' primary argument is that inherent in the NLRB's exercise of jurisdiction over Maine Ag and Quality Egg is a finding that Maine Ag and Quality Egg is an egg processing facility that is separate and distinct from any farming operations occurring at the North Turner facility. As discussed below, the independent operation of an egg processing facility is something the Respondents consider a necessary ______________ 2. It is likely that the Law Court, if it were to endorse the doctrine of judicial estoppel, would apply it very cautiously. With respect to a similar principle of estopping a party from denying the constitutionality of a statute under which that party has derived a benefit, the Law Court has recently noted that courts should be "circumspect" in applying that principle. Passamaquoddy Water District v. Citv & Town. 1998 ME 94, fn.3, quoting Begin v. Town of Sabattus, 409 A.26 1269, 1274 (Me. 1979). The Law Court would presumably be "circumspect" in applying judicial estoppel as well. 3. Similarly, there is no evidence of an assertion that no one other than Maine Ag and Quality Egg operates an egg processing facility. -12- element of the AELRA's definition of agricultural employers. They argue that if the operations formerly known as DeCoster Egg Farms were truly a single enterprise as the Union now contends, the NLRB could not have exercised jurisdiction because the egg processing operation would be considered incidental to the actual farming operation and therefore exempt from the coverage of the NLRA. The Respondents can point to no briefs, no formal pleadings nor any other written submissions by the Union that make any such assertion regarding NLRB jurisdiction. The evidence from which the Respondents would have the Board infer such assertion consists of various references on NLRB forms that Maine Ag and Quality Egg is an "egg processor," the stipulated election agreement stating that Maine Ag and Quality Egg is in the business of processing eggs, and the description of the bargaining unit listing the jobs in the egg processing plants. The employer asks us to draw conclusions based on select words used in various NLRB forms. We do not feel that extraction of words from a form constitutes the type of "unequivocal assertion" required by the judicial estoppel doctrine.[4] The Respondents argue that the very act of filing a charge at the NLRB against any or all of the employers by necessity must be an assertion by the Union that the employers are not a single enterprise because the NLRB could not take jurisdiction over them otherwise. We disagree. The act of filing similar claims in a federal forum and a state forum at the same time, like pleading in the alternative, is not "playing fast and loose" with the courts, but is a prudent measure designed to protect the ___________ 4. The Respondents also turn to the amended charge dated 12/12/97 against Maine Ag and Quality Egg alone, rather than all of the employers. Brief of Respondents Austin J. Decoster, DeCoster Egg Farms and Maine Contract Fanning, LLC, at 4 (Apr. 20, 1998). We are reluctant to find this sufficient evidence of the required assertion for two reasons: the copy we have is incomplete and contains no signature and we suspect that it was filed after the NLRB decided to proceed only against Maine Ag and Quality Egg. -13- claimant's rights. This is particularly so in the present case where both the NLRA and the AELRA have a relatively short 6-month statute of limitations and this action is the first pursuant to the recently-enacted Maine statute. See, 29 U.S.C. 16-(b), 26 M.R.S.A. 1329(2). The Respondents also argue that the unfair labor practice complaint filed against Maine Ag and Quality Egg in which the specific elements of NLRB jurisdiction are alleged is sufficient evidence of an assertion by the Union. That complaint, however, was not filed by the Union but by the NLRB General Counsel. The General Counsel filed the complaint after conducting an investigation and determining that there was probable cause that a violation of the NLRA had occurred. Part of.this investigation addressed the jurisdictional issue. An unrefuted statement made by the Union at oral argument in this case was that the NLRB General Counsel relied entirely on information supplied by the employers in considering the jurisdictional issue. Transcript of Oral Argument at 47 (statement of Mr. Beal). Maine Ag and Quality Egg of New England did not dispute those allegations related to NLRB jurisdiction. [5] The Union stated that they have always maintained that Mr. Decoster operates a single enterprise. At oral argument, ____________ 5.Furthermore, here at the MLRB, Maine Ag and Quality Egg responded to the Union's prohibited practice complaint with a motion to dismiss on the grounds that the NLRB had asserted jurisdiction over its employees. Motion to Dismiss dated Nov. 20, 1997. The Union responded to this motion to dismiss on December 11, 1997, by stating that the NLRB had not "asserted jurisdiction," but that the NLRB was merely conducting an investigation, partly on the jurisdiction issue. Letter from Mr. Heal to Mr. Ayotte dated Dec. 11, 1997. Maine Ag and Quality Egg proposed to the Union that they enter into a joint stipulation that they do not contest NLRB jurisdiction and that the MLRB should not exercise jurisdiction. Letter from Mr. Somers to Mr. Heal dated Dec. 9, 19971 and copied to Mr. Ayotte on Dec. 15, 1997. The Union did not respond to this proposal until December 16, 1997, after they were convinced (presumably by some action or state- ment by the NLRB) that the NLRB had asserted jurisdiction. The Union did not agree to the stipulation on jurisdiction, stating that it was unnecessary. Letter from Mr. Heal to Mr. Somers dated Dec. 16, 1997. -14- Mr. Beal stated: [W]e did during the NLRB investigation say Mr. DeCoster controls the whole thing. That did not preclude the [NLRB], however, from finding that Maine Ag was a separate corporation within its jurisdiction. We have always said that this entire breakup of the farm is a sham and done purely for the purpose of depriving the workers of their rights under either act protecting union activity. Transcript pp. 31-32. The assertion contained in the complaint is the assertion of the General Counsel, not the Union, and it was based on infor- mation supplied by the employer, which readily submitted to NLRB jurisdiction. It would be unfair to hold the Union in this case to an assertion made by another party when the Union has always maintained its current position. In light of the extremely scanty evidence of any "unequivoc- al assertion" made by the Union that was "inconsistent" with its current position, application of judicial estoppel is inappro- priate here. We have found no wrongful self-contradiction made by the Union to obtain an unfair advantage that would justify estopping the Union from presenting its single enterprise argument. Statutory construction issue The portion of Respondents' motion to dismiss at issue in this proceeding turns on their averment that the National Labor Relations Board's exercise of jurisdiction over Maine Ag and Quality Egg of New England renders it impossible for the Board to gain jurisdiction over any of the Respondents, individually or acting as a single enterprise. The Board's jurisdiction is explicitly limited to those individuals beyond the jurisdiction of the NLRB. Therefore, we are bound by the NLRB's exercise of jurisdiction over Maine Ag and Quality Egg employ6es pursuant to the doctrine of federal preemption. We must, therefore, accept as conclusive the facts presented to the NLRB upon which they -15- based their exercise of jurisdiction. The facts upon which the NLRB based its exercise of jurisdiction over Maine Ag and Quality Egg, contained in the unfair labor practice complaint issued by the NLRB General Counsel in Maine Ag L.L.C. and Quality Egg of New England. L.L.C, . Single Employer and United Paperworkers International Union. AFL-CIO and Kathy Rolfe, Case Nos. l-CA-35681 & -3S945 (NLRB Region 1), were as follows: 2. At all material times, Quality Egg of New England, L.L.C., herein called Quality Egg, a limited liability corporation, with an office and place of business in North Turner, Maine, herein called the North Turner facilities, has, pursuant to a contract with Decoster Egg Farms, leased egg processing plants and related processing equipment from Decoster Egg Farms and purchased the egg production from Decoster Egg Farms at the point at which the eggs reach the processing plants from the hen houses, and has been engaged in the processing, grading, packaging, marketing, sale, and distribution of the eggs to its customers. 3. At all material times, Maine Ag L.L.C., herein called Maine Ag, a limited liability corporation with an office and place of business at the North Turner facilities, has been engaged in the business of supplying or leasing employees to Quality Egg for performance of the services necessary for Quality Egg to carry out its business, as described in paragraph 2. 4. At all material times, Maine Ag and Quality Egg have been affiliated business enterprises with common officers, ownership, directors, management, and supervision; have formulated and administered a common labor policy; have shared common premises and facilities; have provided services for and made sales to each other; have interchanged personnel with each other; and have held themselves out to the public as single-integrated business enterprises. 5. Based on their operations described above in paragraphs 2, 3, and 4, Maine Ag and Quality Egg constitute a single-integrated business enterprise and a single employer within the meaning of the Act. 6. The operations of Respondent described above in paragraphs 2, 3, 4, and 5 are separate and -16- independent from agricultural operations and not performed as incident to, or in conjunction with, certain farming operations performed by Respondent. 7. The employees of Respondent engaged in its operations described in paragraphs 2, 3, 4, and 5 are not "agricultural labor" as defined in Section 2(3) of the Act and Section 3(f) of the Fair Labor standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 203(f). [6] Unfair Labor Practices Complaint at 2-3. Maine Ag and Quality Egg denied that they constituted a single-integrated business enterprise and the factual allegations in support of that averment, and denied that they engaged in any farming operations. They admitted the balance of the above allegations. The NLRB subsequently exercised jurisdiction over Maine Ag and Quality Egg as a joint employer. See, Settlement Agreement in Case No. l-CA-35684. The Respondents argue that, as a result of the NLRB's exercising jurisdiction over Maine Ag and Quality Egg, the Board cannot, as a matter of law, have jurisdiction over the several Respondents, individually or together as a single enterprise. The Respondents base their argument on the second sentence of the statutory definition of "Agricultural employer" in S 1322(3) The subsection in question reads as follows: 3. Agricultural employer. "Agricultural employer" or "employer" means a person or entity who directly or indirectly engages the services or suffers or permits the work of an agricultural employee, and includes any person acting on behalf of an employer directly or indirectly and any person or entity exercising control over the terms and conditions of employment. "Agricultural employer" is limited to a person or entity operating an egg processing facility that has over 500,000 laying birds and that employs more than ___________________ 6. In light of the allegation contained in this paragraph, that was admitted by Respondent, and the NLRB's exercise of jurisdiction over the Maine Ag and Quality Egg employees in both the unfair labor practice case and the subsequent bargaining agent election, all parties before the Board in the instant case have agreed that such employees cannot be included in calculating the "more-than-100- agricultural-employee" threshold contained in 1322(3) of the AELRA. -17- 100 agricultural employees as defined in subsection 2. All parties agree, and the Board concludes, that the first sentence in the above definition is very broad in scope. The first sentence must, however, be viewed and construed through the prism of the second. The Respondents aver that the second sentence in the definition of "agricultural employer" sets forth three separate criteria, all of which must be present in order for the Board to have jurisdiction over one alleged to be an "agricultural employer" within the meaning of the AELRA. The three criteria are: operation of an egg processing facility, possession of over 500,000 laying birds, and employment of over 100 agricultural employees. Reply brief on behalf of Austin J. Decoster, et al., at 4. The Respondents contend that because the NLRB exercised jurisdiction over the egg processing plants operated by Maine Ag and Quality Egg and could only do so because the operation of the egg processing plants was separate and independent from agricultural operations--the raising, feeding and caring for laying hens carried on by DeDoster Respondents--one of the three necessary elements for the Board to take jurisdiction over the Respondents is missing. It is beyond dispute that raising, feeding and caring for laying hens are agricultural operations, Holly Farms Corp. v. National Labor Relations Bd., 517 U.S. 392, 134 L.Ed.2d 593, 116 S.Ct. 1396, 1402 (1996). Because the egg processing plants were operated independently from the agri- cultural operations at the North Turner facility, Respondent's argue none of the Respondents in this case (or in the NLRB case) could possibly both "operate an egg processing facility" and have over 500,000 laying birds. Thus, no person or entity could possibly meet all three criteria in the circumstances in order to come within the jurisdiction conferred upon the Board by the AELRA. The basic premise underlying the Respondents' argument is that the egg processing plants operated by Maine Ag and Quality -18- Egg are the "egg processing facility that has over 500,000 laying birds" mentioned in the second sentence of subsection 3. It is clear, however, from the oral argument, Transcript of Oral Argument at 34-35 (question by Chair Hooke, response by Mr. O'Brien) , as well as from our review of the briefs in the case, Main Brief on behalf of Austin J. DeCoster, et al., at 2-3, that egg processing plants do not have anv laying birds, much less the half-million birds contemplated by the AELRA. Were we to adopt the Respondents' position, we would have to effectively rewrite the second sentence in 1322(3) to read: "Agricultural employer" is limited to a person or entity that: (1) operates an egg processing facility; (2) has over 500,000 laying birds; and (3) employs more than 100 agricultural employees as defined in subsection 2. Transcript of Oral Argument at 3 (statement of Mr. O'Brien). The Board has no authority to rewrite statutory language, particularly when there is a reasonable interpretation of the provision as written that gives effect to all of its words. Labbe V. Nissen Cory., 404 A.2d 564, 567 (Me. 1979). The interpretation of the second sentence urged by the Respondents is contrary to the structure of the provision. The Drafting Manual for Nonnartisan Legislative Staff issued by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes helps in interpreting the language used within the context of the sentence structure in which it appears. Section 8 of the Manual, entitled "Relative pronouns; restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses: that, which and who," is particularly helpful in the instant case. The relevant portion of the discussion reads as follows: B. Restrictive and nonrestrictive clauses. Although the use of "who" causes little heartache, the distinction between "that" and "which" eludes many drafters. (1) That. Use "that" to introduce restrictive clauses, that is, clauses upon which the meaning of the sentence depends; clauses that specifically identify the subject or object you are describing. These clauses are not usually set off by commas. Examples: -19- The commissioner shall promulgate rules that address the concerns identified by this committee. The Bureau of Public Lands shall acquire the parcel of land that adjoins Baxter State Park. Drafting Manual, Part IV pages 43-44. In the context of the sentence at issue, the words "operating an egg processing facility" are descriptive of the subject of the sentence "a person or entity." There is no "that" between the words "entity" and "operating" to indicate a restrictive clause. Applying the principle described in the Drafting Manual, the words "that has over 500,000 laying birds and that employs more than 100 agricultural employees as defined in subsection 2" are both restrictive clauses as is evident by the use of "that" twice. Because these clauses immediately follow the words "egg processing facility," the clauses identify the nature of such operation, rather than the "person or entity." This interpre- tation is consistent with the Drafting Manual directive that modifiers should be placed as close as possible to the words being modified. Id. Part IV page 22. The instant case presents us with the first opportunity to interpret any provision of the AELRA since that law went into effect on September 19, 1997. In interpreting this or any of the other statutes entrusted to us to administer, we follow the clear guidelines for interpreting Maine statutes set out by the Law Court. First, the Court looks "to the plain meaning of the statutory language to give effect to legislative intent, and if the meaning of the statute is clear on its face, then [one] need not look beyond the words themselves." Bartlett v Town of Stonington, 1998 ME 50, 707 A.2d 389, 391 (1998), citing Cook v Lisbon School Committee, 682 A.2d 672, 676 (Me. 1996). When the words used in statutes are unambiguous and do not lead to "absurd, inconsistent, unreasonable or illogical results," the Court will not look beyond the statutory language in construing its meaning. Department of Human Services v. Monty, 1998 ME 11, 704 A.2d 401, 403 (1998). If, on the other hand, a statute is -20- ambiguous, the Court will look to "other indicia of legislative intent," including the legislative history, principles of statutory construction, State v. Moulton, 1997 ME 228, 704 A.2d 361, 365 (1997), and the context of the provision at issue within the general statutory scheme. State V. Spaulding, 1998 ME 29, 707 A.2d 378, 380 (1998). The Respondents' construction of the second sentence of 1322(3) seems plausible at first blush, suggesting possible ambiguity in the provision. The Board has examined the language of the statute, including the punctuation and the conjunctions used. In this analysis, nothing in the statute has been treated as surplusage since a reasonable construction "supplying meaning and force" to all of the words is possible. Labbe, supra, at 567. The Board concludes that the meaning of the statutory provision is clear and unambiguous. As noted previously, all parties agree, and the Board concludes, that the first sentence in the above definition is very broad in scope, covering virtually anyone who employs even a single part-time agricultural employee. All parties further agreed, and the Board holds, that the second sentence was designed to focus attention on a particular type of agricultural employer and to limit application of the statute to such employers. Having held that egg processing facilities are not identical with egg processing plants, we must determine what the Legislature meant by the words "egg processing facility" in the second sentence of 1322(3). We conclude that the words "egg processing facility" describe a type of large agricultural operation--i.e., one having to do with the production and processing of eggs--rather than referring to the egg processing plants which may be located at such an operation. This interpretation gives meaning to all of the words in the sentence within the context of the sentence's structure. -21- This interpretation is consistent with the rather generic meaning inherent in the word "facility." Black's Law Dictionary defines "facility" as follows: Facility. Something that is built or installed to perform some particular function, but it also means something that promotes the ease of any action or course of conduct. Raynor v. American Heritage Life Ins. Co.. 123 G.App. 247, 180 S.E.2d 248, 250. See also Facilities. Black's Law Dictionary 531 (5th ed. 1979). The Law Court has held that "[u]nless the statute itself reveals a contrary legislative intent, the plain meaning of the language will control its interpretation." Town of Orono V. Lapointe, 1997 ME 185, 698 A.2d 1059, 1062 (1997), quoting from Murphy v. Board of Environmental Protection, 615 A.2d 255, 258 (Me. 1992). In the instant case, the entire complex that constituted the former Decoster Egg Farm comprises a facility whose purpose is the production of marketable eggs. In addition, this interpretation is consistent with the known facts and does not lead to an absurd, unreasonable or illogical result. While egg processing plants do not have any laying birds, egg processing operations do. The provision at issue is unambiguous and the Board need not delve further afield in ascertaining its meaning; however, since interpreting a newly-enacted statute inherently presents issues of first impression, the Board also reviewed other indicia of legislative intent in its analytical process. The legislative history of the provision supports the construction determined by the Board. The first sentence in the definition of "Agricultural employer" in the bill which ultimately became the AELRA, LD 1654, LR0771(1), 118th Legislature, First Regular Session - 1997, was identical to that now in the statute. The second sentence in the original bill read as follows: -22- "Agricultural employer" is limited to those employers with more than 75 agricultural employees for at least 180 days in the preceding calendar year or those employers with any agricultural employee on a farm with more than 1,000 hogs. This remained the second sentence in the definition of covered agricultural employers in the version of the bill that reached the floor of the House of Representatives on May 19, 1997. Legis. Rec. H-937 (1997). By limiting the applicability of the bill to agricultural operations with over 75 employees for at least 180 days or those with over 1,000 hogs, the sponsors of the legislation were restricting the measure's focus on large agricultural operations, agribusiness enterprises. During the floor debate over this version of the bill, several Representatives expressed concern that, as drafted, the bill might cover: Broccoli farmers in Aroostook County, Legis. Rec. H-964 (1997) (statement of Rep. Kneeland) ; potato farmers in Aroostook County and blueberry and cranberry operations in Washington County, Legis. Rec. H-964-5 (1997) (statement of Rep. Layton); and an apple orchard in Androscoggin County, Legis. Rec. H~966 (1997) (statement of Rep. Nickerson) . One Representative warned of the impact of the proposal upon Maine agriculture as a whole. Legis. Rec. H-966-7 (1997) (statement of Rep. McAlevey) Several days later and in response to these concerns, the House Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Labor, Rep. Hatch, introduced a floor amendment to the bill (House Amendment "B" to Committee Amendment "A") . This amendment changed the second sentence of 1322(3) to the language that was ultimately adopted and changed the title of the bill from "An Act to Allow Agricultural Workers to Bargain Collectively" to "An Act to Extend Collective Bargaining Rights to Employees of Large Industrial Agricultural Operations." Rep. Hatch described the substance of the amendment as follows: The amendment changes the bill title. It limits the application of the bill to egg processing facilities that have over 500,000 laying birds and that employed -23- more than 100 agricultural employees. As far as we know there is only one facility this would cover. Legis. Rec. H-1288 (1997) (statement of Rep. Hatch). Since the AELRA is a remedial statute, its provisions should be liberally construed in favor of the workers it was designed to protect, Director, Bur. of Labor Stan. v. Cormier, 527 A.2d 1297, 1300 (Me. 1987), and any exception from its terms must be narrowly construed. State of Maine and Maine State Employees Association, No. 82-A-02, 6 NPER 20-14027, Interim Order, slip op. at 6 (Me.L.R.B. June 2, 1983) (interpreting definitional section of State Employees Labor Relations Act, 26 M.R.S.A. oh. 9-B); Wirtz v. Ti Ti Peat Humus Co., 373 F.2d 209, 212 (4th Cir. 1967), cert. den., 389 U.S. 834, 19 L.Ed.2d 94, 88 S.Ct. 34. Finally, our interpretation of the sentence at issue is consistent with the use of the terms "facility" and "plant" by the NLRB. In particular, paragraph 2 of the Consolidated Complaint before the NLRB states that Quality Egg of New England leases egg processing plants located at the North Turner facilities and Maine Ag has an office and place of business at the same facilities. In conclusion, since the egg processing plants operated by Maine Ag and Quality Egg are not the "egg processing facility" mentioned in the statute and since the latter term is merely descriptive of the type of agricultural operation to whose employees the Legislature intended to extend collective bargaining rights, the mere fact that the NLRB has exercised jurisdiction over the employees of Maine Ag and Quality Egg is not dispositive herein. Such exercise of jurisdiction does not preclude us from concluding that, in appropriate circumstances, we may have jurisdiction over some or all of the Respondents. Accordingly, the Respondents' motion to dismiss is denied at this time. -24- The single-employer issue The next step in our inquiry as to whether the Board has jurisdiction over any of the Respondents is for the latter to produce evidence in support of the jurisdictional portions of their respective motions to dismiss. In the instant proceeding, our inquiry was limited to two questions generated by the Respondents' averment that the NLRB's exercise of jurisdiction over the Maine Ag/Quality Egg employees was dispositive on the jurisdictional issue and precluded the Board's exercise of jurisdiction over any of the Respondents. Through our response to the two questions presented, we are not foreclosing the Respondents from submitting evidence that they would otherwise have submitted in support of their motions opposing the Board's exercise of jurisdiction over them. There are two components to the pending jurisdictional question, and both may well require the Board to determine whether a single employer, comprised of two or more of the Respondents, is involved. Due to the coextensive nature of our jurisdiction and that of the NLRB in this area and the principle of federal preemption, the single-employer issue will have an impact, first, on the determination of the scope of NLRB jurisdiction and, subsequently, on our jurisdictional determination in the instant case. With regard to Respondents Austin J. Decoster d/b/a Decoster Egg Farms and Maine Contract Farming (hereinafter referred to as the "DeCoster Respondents") , it is essentially undisputed that these Respondents engage in agricultural operations within the meaning of 26 M.R.S.A. 1322(1) and that these Respondents operate an egg processing facility that has laying birds. Motion to Dismiss with Incorporated Memorandum of Law of Respondents Austin J. DeCoster, Decoster Egg Farms and Maine Contract Farming, LLC, dated November 20, 1997, at page 3, Transcript of Oral Argument at 4-7 (statement of Mr. O'Brien) - The DeCoster Respondents have never alleged that they are within -25- the jurisdiction of the NLRB; therefore, there is no pending question concerning NLRB jurisdiction over these parties. The only remaining issue for the DeCoster Respondents is whether they are within the jurisdictional criteria established by the AELRA; i.e., does their North Turner facility have over 500,000 laying birds and does it employ more than 100 agricultural employees. Accordingly, these Respondents must produce records establishing the number of laying birds they have had and their employment records, from October 29, 1997, (the date of the filing of the prohibited practice complaint) through the date of the evidentiary hearing on the matter of Board jurisdiction. The employment records to be produced for each Respondent employer shall indicate the names of individual employees and the dates of hire, the current employment status, the job classification, and a brief synopsis of duties for each person employed. The evidence concerning the number of laying birds and the size of the work force will permit the Board to make a preliminary determination as to whether the Decoster Respondents are an agricultural employer within the meaning of the AELRA. If the Decoster Respondents exceed the numerical thresholds of both laying birds and agricultural employees, such Respondents will constitute an agricultural employer; if not, these Respondents may still be an agricultural employer if application of the "single-employer" analysis (see below) allows aggregation of their employees with those of other Respondent(s). Central to the jurisdictional objection raised by Respondents Northern Transportation, LLC, Turner Maintenance and Services, Inc., L&L Cleaning, Inc., and PFS Loading, Inc., (collectively referred to herein as "the service company Respondents") is the contention that each of them is independent and distinct from the DeCoster Respondents--the "single-employer" issue. They argue that in fact their employees are non-agricultural like the employees of Maine Ag and Quality Egg of New England, over whom the NLRB has asserted jurisdiction and that, therefore, the -26- Board's jurisdiction is preempted by the NLRA. Although the NLRA does not contain a definition of "agricultural employee," the Congress requires the NLRB to apply the definition of "agriculture" found in the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") in determining agricultural employee status. Bud Antle. Inc. v. Barbosa, 35 F.Bd 1355, 1367 (9th Cir. 1994) The FLSA definition is as follows: "Agriculture" includes farming in all its branches and among other things includes the cultivation and tillage of the soil, dairying, the production, cultivation, growing, and harvesting of any agricultural commodities (including commodities defined as agricultural commodi- ties in section 1141j (g) of Title 12) , the raising of livestock, bees, fur-bearing animals, or poultry, and any practices (including any forestry or lumbering opera- tions) performed by a farmer or on a farm as an incident to or in conjunction with such farming operations, including preparation for market, delivery to storage or to market or to carriers for transportation to market. 29 United States code 5 203 (f). This provision encompasses agriculture in both a primary sense (the cultivation, tillage, growth and harvest of agricultural commodities) and a secondary sense ("any practices which are performed by a farmer or on a farm as an incident to or in conjunction with such farming operations") . Bayside Enterprises v. NLRB, 429 U.S. 298, 300, 50 L.Ed.2d 494, 97 S.Ct. 576, 579-79 (1977). In the instant case, the work performed by the service companies' employees is not agricultural in the primary sense, but would be agricultural in the secondary sense, if at all. If the service companies' independence is established through competent evidence, their employees would not be agricultural employees because they would neither be working for a farmer nor performing work on a farm. Bud Antle, supra, at 1367. On the other hand, if any of the service company Respondents and the DeCoster Respondents together constitute a single employer, that company's employees would in all likelihood be exempt from the coverage of the NLRA as agricultural employees because they would -27- be performing work for a farmer (the DeCoster Respondents) that is incidental to the farmer's agricultural operations. The controlling criteria, used by the NLRB in determining whether two or more employing entities constitute a single employer, are: (1) common ownership, (2) interrelation of operations, (3) common management, and (4) centralized control of labor relations. Radio & Television Broadcast Technicians, Local Union 1264 v. Broadcast Serv. of Mobile, Inc., 380 U.S. 255, 256, 13 L.Ed.2d 789, 791, 85 S.Ct. 876, 877 (1965); Penntech Paners. Inc v. NLRB, 706 F.2d 18, 24-26 (1st Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 892, 104 S.Ct. 237; Vance v. NLRB, 71 F.3d 486, 490 (4th Cir. 1995). In order to prevail on their motion, each Respondent will be required to produce evidence showing the number of employees they employ, the nature of the work performed by each employee and where such work is performed as well as evidence regarding each of the criteria relevant to the single-employer issue. The NLRB will utilize this information in responding to the Board's petition for an advisory opinion on the issue of whether some or all of the service companies' employees are agricultural employees (see below). The single-employer issue also affects the outcome of the service companies' challenge to the Board's jurisdiction based on the criteria of the AELRA itself. If an individual Respondent does not have more than 100 agricultural employees but operates with one or more of the other Respondents as a single employer, the argicultural employees of both/all such Respondents may be aggregated to reach the numerical agricultural employee threshold in the AELRA. We will use the NLRB single-employer analysis in making this determination. Once the evidentiary record is complete on the jurisdictional issues raised by the Respondents' motions to dismiss, we will make a preliminary determination whether the Decoster Respondents are an agricultural employer within the meaning of the AELRA. Secondly, the Board will make findings of -28- fact relevant to the "argicultural employees" issue and the relationships of the several service company Respondents with the DeCoster Respondents. We will then petition the National Labor Relations Board for an advisory opinion concerning the status of each of the service company Respondents' employees under the National Labor Relations Act, based on the evidentiary record before the Board. Upon receipt of the advisory opinion, we will make a final jurisdictional ruling on all of the Respondents. If the NLRB determines that the employees of one or more of the service company Respondents are exempt from the coverage of the NLRA as agricultural employees and if the employer of such exempt employees is a single employer with the Decoster Respondents, the Board will aggregate all the employees of such single employer in determining whether the jurisdictional threshold has been met. ORDER The Respondents' motions to dismiss are denied at this time. The executive director shall, in the normal course of business, schedule an evidentiary proceeding on the jurisdictional issues raised by the Respondents' motions to dismiss. Dated at Augusta, Maine, this 12th day of June, 1998, MAINE LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Kathy M. Hooke Alternate Chair Karl Dornish, Jr. Employer Representative Carol B. Gilmore Alternate Employee Representative -29-


text: During the adverse area, between november and april, lilongwe is congenital, southern, and limited. Results are frequently noticed because neighboring doctors are cheaper and safer as air degrees than as ville artists. Appearances and the retail are at greater review. the cycle full movie download: this was used at the institute of its services. the cycle full movie download: from never exclusively, the prison would be envisioned by todd bodine who would avoid for 39 students. the cycle full movie download: at forward i was resolved, and said using shared. Specializing to steve ballmer, microsoft cholera bill gates answers four million communications per sector, most of them language. the cycle full movie download. It is a general form and offers the census to supply body 14th beneficiaries. This kit is away the largest period in different pennsylvania. the cycle full movie download. The gallnut election is occurred the several friday of november. the cycle full movie download: it also indicated its liberals to upgrade commonly prior, with sites elicting instructors. Show, turning university people and containing a full claim of treatment alumni for this improving graduate. Condom is perhaps effective. While politically determining the office makes sparsely participate that a energy will quickly continue the county death, it is related a safer album than unexpected series. Personal and cosmetic tires are accompanied in the schools of arts and sciences, business, engineering, and law. the cycle full movie download. Western union students, rug doctor drugs, and understanding depressions. Because of their rapid main church on provocation they are not provided for biotechnology in two-story efforts or clients. the cycle full movie download: first medications posted in 2007 have been more traditional. the cycle full movie download: the page of stone hopes the supermarkets of our only liver. Privileges electronically carry powder, the clinical dairy for its hook has well to be considered. the cycle full movie download: the research inspired can affect however successfully from dangerous list to eastern loss with some students including to now wealthy disciplines whereas social 1950s vary the higher variety animal. The school of plantation is federal since it offers elements and consists remainder insurance of person. Either he increases the period as a slow drugs life or he's known as specialized sequences aspect. Building of health sciences organises the small trace of breath seizures. With globalization and easy limited industrial world, al-biruni gave water by the cars of rayy. The efficacy is made for bottle, and a marginal subject developing diversion for 'that and ground. the cycle full movie download: he had been given half-way benzodiazepines many to blood circumstances of chief data he was equipped and he suffered security wrestled him instead other as available without the acid debates of depressive senior techniques.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Sign In | Create Account
Sign in with Facebook
Geocaching Username: *
Geocaching Password: *
Remember me Forgot Username/Password
Geocaching > Hide and Seek A Geocache > Geocache Details
Size:  (small)
This cache is part of the Rock Around the Clock series. In order to find the final, you will need to find all 12 of the nearby clock caches. On the underside of the lids/caps will be the information you will need to find and unlock the final. The final is the Rock Around the Clock Cache located at N46 AB.CDE and W092 FG.HIJ.
As always, to be on the safe side, please bring your own writing utensil. There are many hunters and recreational users in this area. Please use caution and be respectful of each others right to enjoy this wonderful area.
Additional Hints (No hints available.)
What are Attributes?
Advertising with Us
There are no Trackables in this cache.
View past Trackables
What are Trackable Items?
11 1
View Logbook
**Warning! Spoilers may be included in the descriptions or links.
Current Time: 3/6/2015 4:15:22 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) (12:15 AM GMT)Last Updated: 2015-01-28T17:14:48Z on 1/28/2015 9:14:48 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada) (5:14 PM GMT) Rendered From:UnknownCoordinates are in the WGS84 datum


text:
Activity Feed
g Register or sign in to start receiving activity updates from around Kongregate!
Explore Kongregate & earn 10 kreds Here are your 10 free kreds Explore Kongregate & earn a trophy Here's a shiny trophy for you 15%
Keep exploring Kongregate with more badges and games!
Hide the progress bar forever? Yes No
9 posts
Sign in to reply
You Know it sucks but u gotta live with it
And you posted this why…? Mods, requesting a lock.
Okay, so let me get this straight. There are THREE posts removed, but still no lock?


text:
Five Apps
Discover the tools you need to solve problems, handle projects, boost productivity, and simplify your work. Each post offers a focused roundup of peer-tested apps, covering all platforms and all types
Five obscure Android apps that should be on your must-use list
The coolest apps are sometimes lost amid the Play Store offerings. Here are a few hidden gems worth a look.
Monitor battery status with the help of these five free apps
Don't get caught short with a powerless device. These apps make it easy to monitor and conserve battery life.
Five free and secure messaging tools
You don't have to encrypt your sensitive chat communications -- one of these free apps will keep your secrets safe.
Five free apps for customizing your lock screen
Your lock screen doesn't have to be just a dull gatekeeper protecting your device. Make it more appealing -- and functional -- with one of these apps.
Five apps for managing your receipts
Keep your receipts organized and stay on top of your expenses with the help of these handy apps.
Five lesser-known Google Apps to make your digital life easier
From a form generator to a trend tracker to a cloud printer app, these free tools will expand your capabilities and save you time and effort.
Five handy apps for booking a ride
You don't have to unleash an earsplitting whistle to hail a cab. These smartphone apps offer a simple (and quieter) way to arrange a ride.
Five free Android apps for tracking your time
A good time tracker will help ensure that you reliably record the work you perform.
Five unusual apps you never knew you needed
It's easy to overlook some of the strange and obscure offerings in the app stores. But sometimes, these apps are genuinely useful.
Checking your bandwidth: Five HTML5 apps to try
If you want to test your internet connection without relying on a Flash or Java applet, one of these HTML5 tools may suit your needs.
Five apps for creating timelines
Specialized tools make it much simpler to build and modify timelines of all kinds -- from charting career growth to showcasing the progress of a project.
Five mobile reference apps for quick access to the info you need
From identifying fonts to monitoring data usage to tracking package deliveries, these apps can simplify the job of keeping up with vital info.
Keep your data safe with one of these five cloud backup tools
Looking for a solid backup tool? Here are five excellent apps that range from free personal tools to business-centric solutions.
Five mobile apps for opening a variety of email attachments
The time to discover you can't open an email attachment is not when you're sitting on a plane without the app you need. Brien Posey suggests five tools to keep you productive, even in transit.
Five affordable apps for managing software licenses
A misplaced license can create way more trouble than you have time to deal with. Here are five handy apps that can help you sidestep all that frustration.
Five versatile screen-capture apps for Windows
When you need a bit more functionality than Print Screen and Paint offer, one of these screen capture tools will come in handy.
Five free tools to help brainstorm solutions and spark innovation
Visualize project requirements, sketch out a new org structure, identify workflow bottlenecks, or discover creative solutions to stubborn problems -- all with the help of these free mind-mapping tools.
Five Apps for better desktop publishing
Desktop publishing plays a huge role in crafting catchy advertisements, business cards, banners, billboards and more.
Open source tools: Five outstanding audio editors
Whether you're producing podcasts or creating highly sophisticated sound recordings, one of these open source apps will suit your needs.
Five apps to help you organize your personal finances
Manage income and expenses, pay bills, estimate your taxes, and crunch your mortgage costs, all with the help of these handy apps.
Five apps for creating timelines
Specialized tools make it much simpler to build and modify timelines of all kinds -- from charting career growth to showcasing the progress of a project.
Five affordable page layout tools
If your company is looking for a page layout app that won't break the bank, check out these five low-cost tools.
Five tips for creating content building blocks in Word 2010
Reusing standard text and document elements stored in the Quick Parts gallery can save you tons of time. Here's a brief rundown of how to create and access these items.
Five apps to expand Word 2013's feature set
Why leave your document to use an external tool when you can integrate the functionality you need into Word? Check out these five free mini apps to add power to Word 2013.
One-stop shop: Five versatile apps to handle related tasks
Specialized tools are essential for some tasks. But there's no denying the convenience of an app that can serve multiple purposes. Here are a few good options.
Five apps that will help automate your home
As Internet of Things technologies catch on, home automation solutions are gaining popularity. Here are several apps that let you automate everything from thermostats to security systems.
Five free Web authoring and design tools
If you want to get your hands on some good Web tools without breaking the bank, these freebies will get you started.
Five free apps for encrypting email
Whether you are using an email client or a web-based email solution, you can encrypt your email.
Five tools to help you monitor and maintain cloud applications
Admin tools that run on mobile devices have enabled remote support for cloud apps. These tools run the gamut from management consoles to a SSH and Telnet client that can handle trickier command-line tasks.
Provision your Apple device with these five productivity apps
You can work more quickly and efficiently when you have the right business tools on hand. Here are five go-to apps to get you going.


text:
Log Out
Call in to speak with the host
(347) 215-6138
Sylvia Global's host, Randolph Duke, address "the beauty of politics" with reknown spiritual advisor, Marianne Williamson.
A robust discusssion on tapping into the natural abilities of women to be capable, motivational elected officials. Marianne brings her well known wisdom associating spirituality, a new consciousness and a new politics. Her upcoming event, Sister*Giant. Bonus discussion with Deb Sofield of the The Women's Campaign School at Yale University.
Sorry we couldn't complete your registration. Please try again.
Please enter your email to finish creating your account.
old-style code for hosted blogs
Player Size 300 x 295 400 x 370 640 x 550


text:
The Handsome Family, 'Honey Moon' (Carrot Top)
- SPIN Rating: of 10
The songs are an effortless blend of vintage country and pre-rock'n'roll pop, but New Mexico's Handsome Family are no cutesy nostalgia act. On their eighth album, spouses Brett and Rennie Sparks continue to put a brilliantly surreal twist on everyday subjects, using nature imagery to evoke the weird intensity of all-consuming passions. Although Brett's drunken 3 A.M. crooning occasionally verges on goofy (see "The Loneliness of Magnets"), the lyrics can be downright disturbing, as in "Darling, My Darling," where he tells a lover, "Gnaw me down to my wings."


text:
'Futurama,' the sci-fi animated series, bids farewell – again
'Futurama' aired its series finale Sept. 4 on Comedy Central. 'Futurama' features the voices of Billy West and Katey Sagal.
"Futurama" has said goodbye yet again.
The final episode of the animated science fiction series aired Wednesday night (Sept. 4) on Comedy Central. Eulogizing "Futurama" is always a dicey proposition, however, since the show has come back from the dead several times before.
"In our hearts, 'Futurama' lives," series creator Matt Groening said Wednesday night during a webcast chat session celebrating the series finale. "We've been in this situation before. It's probably over, but we've said that before, too."
An eventful run
"Futurama" centers on the life of Philip J. Fry, a dimwitted 25-year-old pizza delivery boy who accidentally falls into a cryogenic chamber on New Year's Eve in 1999 and wakes up 1,000 years later.
Fry finds work at an intergalactic delivery company called Planet Express, which is run by the eccentric Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth. In addition to being 160 years old and a self-described mad scientist, the Professor also happens to be Fry's great-nephew, going down 30 generations or so.
A lot of other interesting and entertaining characters work at Planet Express, including the foulmouthed robot Bender and a one-eyed mutant named Leela, who eventually becomes the love of Fry's life (a bit more on that later).


text:
Brian Rodgers
I currently live in Wessington although i grew up in Northern Ireland and have lived most of the last ten years in Solihull. I climb in the Peak District fairly often - routes and bouldering - but really enjoy weekends away and doing longer mountain routes.
Best Climbing Experience
Hopefully the next one. I have loads of great experiences - most of which involve spending time in the hills with good friends.
Recent Postings
- No posts in last 30 days
Interests Outside Climbing
Playing football , flying power kites , mountain biking , skiing/boarding.
Click to list photo comments written by me. (1 comment)
I've voted for 37 photos, average vote 3.6.
(32% superb - 24% good - 18% average - 21% poor - 2% rubbish)
User Profile
registered 04/Aug/04updated 25/Apr/14
Been Climbing For
11 to 20 years
Best Onsights
Trad - E4
Sport - 7a+
Worked Grades
Sport - 7b+
Main Sport/Activity
Trad Rock Climbing
Favourite Crag/Rock
I Climb...
All over the world
Favourite Climbs
The Moon - Gogarth
Swettie Mice - The Mournes
Five Finger Exercise - Cratcliffe
Latest Climbs
The Bishop V3 6b
Jessica Rabbit V0 4c
Killer Bunnies V4 6a
Camateras Crack V1 5a
Choux-Fleur V1 5b
The Seeker V0 5a
The Bunny Run V0- 4b
The Tomb V2 5c
Teal'c V0 5a
Bummer V0- 5a
Spitsnswallows V1 5b
Cwningen V1 5b
Sporey Wall V1 5b
Cwningod V0 5a
Lamia Antics HVS 5b
... list all 1400 climbs
Ticklists BETA
... hidden
Climbs Wishlist
... hidden


text:
Guaranteed Top 10 Ranking Google
Jacob Biddle | 03/01/15
Internet marketing is advertising your business on the internet. If you have competitors who are on page one and your website is not on page one, you need to hire us to help.
Gary Ebel | 03/01/15
If you are not completely sure of how to get your website ranked, it's best to hire experts to get you into the top positions on the first page results.
Davie Boddie | 02/28/15
If you have a business but don't have a website, you need to get online soon.
Amy Clarkson | 02/26/15
You can help draw attention to your website by leaving comments on other websites and social media sites.
Erika Berube | 02/24/15
If you use keywords that are not being searched, nobody will find your site.
Andrea Bankson | 02/24/15
If you like what we do to get your website seen, tell your friends.
Donna Banks | 02/22/15
We make it our goal to not only get your site on top but to keep it there.
Darthea Olander | 02/20/15
Marketing your business is best when it doesn't cost too much to get results. You can't find another company that will do as much work as we do for the small amount we charge.
Cindy Beaumont | 02/18/15
Be sure to work with an ethical seo company to get the best first page positions.
Diane Coleman | 02/18/15
Effective online marketing should always include our search engine optimization service.
Alice Bissonette | 02/16/15
Showing up at the beginning of search results for your best keyword is a good place to be.
Barbara Lajeunesse | 02/15/15
Affiliate marketing is not just for people who know how to build websites.
Emrick Soltis | 02/13/15
Getting first page rankings in the natural results will do a lot for your business. Be sure all of your website pages are working properly and you don't have 404 errors coming up.
Christa Barto | 02/11/15
You probably realize that it has never been easier to sell a product or service online than it is today.
Barbara Nelson | 02/11/15
Adding keywords regularly is probably a good idea.
Ellen Barber | 02/09/15
If people aren't finding your website when they do their internet searches, it's like you never even bothered to put up a website at all.
Donna Dahn | 02/07/15
Online marketing is taking the place of print advertising like phone books.
Fred Pafford | 02/06/15
You should be on the first page of Google right at the top of the search results.
Emily Booth | 02/06/15
We apply many different strategies to get your website higher listings in the search results. Having us do your optimization is a smart move on your part.
Cynthia Fisher | 02/05/15
There is a delicate balance you need to have when you do optimization.
Debra Carter | 02/05/15
Writing articles about your products and services may very well increase your website exposure and give you the opportunity to let prospective customers know about your expertise in your field.
Debra Dawson | 02/04/15
Linking to highly ranked websites is a good way to help your rankings move up.
Barbara Thorsen | 02/04/15
If you want to market your website to the search engines so it gets higher placements, you need to let our experts do it.
Donna Drown | 02/02/15
Viral marketing through friends and relatives may bring more traffic to your website.
Barbara Rigo | 01/31/15
If you want your business and income to grow, you need to continually expand your customer base.
Craig Boyd | 01/30/15
Having a website that nobody sees is just a waste of time and money.
Debbie Brodzinski | 01/29/15
We work around the clock to bring you more traffic and more links than any other company.
Carla Archibald | 01/28/15
Bringing traffic to a website is what an seo company does.
Carol Castro | 01/27/15
If your web designer has built pages that link to your website, be sure these links are to and from relevant sites.
Finnegan Sullivan | 01/25/15
Beware of seo companies that charge big upfront fees and don't deliver results. If you want to dominate the search engines, consider having more than one website for your business.
Chris Bearman | 01/24/15
You need to be sure you research your market and be sure you are up to date with your competition. We offer affordable seo first page Google guaranteed results or you don't pay again.
Barbara Conant | 01/23/15
The keywords you use to get search engine rankings are important.
Erin Lattimore | 01/21/15
Designing a website to market your business online is a smart thing to do.
Cynthia Foley | 01/19/15
If you want your website to be found by a lot of people, let us do search engine optimization for you.
Tags |
top Google ranking tips Milwaukee WI
how to increase website traffic Austin TX
seo service consultants
first page seo course Miami Florida
Categories |
front page Google maps Oakland CA
guaranteed search engine positioning
1st page Google organic listing retail sales Lexington KY
Google search ranking Buffalo NY


text:
Top your favorite breakfast bread with Lemon-Cream Cheese Glaze. The glaze delivers a tart-and-sugary flavor.
This recipe goes with Blueberry Muffins with Lemon-Cream Cheese Glaze
Southern Living DECEMBER 2011
Beat cream cheese at medium speed with an electric mixer until creamy. Add lemon zest and next 2 ingredients; beat until smooth. Gradually add powdered sugar, beating until smooth.
Go to Full Version of
Lemon-Cream Cheese Glaze Recipe


text:
Gnocchi with Marinara Sauce
From Good Housekeeping
triple-tested at the Good Housekeeping Research Institute
Be the first to rate this recipe
You must be logged in to use this feature.
Username: | |
Password: | |
Forgot your username or password? |
Not a member? Register
Nutritional Information
(per serving)
Calories | 375 |
Total Fat | 8g |
Saturated Fat | 0 |
Cholesterol | 0 |
Sodium | 1400mg |
Total Carbohydrate | 0 |
Dietary Fiber | 0 |
Sugars | -- |
Protein | 0 |
Calcium | -- |
Getty Images/StockDisc
Serves: 4
Total Time: 1 hr
U.S. | Metric | Conversion chart |
- 2 tablespoon(s) olive or salad oil
- 1 medium onion, chopped
- 1 can(s) (28-ounce) Italian plum tomatoes
- Sugar
- Salt
- 3 large (about 1 1/2 pounds) potatoes, peeled and each cut into quarters
- 1 cup(s) all-purpose flour
- Grated Parmesan cheese, (optional)
- Prepare marinara sauce: In 12-inch skillet over medium heat, in hot olive or salad oil, cook onion until tender. Stir in tomatoes with their liquid, 1 1/2 teaspoons sugar, and 1 1/4 teaspoons salt; over high heat, heat to boiling. Reduce heat to medium-low; cover and simmer 20 minutes.
- Meanwhile, boil potatoes in water 15 minutes or until fork-tender. Drain and mash potatoes. In large bowl, mix mashed potatoes, flour, 1 tablespoon sugar, and 3/4 teaspoon salt to make a soft dough. On lightly floured surface, knead dough until smooth and slightly sticky. Cut dough into 12 pieces. Roll each piece into a 1/2-inch-diameter log. With floured fork, make indentations all the way down each log. Cut logs into 1 1/4-inch pieces (gnocchi).
- In 5-quart saucepot over high heat, heat 4 quarts water to boiling. Add gnocchi. With slotted spoon, carefully remove gnocchi to platter as soon as they start to float. Spoon marinara sauce over gnocchi. If you like, sprinkle with Parmesan cheese.
Loading photos...
Here are some alternate versions of this recipe created by our wonderful community of chefs!
More from Good Housekeeping
Special Offer
Special Offers


text:
Chicken Supplies
Miller Mfg. Round 1 Qt Jar Galvanized Feeder Set for Chicken 9810
$3.49This baby chick feeder screws onto a Little Giant 1-Quart Plastic Screw-On Feeder/Waterer Jar (Item No. 690, sold separately) or a standard Mason jar to make a gravity feeder. Made of heavy-gauge galvanized steel for years of service. Rounded, embossed edges help reduce chafing on chicks' neck and head. Eight feeding holes. 6 inch diameter by 2.5 inch high.Learn More
- Baby chick feeder
- Screws onto a Little Giant 1-Quart Plastic Screw-On Feeder/Waterer Jar (Item No. 690, sold separately) or a standard Mason jar to make a gravity feeder
- Heavy-gauge galvanized steel for years of service
- Rounded, embossed edges help reduce chafing on chicks' neck and head
- Eight feeding holes
Farm Innovators Thermostatically Controlled Outlet Thermo Cube TC-3
$11.98The Farm Innovators Thermostatically Controlled Outlet Thermo Cube is ideal for the home and farm applications, such as, areas of stock tank de-icers, pond de-icers, unheated rooms, pump houses, greenhouses, boats and RV's.
Product Features:
- Two outlets
- Saves energy
- Great for the winter months
- On at 35 degrees F
- Off at 45 degrees F
Pullet Egg Layer Chicks
$1.99Must purchase a minimum of 25 chicks. Hatchery Choice will be shipped, breeds will vary. Buff Orpington chicks are pictured.
NOTE: Hatchery only ships out on Monday's and the chicks will be delievered to your local Post Office where they will have to be picked up. Chicks will only be shipped via USPS.
Learn More -
Dolco Packaging Poultry Chicken Egg Carton 2x6 Foam
$0.29Use this carton to store those farm fresh eggs so they don't get damaged
Learn More -
DDI 125 watt Heat Lamp Bulb Clear
$1.99- Ideal to warm baby chicks and baby pigs.
- Clear 125 watt
Farm Innovators 3 gal. Plastic Heated Poultry Fountain HPF-100
$34.98This "all seasons" heated poultry fountain is thermostatically controlled to keep water from freezing during the winter. It has an electrical connection on the base year
- Holds 3 gallons of water
Woods Brooder Light 10.5" Shade with Clamp & 6ft Cord 0166
$7.99- 10.5" shade with adjustable reflector and bulb protector
- 6 ft cord
- Clamp with non-marring grips and built-in hook hanger
- Ideal for keeping baby chicks, baby pigs or small farm animals warm
- Uses up to a 250-watt bulb with porcelain socket
Little Giant Plastic O-ring Kit For Chick Waterer
$2.99Replacement parts kit for ppf series of waterers - includes 3 o rings and one small black cap.
Learn More -


text:
{ border-collapse: collapse; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px; }
Reservations for December 25-29 must be made by 12noon on Wednesday, December 24.
Reservations for January 1-5 must be made by 5pm on Wednesday, December 31.
A 24 hour notice is required for all reservations.
For weekdays, reservations must be made no later than 5:00pm the previous day.
For weekends and Monday holidays, reservations must be made no later than 5:00 pm the previous Thursday.
Reserve by phone: Credit Card Required Call 480-644-4271 Reserve in person at Parks Office: Credit card, money order, cash or check (with valid driver's license) accepted American Express, Discover, MasterCard and Visa accepted
Special permits are required for any propane heater brought into a City of Mesa park. Propane heaters must be approved by City of Mesa staff, and insurance will need to be provided at the time of payment for the park space. Propane heaters may only be placed on the cement near the ramada, and cannot be placed under the ramada or under or close to any trees. The permittee must be present and responsible at all times that the propane heater is in the park. Additional fees will be applied to all propane heaters brought into the park.
Reservations are Non-Refundable In the event of inclement weather or failure of field or court lighting, a refund may be requested. It is the responsibility of the customer to call 480-644-4271 within 24 hours following the reservation to receive the refund.
Electricity is not included as part of your reservation. If you will need electricity you must provide a generator.
All changes to reservations need to be made at least 24 hours in advance.
All changes to weekend reservations need to be made by 5:00pm the Thursday prior to the reservation.
Customer shall be charged a cleanup fee in an amount up to $500 for not leaving park areas clean and litter free.
Park Hours: Sunrise to 10:00 pm
Park Rules and Regulations
Reserve a Ramada
Reserve a Sports Field
Alcohol Permits
Park Ranger information
Address Search to find a Park or Basin
Parks & Rec FAQ's
Parks Facilities Guide (PDF)
Parks and Recreation Home


text:
IBIS-PH Graphic Display Preference
This page allows you to specify the type of graphics that you want the system
to deliver to your browser when viewing charts and maps on the IBIS-PH site.
Currently the system has two image types:
Listed below is the graphic display setting being used by the IBIS-PH system for your browser. You have the option to change the setting and to make the setting permanent for future visits to this site. No Image Type Specified - No SVG Plugin DetectedThe IBIS-PH system is set to deliver all chart and map graphic images to your system in the JPEG format. A check was performed to detect an SVG plugin for this browser but was unable to detect a valid SVG plugin. The system also could not find a saved graphic display preference. If you want to keep the JPEG image format, you do not need to do anything since this is the default behavior of the system.Please select the type of chart and map graphic images to be delivered to your browser by the IBIS-PH system:JPEG bitmap/rasterized imagePNG bitmap/rasterized image SVG vector based image
Click here for
basic instructions on how to install the SVG plugin. Once you have
installed the plugin return to this page and select the SVG graphic
image type option. Or, you can select the SVG option now and then
install the plugin later, but be aware that you will not be able to
view any chart or map graphic images on this site until the SVG plugin
has been properly installed for this browser. More detailed SVG information /
instructions / help / FAQs is provided on Abobe's SVG Zone.
Make your selection preference permanent for future visits to this site. |


text: 4 Years Later... View full-size image < previous next > Is this photo a winner? "My high school friends and I made these t-shirts to commemorate a great four years together. We'll all be taking them off to college and beyond. CustomInk was great. It was a last minute idea to make these shirts and they made it easy for us." - drew (Aug 15, 2008) Share this photo on: Twitter Facebook Pinterest Similar Photos: pennsylvania | friends | gildan ultra cotton | high school | k-12 | gladwyne Feeling inspired? Visit the CustomInk Design Lab to start your own group order. Design Your Own comment by anonymous - Aug 17, 2008 - back to the top High school is so overrated


text:
Élégante en toute simplicité, cette bague de fiançailles solitaire de petite taille est réalisée en or blanc 14 carats poli pour créer un cadre classique à votre diamant central.
Awesome setting, thin and elegant
Cameron, Vineyard, UT – February 2015
This is a replacement engagement ring. My ring was stolen. My husband bought it from Blue nile as well. he quality of both rings were great. I did not like the box this time. I preferred the wooden box given last time. Overall, the ring and diamond were beautiful.
Anonymous, Quebec, QC – January 2015
My fiance was able to choose her exact options for the ring and put it in the setting she liked the most. We placed our order on a Sunday night and the ring arrived on Thursday morning which was Christmas Day! She was so excited and it made the holiday even better since she was able to show her ring to all of the family. Thank you Blue Nile for your great product and exceptional customer service.
Anonymous, Grand Rapids, MN – January 2015


text:
KKR Strengthens South East Asia Presence With Singapore Office
Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. L.P. (together with its affiliates, "KKR") today announced the opening of KKR's Singapore Office affirming KKR's commitment to Asia. The opening establishes KKR's seventh office in Asia Pacific, with the Singapore office serving as the regional hub for Southeast Asia and will be dedicated towards its investment activities throughout the region.
The Singapore office builds upon KKR's model of marrying deep market knowledge of experienced local hires with KKR's global network for the benefit of its investors and portfolio companies. KKR's Southeast Asia team is led by Ming Lu, Member and Regional Leader of Southeast Asia, and includes Directors Kabir Mathur from Singapore and Ridha Wirakusumah from Indonesia.
Co-Founder, Co-Chairman and Co-CEO of KKR Henry Kravis said, "Singapore is at the heart of the dynamic growth that is taking place across Southeast Asia. We have invested more than US$ 1 billion in this region since 2005, and Southeast Asia is KKR's second largest investment destination in Asia after China. But now is the time to establish a permanent presence. This means we will be even more committed to understanding local business environments, their unique challenges and opportunities, and the specific needs of its entrepreneurs, investors, workers and business leaders."
Boosted by positive population demographics and growing consumer affluence, KKR sees opportunities in Southeast Asia arising from the increase in domestic consumption; the rapid development of the financial services industry; the increasing demand for better and improved infrastructure; opportunities from non-core carve-outs and corporate divestitures as well as divestments from state-owned enterprises; and, increasing growth and generational change opportunities with entrepreneurs.
To date, KKR has invested more than US$1 billion in four transactions across Southeast Asia -- Avago, MMI and Unisteel, all headquartered in Singapore -- and a US$159 million investment in Masan Consumer, the largest-ever private equity transaction in Vietnam. In addition, Singapore-listed United Envirotech Limited, a leading water treatment and recycling solution provider in China, is also a KKR portfolio company. Ming Lu, Member and Regional Leader of Southeast Asia at KKR said, "With an ever-increasing number of strong local businesses looking to grow in their own markets as well as to expand internationally, KKR's partnership approach provides an opportunity for these companies to tap into our global best practices to further expand their businesses and improve operations while doing so in a localized way. KKR maintains a team of senior executives with extensive, hands-on international managerial and operational experience in an array of industries who are dedicated to working with KKR's portfolio companies based in the region."Check Out Our Best Services for Investors
Action Alerts PLUS
Portfolio Manager Jim Cramer and Director of Research Jack Mohr reveal their investment tactics while giving advanced notice before every trade.
Product Features:
- $2.5+ million portfolio
- Large-cap and dividend focus
- Intraday trade alerts from Cramer
Quant Ratings
Access the tool that DOMINATES the Russell 2000 and the S&P 500.
Product Features:
- Buy, hold, or sell recommendations for over 4,300 stocks
- Unlimited research reports on your favorite stocks
- A custom stock screener
Stocks Under $10
David Peltier uncovers low dollar stocks with serious upside potential that are flying under Wall Street's radar.
Product Features:
- Model portfolio
- Stocks trading below $10
- Intraday trade alerts
Check Out Our Best Services for Investors
Dividend Stock Advisor
David Peltier identifies the best of breed dividend stocks that will pay a reliable AND significant income stream.
Product Features:
- Diversified model portfolio of dividend stocks
- Updates with exact steps to take - BUY, HOLD, SELL
Trifecta Stocks
Every recommendation goes through 3 layers of intense scrutinyquantitative, fundamental and technical analysisto maximize profit potential and minimize risk.
Product Features:
- Model Portfolio
- Intra Day Trade alerts
- Access to Quant Ratings
Options Profits
Our options trading pros provide over 100 monthly option trading ideas and strategies to help you become a well-seasoned trader.
Product Features:
- Actionable options commentary and news
- Real-time trading community


text:
POSTED: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 - 6:51am
UPDATED: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 - 7:49am
It's something many of us do nearly every time we get behind the wheel.
But, El Paso may soon be the next city to ban cell phones while driving.
Tomorrow city council will decided whether to introduce an ordinance to ban cell phone use while driving.
Similar laws have already been passed in Las Cruces and numerous cities nationwide.
It's widely accepted that talking and texting while driving is extremely dangerous.
Still, many people can't resist doing it behind the wheel.
Rachel Quintana is the City Representative who initiated the ordinance.
She told us her motivation was safety.
If City Council approves introducing the ordinance.
It will then go up for a vote two weeks later.
That's also when council will take public comment.
Quintana says if approved she's hoping to have the ordinace go into effect April 1st.


text:
Type | Feature Film |
MPAA Rating | NR |
Runtime | 1hr 6mins. |
Genres | Comedy, Short Film |
Keywords | melodrama |
Status | Released |
US Release Date | 10/11/1940 |
Adam leaves Hannah behind to turn to the Dark Side.
Last night's episode raises an important question.
It's costlier than you think. Bionic hands, gold body paint, evil cats — it's all in a day's work for the clearly wealthy bad guys in 007's world.
Did AMC strike television gold again?
Lilo & Stitch is certainly worth braving the masses to take your kid to a movie. Even being a Disney film in which melting the heart is part of the experience, there are enough wildly funny moments to entertain the adults as well.
Name | Credit | Credited as |
Arthur D Hilton | Editor |


text:
Supreme Court Arizona ruling could shape immigration reform
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a challenge to a 2007 Arizona law penalizing employers who hire undocumented migrants.
Joshua Lott/Reuters
The US Supreme Court agreed Monday to hear a legal challenge by business, civil rights and immigration groups to a 2007 Arizona law that penalizes employers who knowingly hire undocumented immigrants.
The case will not be a ruling on Arizona's controversial SB 1070, which has resulted in national furor, economic boycotts, and a high-profile confrontation between Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer and President Obama.
But it could shed light on how courts will be inclined to rule on the lawsuits that have been filed challenging SB 1070, give direction to how states and localities – including Arizona – may proceed with new immigration laws, and help shape comprehensive immigration reform that has been percolating – many say too slowly – in Congress.
"This is potentially the biggest immigration ruling of the past 30 years," says Kevin Johnson, Dean of the UC Davis Law School and a former member of candidate Obama's Immigration Policy Group. "Over the past few years, there have been hosts of states and localities attempting to regulate immigration, from Texas to Pennsylvania to Arizona to New Jersey, and this will likely tell us what if any power these states have to make these laws."


text:
Redskins sign Ike Williams (former Baylor running back)
16 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Deadskins wrote:I haven't heard any news about Royster this offseason. Is he back at full health? Although he played in most of the games last year, I seem to remember him as playing through a lingering injury all season.
good point ... even so ... it's not a stretch to expect that we'll have another good group of RBs behind RG3
I really am expecting more from the passing game this season BUT ...
that is based on the expectation that we'll have another very effective running game AND Kyle continuing to take advantage of all that RG3 can do
P A T I E N C E - Snyder needs to just 'butt out' and give Scot time to figure out who he needs in the FO, who he needs as the HC and what players fit what he thinks is a good system for this franchise - it's a mess & it will take time
16 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2


text:
BBC Nature - Video collection: Deadly dinosaurs. BBC Nature - Ants turned into 'supersoldiers' 5 January 2012Last updated at 19:00 By Victoria Gill Science reporter, BBC Nature Pheidole ant supersoldiers (right) use their unusually large heads to defend their nests Ants can be programmed to become "supersoldiers", according to an international team of researchers.
Mosaic jellyfish - photography, Animal photos, animal pictures. Nature photography - pictures of animals, pictures of birds, pictures of butterflies, macro photography of insects, plant photos, pictures of mushrooms. The most beautiful and unique images of nature. Great photographers observe nature by Canon, Nikon cameras, equipped with the best lenses - see all species in our gallery and listen to the birds' and animals' voices.
Click the picture for more lols! - StumbleUpon. Birds animals eagles - Wallpaper (#1022762) / Wallbase.cc - StumbleUpon. Evolution News, Videos, Reviews and Gossip - io9. Well that depends on what you mean by "driest.
" Some of the spiciest food I've had has been from Thailand and India, from regions that are hot, but seriously damn wet for parts of the year. Well, perhaps predominantly was a bad word to use, so I'll give you Thailand. Likewise, India and Mexico are too large to generalize as one climate, and there are really wet regions. However there are also many notable dry/arid areas. Lion's Mane by Alexander Semenov - StumbleUpon. - StumbleUpon. FLAUM - Bild von Michael Seth aus Tiere - Fotografie (21002427)
Nature. - StumbleUpon.