text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
April 25, 2014
JANE DOE, f/k/a MASHA ALLENv.ALAN HESKETH, et al
Page 587
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 588
For JANE DOE, THE VICTIM IN THE " DISNEY WORLD GIRL" OR " INTERNET GIRL" CHILD PORNOGRAPHY SERIES formerly known as MASHA ALLEN, Plaintiff: ANGELA R. FOX, J. DARREN SUMMERVILLE, S. LEIGHTON MOORE, LEAD ATTORNEYS, SUMMERVILLE MOORE PC, ATLANTA, GA; MICHAEL A. FERRARA, JR., LEAD ATTORNEY, THE FERRARA LAW FIRM LLC, PHILADELPHIA, PA.
For DAN W. JOACHIM, MAYER FINKELSTEIN, SUED IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES AND AS REPRESENTATIVES OF A CLASS OF PERSONS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Defendants: MICHAEL S. BOMSTEIN, PINNOLA & BOMSTEIN, PHILADELPHIA, PA.
DOUGLAS MICHAEL STUM, Defendant, Pro se, YAZOO CITY, MS.
RICHARD SCHEIRING, Defendant, Pro se, FORT DIX, NJ.
For CHARLES LINDAUER, Defendant: COLETTE RESNIK STEEL, LEAD ATTORNEY, PRO HAC VICE, THE STEEL LAW FIRM PC, ATLANTA, GA; GEORGE HENRY NEWMAN, NEWMAN & ASSOCIATES, PHILADELPHIA, PA.
JOSEPH MARCUS, Defendant, Pro se, PHILADELPHIA, PA.
For JOSEPH MARCUS, Defendant: SAMUEL BRAVERMAN, LEAD ATTORNEY, FASULO BRAVERMAN & DIMAGGIO LLP, NEW YORK, NY.
For STEPHEN JABBOUR, Defendant: CHRISTOPHER M. CHOATE, JOHN T. FLOYD, III, PRO HAC VICE, THE JOHN T. FLOYD LAW FIRM, HOUSTON, TX; DANIEL STRICK, LUCAS & CAVALIER LLC, PHILADELPHIA, PA.
ALBERT NOAH ABRAMS, Defendant, Pro se, LOMPOC, CA.
Page 589
Dalzell, J.
Plaintiff Jane Doe seeks statutory redress under 18 U.S.C. § 2255 for her victimization in the child-porn trade when she was a minor by suing a putative class of men convicted of illegally possessing her image, including defendants Dan W. Joachim, Mayer Finkelstein and Charles Lindauer. These three defendants each pled guilty in their respective Districts to possession of child pornography after which the Department of Justice sent Doe a notice that her image was among those in each defendant's possession.
Before us now are Joachim, Finkelstein and Lindauer's individual motions to dismiss Doe's amended complaint which we will consider together because they make identical arguments,[1] i.e., that we lack personal jurisdiction over each defendant; each defendant is not an appropriate representative of the putative defendant class; the statute under which Doe sued is void for vagueness under the Fifth Amendment; and the complaint impermissibly seeks punitive damages under a statute that permits recovery of actual damages alone. Doe opposes the three defendants' motions and seeks jurisdictional discovery to show that we have jurisdiction over these defendants.
For the reasons detailed below, we will grant these defendants' motions to dismiss on the basis of personal jurisdiction and accordingly we will not reach the Rule 12(b)(6) questions.[2]
I. Factual and procedural background
A. The Parties
From the age of five Doe was filmed being repeatedly raped and sexually abused by her then-adoptive father, defendant Matthew Mancuso, who then distributed those images over the Internet. First Amended Complaint (" FAC" ) at 2. Most of these acts took place in Mancuso's home in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, but others were filmed during their annual trips to Disney World -- including a widely distributed series through which Doe became known as " Disney World Girl." Id. ¶ 12. Mancuso distributed in secret online chatrooms some two hundred images of Doe in exchange for pictures and videos of other children being sexually abused. Id. ¶ 13.
Page 590
Doe alleges that the named defendants and others " conspired with each other, and with members of the class, to share and distribute these and other illegal child-abuse images, largely by means of the so-called 'darknet,' a collection of secure websites, online chatrooms, bulletin-board sites, and peer-to-peer file-sharing computer networks that communicate via the Internet but are specifically designed to conceal the participants' personal identifying information." Id. at 4. She further alleges that, because the images are illegal, defendants " operated under an agreement to protect each other's anonymity [by] communicating with each other remotely under fictitious usernames."
With respect to those moving to dismiss, Doe alleges that defendant Joachim pled guilty in 2012 to receipt of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2). Id. at ¶ 30. As part of the conduct of his offense, Doe alleges that Joachim " communicated with other possessors and distributors of child pornography by means of the Internet," using a fictitious screen name to advertise, distribute and receive illegal images -- including of Doe -- through " websites, chatrooms, and other modes of online communication." Id. at ¶ 31. Joachim's last known address before his incarceration was in Metairie, Louisiana. Id.
As to defendant Finkelstein, Doe alleges that in 2007 he pled guilty to possessing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B). Id. ¶ 57. Doe alleges that Finkelstein " communicated with others via the Internet to distribute and receive images of child sexual abuse." Id. ¶ 58. Doe's image was among the 14,000 still images and 324 videos that federal agents found on his home and law-office computers. Id. His last known address prior to his incarceration was New Orleans, Louisiana.
Doe alleges that defendant Lindauer pled guilty in 2010 to one count of transporting child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 2252A(a)(1) and 2252A(b)(1)[3] and one count of possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § § 2252A(a)(5)(B)[4] and 2252A(b)(2). Id. at ¶ 42. He was sentenced in 2011 to nine years' imprisonment. Id. Doe alleges that Lindauer " used a particular type of peer-to-peer file-sharing software that is commonly used by child pornographers to conceal their identifying information when interacting with one another and trading illegal images." Id. ¶ 43. She further alleges that, using the pseudonym " ForVicky," Lindauer received and distributed hundreds of digital pictures and videos, among them depictions of the rape and sexual abuse of small children including Doe. Id. Lindauer's last known address before his incarceration was in Charlottesville, Virginia. Id. ¶ 44.
B. Procedural History
Doe brings this lawsuit under 18 U.S.C. § 2255, which is known as " Masha's Law" and named after this plaintiff. Id. at 2. The statute provides in relevant part:
Any person who, while a minor, was a victim of a violation of [a predicate offense] and who suffers personal injury as a result of such violation, regardless of whether the injury occurred while such person was a minor, may sue in any appropriate United States District Court and shall recover the actual damages such person sustains and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee. Any person as described in
Page 591
the preceding sentence shall be deemed to have sustained damages of no less than $150,000 in value.
18 U.S.C. § 2255(a). Doe rehearses that any plaintiff who establishes a claim under Masha's Law may recover a minimum of $150,000 in damages from each defendant " [a]s a punitive deterrent to such crimes[] and in recognition of both the magnitude of the damages resulting to the victim and the difficulty of precisely calculating the amount of such damages." FAC at 5. Doe seeks " at least" the $150,000 in statutory minimum damages from each member of the putative class. Id.
The United States Department of Justice (" DOJ" ) identified each of the named defendants as having " received, possessed, and/or distributed one or more of the illicit images" Mancuso created of Doe and each defendant was convicted of a predicate offense to 18 U.S.C. § 2255. Id. ¶ 15. Under the DOJ's Victim Notification System, Doe learned of each defendant " who illegally possessed and/or distributed" one or more of the images of her that Mancuso created. Id. ¶ 16. To date, Doe has received over 2,000 such notifications. Id.
Because these images continue to circulate and Doe suffers a severe deprivation of her privacy as a result, she changed her name and took steps to shield her address and personal information before filing this lawsuit. In January of 2014, we granted her unopposed motion to proceed under a pseudonym. See January 29, 2014 Order.
On February 4, 2014 Doe filed her first amended complaint against thirteen named defendants whom she sued individually and as class representatives under 18 U.S.C. § 2255(a). Defendants Joachim and Finkelstein each filed motions to dismiss on March 14, 2014 and defendant Lindauer filed his motion to dismiss a week later. Doe responded to the motions on April 7, 2014.
II. Discussion
A. Legal Standard for Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction
A district court considering a challenge to its jurisdiction over a defendant has " considerable procedural leeway in choosing a methodology for deciding the motion." 5B Charles Alan Wright and Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 1351 (3d ed. 2013). In ruling on a motion under Rule 12(b)(2) we must accept all of the plaintiff's allegations as true and accept disputed facts in the plaintiff's favor. See Pinker v. Roche Holdings Ltd., 292 F.3d 361, 368 (3d Cir. 2002); see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) and (6).
" But once a defendant has raised a jurisdictional defense, a plaintiff bears the burden of proving by affidavits or other competent evidence that jurisdiction is proper." Dayhoff Inc. v. H.J. Heinz Co., 86 F.3d 1287, 1302 (3d Cir. 1996). As our Court of Appeals explained in Time Share Vacation Club v. Atlantic Resorts, Ltd, 735 F.2d 61 (3d Cir. 1984), " [a] Rule 12(b)(2) motion. . . is inherently a matter which requires resolution of factual issues outside the pleadings, i.e. whether in personam jurisdiction actually lies." Id. at 66 n.9. The plaintiff must respond with " competent evidence" and " actual proofs," and may not " rely on the bare pleadings alone in order to withstand a defendant's Rule 12(b)(2) motion to dismiss for lack of in personam jurisdiction." Id.
The district court may " receive and weigh" any relevant matter the parties submit to determine jurisdictional facts. 5B Wright & Miller at § 1351; see also Metcalfe v. Renaissance Marine, Inc., 566 F.3d 324, 51 V.I. 1219 (3d Cir. 2009). The court may hold an evidentiary hearing, but when it restricts its review of the Rule 12(b)(2)
Page 592
motion solely to affidavits and other written evidence, the plaintiff need only make a prima facie showing. 5B Wright & Miller at § 1351 (citing IMO Industries, Inc. v. Kiekert AG, 155 F.3d 254 (3d Cir. 1998). But the plaintiff must still prove personal jurisdiction by a preponderance of the evidence. Carteret Sav. Bank, FA v. Shushan, 954 F.2d 141, 142 (3d Cir. 1992).
A court must analyze questions of personal jurisdiction on a defendant-specific and claim-specific basis. Miller Yacht Sales, Inc. v. Smith, 384 F.3d 93, 95 n.1 (3d Cir. 2004) (citing Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783, 790, 104 S.Ct. 1482, 79 L.Ed.2d 804 (1984)). Each defendant's contact with the forum state must be assessed individually. Calder, 465 U.S. at 790.
B. Alternative Tests to Establish Personal Jurisdiction
A district court's jurisdiction over a foreign defendant rests on a two-part analysis that considers the reach permitted by the law of the state in which the court sits, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(k), and the due process requirement for " certain minimum contacts" between the defendant and the forum state so as not to " offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice."
International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316, 66 S.Ct. 154, 90 L.Ed. 95 (1945).
" When a controversy is related to or 'arises out of' a defendant's contacts with the forum, the [Supreme] Court has said that a 'relationship among the defendant, the forum, and the litigation' is the essential foundation of in personam jurisdiction," Helicopteros Nacionales de Colombia, S.A. v. Hall, 466 U.S. 408, 414, 104 S.Ct. 1868, 80 L.Ed.2d 404 (1984) (citing Shaffer v. Heitner, 433 U.S. 186, 204, 97 S.Ct. 2569, 53 L.Ed.2d 683 (1977)). Specific jurisdiction exists where the plaintiff establishes " with reasonable particularity sufficient contacts between the defendant and the forum state." Provident Nat. Bank v. California Fed. Sav. & Loan Assoc., 819 F.2d 434, 437 (3d Cir. 1987) (internal citation omitted). In such cases, Pennsylvania's long-arm statute provides that we may exercise jurisdiction over nonresident individuals " to the fullest extent allowed under the Constitution of the United States and [our jurisdiction] may be based on the most minimum contact with this Commonwealth allowed under the Constitution of the United States." 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. Ann. § 5322(b) (emphasis supplied).[5]
1. The Minimum Contact Requirement
The traditional minimum contact analysis derived from Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz, 471 U.S. 462, 105 S.Ct. 2174, 85 L.Ed.2d 528 (1985), grants a district court personal jurisdiction over a defendant who " purposefully direct[s] his activities at residents of the forum [when] the litigation results from alleged injuries that arise out of or relate to those activities." Id. at 472 (internal quotations omitted);
see also Metcalfe, 566 F.3d at 334.
Page 593
If those requirements are met, the court may consider whether the exercise of jurisdiction otherwise comports with fair play and substantial justice. O'Connor v. Sandy Lane Hotel Co., Ltd., 496 F.3d 312, 317 (3d Cir. 2007) (internal citations omitted). Under this traditional test, a defendant purposefully directs his activities at the forum state when he " avails [himself] of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum State, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws." Hanson v. Denckla, 357 U.S. 235, 253, 78 S.Ct. 1228, 2 L.Ed.2d 1283 (1958) (cited in Vetrotex Certainteed Corp. v. Consolidated Fiber Glass Products, 75 F.3d 147, 150 (3d Cir. 1996)).
2. " Effects" Test
As an alternative to minimum contact through one's presence within the state, our Court of Appeals adopted the so-called " effects" test the Supreme Court first articulated in Calder, supra. In Calder, a California-based entertainer sought jurisdiction over two Florida-based journalists for an allegedly libelous story drawn from California sources where the brunt of the harm -- the entertainer's emotional distress and harm to her professional reputation -- occurred in California. Calder, 465 U.S. at 789-90. The Supreme Court concluded that " California is the focal point both of the story and the harm suffered. Jurisdiction over petitioners is therefore proper in California based on the 'effects' of their Florida conduct in California," id. at 789, because their intentional and allegedly tortious actions were expressly aimed at one living in California.
Under the " effects" test, a court has personal jurisdiction if the plaintiff can show " (1) the defendant committed an intentional tort; (2) the plaintiff felt the brunt of the harm in the forum. . . ; [and] (3) the defendant expressly aimed his tortious conduct at the forum such that the forum can be said to be the focal point of the tortious activity." IMO Indus., 155 F.3d at 265-66.
As our Court of Appeals explained in Marten v. Godwin, 499 F.3d 290 (3d Cir. 2007),
The effects test and traditional specific jurisdiction analysis are different, but they are cut from the same cloth. Just as the standard test prevents a defendant from " be[ing] haled into a jurisdiction solely as a result of random, fortuitous, or attenuated contacts," Burger King, 471 U.S. at 475. .., the effects test prevents a defendant from being haled into a jurisdiction solely because the defendant intentionally caused harm that was felt in the forum state if the defendant did not expressly aim his conduct at that state.
Id. at 297. See also Toys " R" Us, Inc. v. Step Two, S.A., 318 F.3d 446, 455 n.6 (3d Cir. 2003) (stating that the effects test is an alternative to the minimum contact analysis for specific jurisdiction if the defendant " expressly aimed his tortious conduct at the forum" and where the intentionality requirement is the " key" component for jurisdiction under either the " minimum contacts" analysis or the " effects" test).
The " expressly aimed" element constitutes the threshold. Only if we cross that threshold need we consider the other two elements. Marten, 499 F.3d at 297. This standard is exacting. To meet it, the plaintiff must show that " the defendant knew that the plaintiff would suffer the brunt of the harm . . . in the forum, and [must] point to specific activity indicating that the defendant expressly aimed [his] tortious conduct at the forum." IMO Indus., 155 F.3d at 266. In Remick v. Manfredy, 238 F.3d 248 (3d Cir. 2001), our Court of Appeals dismissed a defamation
Page 594
claim for want of in personam jurisdiction. There, defendants made defamatory statements to plaintiff's professional community and wrote a defamatory letter that was read by plaintiff's Pennsylvania coworkers. But plaintiff could not show that the letter was targeted at anyone in Pennsylvania besides the plaintiff or that the Commonwealth had a " unique relationship" with plaintiff's colleagues. The court similarly found no jurisdiction in Marten -- even assuming the truth of the allegations and that plaintiff felt the brunt of the harm in Pennsylvania -- because the plaintiff failed to allege " any specific facts showing a deliberate targeting of Pennsylvania."
Marten, 499 F.3d at 298.
As our Court of Appeals explained, " the effects test asks whether the plaintiff felt the brunt of the harm in the forum state, but it also asks whether the defendants knew that the plaintiff would suffer the harm there and whether they aimed their tortious conduct at that state." Id. at 299 (emphasis in original).
3. The Sliding Scale Approach
As the Internet has grown exponentially, courts have struggled to derive personal jurisdiction tests that satisfy the due process requirement for the defendant's minimum contact with the forum state while also offering plaintiffs redress. At issue for Internet-based claims is whether operation of a commercial Web site accessible in the forum state is enough to support specific jurisdiction or " whether there must be additional evidence that the defendant has 'purposefully availed' [himself] of the privileges of engaging in activity in that state."
Toys " R" Us, 318 F.3d at 451. The purposeful availment requirement balances the constitutional imperatives of protecting defendants from being haled into court based solely on attenuated contacts while providing injured parties the means to sue a non-resident defendant for harms directed toward -- and through a substantial relationship with -- the forum state.
See Burger King, 471 U.S. at 475.
In Toys " R" Us v. Step Two, S.A. our Court of Appeals endorsed the sliding-scale approach first articulated in Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc., 952 F.Supp. 1119 (W.D.Pa. 1997). Under Zippo, a court has personal jurisdiction when an Internet site offers commercial interactivity and the claim relates to, or arises from, use of the Web site, but not where a defendant only posted information on a passive site. The court concluded that " the likelihood that personal jurisdiction can be constitutionally exercised is directly proportionate to the nature and quality of commercial activity that an entity conducts over the Internet."
Zippo, 952 F.Supp. at 1124.
Zippo identified three types of Internet Web presences and their effects on personal jurisdiction:
At one end of the spectrum are situations where a defendant clearly does business over the Internet. If the defendant enters into contracts with residents of a foreign jurisdiction that involve the knowing and repeated transmission of computer files over the Internet, personal jurisdiction is proper. At the opposite end are situations where a defendant has simply posted information on an Internet Web site which is accessible to users in foreign jurisdictions. A passive Web site that does little more than make information available to those who are interested in it is not grounds for the exercise [of] personal jurisdiction. The middle ground is occupied by interactive Web sites where a user can exchange information with the host computer. In these cases, the exercise of jurisdiction is determined
Page 595
by examining the level of interactivity and commercial nature of the exchange of information that occurs on the Web site.
Id. (internal citations omitted).
Our Court of Appeals concluded in Toys " R" Us that " the mere operation" of an interactive Web site failed to subject its operator " to jurisdiction anywhere in the world" -- and, specifically, in Pennsylvania.
Toys " R" Us, 318 F.3d at 454. " Rather, there must be evidence that the defendant 'purposefully availed' [himself] of conducting activity in the forum state, by directly targeting [the] web site to the state, knowingly interacting with residents of the forum state via [the] web site, or through sufficient other related contacts."
4. Co-Conspirator Jurisdiction
Under certain circumstances district courts in this Circuit have adopted Pennsylvania's " co-conspirator jurisdiction" under which " [t]he court imputes the contacts of the 'resident' co-conspirator over whom it has jurisdiction to the 'foreign' co-conspirator to see if there are sufficient contacts to exercise jurisdiction over the latter." Massachusetts School of Law at Andover, Inc. v. American Bar Ass'n, 846 F.Supp. 374, 379 (E.D.Pa. 1994) (Ditter, J.). The availability of the conspiracy theory of jurisdiction is a question of state law,
Miller Yacht, 384 F.3d at 102 n.8., but our Court of Appeals has not adopted this theory of jurisdiction.
For a court to have co-conspirator jurisdiction over a foreign defendant, the plaintiff must allege that substantial acts in furtherance of the conspiracy occurred within the forum state and that the foreign defendant was, or should have been, aware of them. Massachusetts School of Law, 846 F.Supp. at 379-380. " Merely belonging to a civil conspiracy does not make a member subject to the jurisdiction of every other member's forum." Id. at 379.
See also Commonwealth ex rel. Pappert v. TAP Pharm. Prods., Inc., 868 A.2d 624, 632 (Pa. Commw. 2005) (" [B]are assertions of a conspiracy connection are insufficient to justify the exercise of personal jurisdiction" ).
In short, a plaintiff must plead the defendant's involvement with particularity. Aluminum Bahrain B.S.C. v. Alcoa Inc. 866 F.Supp.2d 525 (W.D.Pa. 2012). Courts have recognized co-conspirator jurisdiction where the plaintiff alleges specifically how co-conspirators related to each other in order to make a prima facie showing of personal jurisdiction. See, e.g. Arrington v. Colortyme, Inc., 972 F.Supp.2d 733, 2013 WL 5230728 at *9-10 (W.D.Pa. Sept.17, 2013).
Though not, strictly speaking, a " minimum contacts" case involving in personam jurisdiction, our Court of Appeals's decision two weeks ago in United States v. Auernheimer, 748 F.3d 525, 2014 WL 1395670, No. 13-1816 (Apr. 11, 2014), is nevertheless instructive. Judge Chagares, for the Court, addressed a prosecution under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (" CFAA" ), 18 U.S.C. § 1030, where the defendant claimed that venue was unconstitutionally improper in the face of the Government's contention that about 4,500 of the email addresses defendant unlawfully obtained " belonged to New Jersey residents, thereby satisfying the 'locus of the effect[s]' consideration." [WL] at *7 (referring to the Second Circuit's approach in United States v. Reed, 773 F.2d 477, 481 (2d Cir. 1985)). The Court held that the CFAA prosecution should not have proceeded in New Jersey notwithstanding the 4,500 New Jersey victims.
On Doe's theory, our Court of Appeals's analysis in Auernheimer would make no sense. Specifically, the contention she presses for " minimum contacts" purposes would apply equally to the venue contentions
Page 596
the Government made in Auernheimer. Thus, while not constituting a square holding as to the issue the three defendants raise here, it seems to us that we cannot ignore Auernheimer's teaching where, as here, criminal and civil claims intersect.
C. Application
1. Joachim
Defendant Joachim pled guilty to receiving or distributing visual depictions of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct under 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2). Joachim asserts that we do not have personal jurisdiction over him either under a theory of general jurisdiction or specific jurisdiction. MTD at 5. He was not in Pennsylvania when process was served or domiciled here then and he has not consented to service. Id. He contends that his actions do not meet the " effects" test because Doe does not allege that he expressly aimed his receipt or distribution of child-porn images at Pennsylvania. Id. at 7.
In support of her response, Doe states that Joachim has " sufficient minimum contacts with Pennsylvania because he intentionally conspired to solicit, receive, and trade images created in Pennsylvania, all of which depict the abuse of [Doe], a Pennsylvania resident, by another Pennsylvania resident and co-conspirator." Resp. at 8. She contends that, because the images of her abuse are illegal, Joachim could only obtain them " by actively seeking them out and by conspiring" to share and distribute them among like-minded others " while operating under an agreement to protect each other's anonymity by communicating with each other remotely under fictitious usernames." Id. at 11-12.
In addition to the allegations in her complaint, Doe states that she was a Pennsylvania resident from 1998 -- when Mancuso adopted her -- to December of 2004 -- when she was taken to Georgia by her adoptive mother for two-and-a-half years. Decl. at ¶ ¶ 1, 4, 5. She is currently a Pennsylvania resident. Id. at ¶ 5. She also includes Joachim's Judgment and
Probation/Commitment Order and the factual basis of his plea. Resp. Ex. 2 and 3. According to the factual basis for Joachim's plea, the Government stood ready to prove that on May 26, 2010 and July 6, 2010, FBI agents executed warrants to search Joachim's home computers. Resp. Ex. 3 at 2. Further, the Government had evidence that Joachim " accessed numerous websites that contained, and offered for download, child pornography, and that he knowingly received and possessed images of child pornography." Id. The images and videos included children ranging from six or eight months to prepubescent children, and forensic tests established at least some were of real, identifiable children. Id. at 3.
Doe urges that we find personal jurisdiction because she alleges a substantial nexus with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in that Joachim downloaded images created in Pennsylvania by a Pennsylvania resident defendant (Mancuso), depicting abuse of a Pennsylvania resident, and those images were placed into Internet circulation by the Pennsylvania defendant. Resp. at 25. She argues we may apply the Zippo sliding scale because " these illegal online marketplaces typically required that a would-be user prove himself by uploading and sharing images of child sexual abuse." Id. at 17, FAC ¶ 10. She also argues that we have personal jurisdiction through the Calder " effects" test because injury to a child in her forum state is the foreseeable result of child-porn distribution and possession. Id. at 21.[6] Further,
Page 597
she contends that Joachim (who was indicted in August of 2010 for images received around May of 2010), knew or should have known that the images he possessed were made in Pennsylvania because defendant Mancuso was arrested in 2003 and Doe appeared on Oprah Winfrey's television program in January of 2006 and testified before Congress in May of that year. Id. at 22. She states that Joachim's " attempt to evade jurisdiction. . . makes a mockery of the fundamental principles of fairness on which personal jurisdiction jurisprudence is based." Id. at 7.
We nevertheless cannot hold that we have personal jurisdiction over Joachim. Jurisdiction is proper when " the contacts proximately result from actions by the defendant himself that create a 'substantial connection' with the forum state," not from attenuated contacts or the unilateral activity of someone else. Burger King, 471 U.S. at 475 (emphasis in original). Despite Doe's contention that Joachim knew or should have known he was inflicting harm on a Pennsylvania resident, it is well-established that " foreseeability of causing injury in another [s]tate . . . is not a 'sufficient benchmark' for exercising personal jurisdiction." Id. at 474 (emphasis in original) (citing World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286, 295, 100 S.Ct. 559, 62 L.Ed.2d 490 (1980)). There is simply no evidence of any contact between Joachim and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania under any accepted test.
Notably absent from Doe's allegations and the additional materials before us is any indication that Joachim accessed child-porn sites in Pennsylvania or exchanged child-porn with anyone in the Commonwealth -- in short, that he purposely availed himself of this forum under the traditional Hanson test. And although Joachim's actions unquestionably had an impact upon Doe in Pennsylvania -- where she continues to feel the brunt of the harm he inflicted -- there is no indication that Joachim expressly aimed any action toward the Commonwealth -- no emails, no image distribution, nothing. Doe has thus failed to show specific activity that can be fairly construed as showing that Joachim expressly aimed tortious conduct at this forum, as the Calder effects test requires.
Likewise, the Zippo sliding scale requires some evidence of commercial interactivity with the forum state as where the Zippo defendants solicited subscribers and entered into contracts to furnish services to Pennsylvania customers. Zippo, 952 F.Supp. at 1126. Even accepting as true Doe's allegations that Joachim and other consumers of child-porn entered into quasi-commercial exchanges for mutual benefit, any links from Joachim in Louisiana back to Pennsylvania through Mancuso are at best conjectural. Nor does Doe allege shared use of a specific Internet site. There is no evidence as to exactly when Joachim accessed Doe's image before his 2010 arrest, but that time had to be distant from Mancuso's actions in view of Mancuso's arrest seven years earlier.
Finally, while we entertain no doubt about Doe's assertion that users of child-porn shield each other and act covertly, Doe does not allege any facts with sufficient
Page 598
particularity for us to find that Joachim, in Metairie, Louisiana, conspired in any way with Mancuso in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
2. Finkelstein
Defendant Finkelstein pled guilty to possession of child pornography in 2007 under 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B). His motion to dismiss is identically worded to Joachim's and asserts that we do not have personal jurisdiction over him either under a theory of general jurisdiction or specific jurisdiction. MTD at 5. He was not in Pennsylvania when process was served or domiciled here then and he has not consented to service. Id. He contends that his actions do not meet the " effects" test because Doe does not allege that he expressly aimed his receipt or distribution of child-porn images at Pennsylvania. Id. at 7.
As she did with Joachim, Doe responds that Finkelstein has " sufficient minimum contacts with Pennsylvania because he intentionally conspired to solicit, receive, and trade images created in Pennsylvania, all of which depict the abuse of [Doe], a Pennsylvania resident, by another Pennsylvania resident and co-conspirator." Resp. at 8. She repeats her contention that, because the images of her abuse are illegal, Finkelstein could not have obtained the images found on his computer except by seeking them out and becoming trusted by someone who illegally possessed them. Id. at 13. " [B]ecause all of the images depicting [Doe's] abuse . . . originated with Mancuso, a Pennsylvania resident, [d]efendant Finkelstein could not have obtained them without contacting, and becoming trusted by, that Pennsylvania resident or one of his co-conspirators who possessed the images." Id.; FAC ¶ ¶ 11-13.
In addition to the allegations in her complaint and her Declaration, Doe includes the factual basis for Finkelstein's plea and the transcript of his 2008 sentencing. Resp. Ex. 3 and 4. Had Finkelstein gone to trial the Government would have shown that the FBI searched his New Orleans residence and law office on May 14, 2007 pursuant to search warrants based on probable cause. Resp. Ex. 3 at 1. Agents would have testified that they recovered computers, DVDs and CDs at both locations. Id. at 2. The Government would have established that Finkelstein searched for, downloaded and saved more than 600 child-porn images and videos.[7] Id. Finkelstein told the agents that he subscribed to Internet child pornography Web sites on three occasions, most recently in April of 2007.[8] Id. At the sentencing hearing, the Government's attorney described Finkelstein as a " purchaser, downloader, and collector of images of children being sexually victimized." Ex. 4 at 8.
Doe urges that we find personal jurisdiction over Finkelstein because he established minimum contacts with Pennsylvania when he " interacted with an anonymous, geographically dispersed online community for the purpose of trading child pornography and solicited, received, and downloaded illegal and privacy-invading images of" Doe. Resp. at 19. She argues we may apply the Zippo sliding scale because Finkelstein's online activities were " highly interactive and commercial in nature." Id. at 18. She also contends that we have personal jurisdiction through the Calder " effects"
Page 599
test because injury to a child in her forum state is the foreseeable result of child-porn distribution and possession. Id. at 21-22. Further, she contends that Finkelstein (who was arrested in 2007 and sentenced in 2008) knew or should have known that the images he possessed were made in Pennsylvania because defendant Mancuso was arrested in 2003 and Doe appeared on Oprah in January of 2006 and testified before Congress in May of 2006. Id. at 23. " [I]t seems quite likely that members of these communities would have discussed the fact that [d]efendant Mancuso . . . had been arrested." Id. at 24.
As with Joachim, Doe alleges a substantial nexus between Finkelstein and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania because Finkelstein downloaded illegal images Mancuso created in Pennsylvania, depicting abuse of a Pennsylvania resident, and Mancuso necessarily placed those images into Internet circulation in Pennsylvania. Id. at 26.[9]
We decline to find personal jurisdiction over Finkelstein because there is no evidence of any contact between Finkelstein and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania under any accepted test. Doe does not claim that Finkelstein purposely availed himself of this forum by accessing child-porn sites in Pennsylvania or exchanged child-porn with anyone in the Commonwealth. Nor is there any evidence that Finkelstein expressly aimed any action toward the Commonwealth.
As for the Zippo sliding scale, Doe contends that Finkelstein's online searches were commercial and interactive, but the evidence before us is that Finkelstein was a consumer, not a purveyor. Certainly there are no allegations of contracts with Pennsylvania residents.
See Zippo, 952 F.Supp. at 1126. Zippo counsels that users of interactive Web sites who exchange information occupy a " middle ground" where " the exercise of jurisdiction is determined by examining the level of interactivity and commercial nature of the exchange of information that occurs on the Web site." Id. at 1124. Nothing in Finkelstein's sentencing hearing or contained in the factual basis of his plea suggests he interacted online except as a viewer of child-porn. Accepting as true Doe's allegations that Finkelstein entered into quasi-commercial exchanges with other child-porn collectors for their mutual benefit, any links to Pennsylvania resident Mancuso are as fortuitous here as in Joachim's case. Doe does not allege shared use of a specific Internet site. There is no evidence when Finkelstein accessed Doe's image before his arrest, but once again the facts before us suggest it was years after Mancuso's 2003 arrest.
Finally, while we do not quibble with Doe's assertion that users of child-porn shield each other and act covertly, she does not allege any facts with sufficient particularity for us to find that Finkelstein in New Orleans, Louisiana, conspired in any way with Mancuso in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
3. Lindauer
Defendant Lindauer pled guilty in 2010 to one count of transporting child pornography and one count of possession of child pornography. 18 U.S.C. § § 2252A(a)(1), (b)(1) and (a)(5)(B). His motion to dismiss is cognate with the others. Lindauer asserts that we do not have personal jurisdiction over him either under a theory of general jurisdiction or specific jurisdiction.
Page 600
MTD at 5. He was not in Pennsylvania when process was served or domiciled in Pennsylvania and he has not consented to service. Id. He contends that his actions do not meet the " effects" test because Doe does not allege that he expressly aimed his receipt or distribution of child-porn images at Pennsylvania. Id. at 7.
Doe alleges in her response that Lindauer used a particular type of peer-to-peer file-sharing software (" P2P" ) in an effort to conceal his activities. Resp. at 5. She proffers the affidavit in support of Lindauer's arrest warrant, which states that FBI agents downloaded child-porn images from a P2P user later identified as Lindauer during two sessions on December 22, 2009 and January 21, 2010. Id. Ex. 2 at 1. When the agents executed search warrants at Lindauer's Charlottesville, Virginia residence and business, he admitted during an interview that he had " viewed child pornography over the past 10 years" which he accessed through the Internet. Id. at 3.
Doe urges that we find personal jurisdiction over Lindauer for the identical reasons she cited about the other two defendants. She contends that Lindauer had " sufficient minimum contacts with Pennsylvania because he intentionally conspired to solicit, receive, and trade images in Pennsylvania, all of which depict [Doe's] abuse." Resp. at 9. She repeats her view that because those images are illegal, Lindauer could not have obtained them " except by seeking them out[] and becoming trusted by someone who illegally possessed them. And because [they] originated with Mancuso, a Pennsylvania resident, [d]efendant Lindauer could not have obtained them without contacting, and becoming trusted by, that Pennsylvania resident or one of his co-conspirators who possessed the images." Id. at 13. She urges application of the Zippo test because Lindauer established minimum contacts with Pennsylvania when he " interacted with an anonymous, geographically dispersed online community for the purpose of trading child pornography and solicited, received, and downloaded illegal and privacy-invading images of" Doe, id. at 20, and this illegal online marketplace was essentially commercial in nature. Id. at 18.
She also argues that we have personal jurisdiction through the Calder " effects" test because she alleges " a substantial nexus with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania" since the images were created in Pennsylvania by a Pennsylvania resident, depicting the abuse of a Pennsylvania-based plaintiff, and were originally placed on the Internet by that Pennsylvania resident. Id. at 26. " [G]iven that all images of [Doe] originated in Pennsylvania. . . Lindauer could not have obtained [them] without coming into contact with and becoming trusted by the Pennsylvania resident who placed the images on the Internet or one of his co-conspirators."
We have no personal jurisdiction over Lindauer. Again, there is no evidence of contacts between Lindauer and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania under any accepted test for contacts with the forum. Doe does not allege that Lindauer purposely availed himself of this forum by accessing child-porn sites in Pennsylvania. She can point to no specific activity through which he expressly aimed any action toward this Commonwealth.
As for the Zippo sliding scale, it is unclear how it applied to a peer-to-peer network, which is a decentralized and distributed communications architecture that requires a user to download file-sharing
Page 601
software in order to participate. Courts that have applied the Zippo standard to peer-to-peer file-sharing networks have done so when the users on such a network are within the forum state. See, e.g., Northbrook Digital, LLC v. Vendio Services, Inc., 625 F.Supp.2d 728, 751-52 (D. Minn. 2008) (finding the Zippo standard applies to the level of interactivity required when in-forum users download file-sharing software); see also Virgin Records America, Inc. v. Does 1-35, 2006 WL 1028956 at *4 (D.D.C. Apr. 18, 2006). But that is not the case here. Further, there are no specific allegations that Lindauer's image exchanges concerning Doe (even assuming the barter approached the level of commercial activity) ever glanced into the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Turning to co-conspirator jurisdiction, while it is possible that Lindauer and Mancuso had dealings in some period before Mancuso's 2003 arrest, that conjecture alone cannot create firm grounds for co-conspirator jurisdiction. Doe has not alleged any facts with sufficient particularity for us to find that Lindauer, in Charlottesville, Virginia, conspired with Mancuso or anyone else in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
D. Jurisdictional Discovery
Doe also requests that she be permitted to conduct jurisdictional discovery.
We may permit jurisdictional discovery under certain circumstances and at our discretion. In general, jurisdictional discovery relates to corporate defendants and arises from an inquiry as to whether they are " doing business" in the state. Massachusetts School of Law at Andover, Inc. v. American Bar Ass'n, 107 F.3d 1026, 1042 (3d Cir. 1997). For example, in Toys " R" Us our Court of Appeals found that the district court erred in denying plaintiff's request for jurisdictional discovery because the record before the lower court contained sufficient specific allegations and admissions of infringement to support the request for jurisdictional discovery into the extent to which those activities were aimed toward the forum, " an essential element of the personal jurisdiction calculus." Toys " R" Us, 318 F.3d at 457.
When the defendant is a natural person, the presumption in favor of discovery necessarily weakens. Massachusetts School of Law, 107 F.3d at 1042 (citing Shaw v. Boyd, 658 F.Supp. 89, 90 n. 1 (E.D.Pa.1987) (Newcomer, J.)). But in any case, " [i]f the plaintiff presents factual allegations that suggest 'with reasonable particularity' the possible existence of the requisite 'contacts between [the party] and the forum state,' the plaintiff's right to conduct jurisdictional discovery should be sustained."
Toys " R" Us, 318 F.3d at 456 (modification in original) (quoting Mellon Bank (East) PSFS, Nat. Ass'n v. Farino, 960 F.2d 1217, 1223 (3d Cir. 1992). Where the plaintiff makes " this required threshold showing, courts within this Circuit have sustained the right to conduct discovery before the district court dismisses for lack of personal jurisdiction." Id. at 456.
But Doe here has not presented factual allegations with such particularity with respect to these three defendants' purported contacts with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Indeed, as to all three defendants, it is hard to imagine any germane discovery that would enlighten us more than their admissions to the Government's respective recitations of the factual basis for their guilty pleas. She has not made the requisite threshold showing to sustain her right to conduct jurisdictional discovery over these three individuals.
Page 602
III. Conclusion
After a careful canvass of the record, we will grant defendants Joachim, Finkelstein and Lindauer's motions to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) and deny Doe's request for jurisdictional discovery.
AND NOW, this 25th day of April, 2014, upon consideration of defendants Joachim, Finkelstein and Lindauer's motions to dismiss under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(2) (docket entries ## 71, 72 and 73), and plaintiff Doe's response in opposition thereto and seeking jurisdictional discovery, and for the reasons articulated in the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Clerk of Court shall RESTORE this action to the Court's Active Docket;
2. Joachim's motion to dismiss is GRANTED;
3. Finkelstein's motion to dismiss is GRANTED;
4. Lindauer's motion to dismiss is GRANTED;
5. Doe's motion for jurisdictional discovery is DENIED; and
6. Defendants Joachim, Finkelstein and Lindauer are DISMISSED as defendants in this action.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
Ukraine wants sanctions on those involved in abduction of pilot
Ukraine is pressing the E.U. to impose sanctions on people involved in the abduction of pilot Nadiya Savchenko. Kyiv has passed to Brussels a list of 46 names, among them Russian prosecutors and investigators.
Savchenko is on trial in Russia for alleged involvement in the murder of two Russian journalists. Ukraine calls the proceedings a 'brutal violation of human rights.' The topic was at the top of the agenda for Ukrainian President Poroshenko as he met EU leaders in Brussels.
Watch also Poroshenko: Ukraine and the EU cannot keep silent on 'brutal violation of human rights'
A visa-free regime for Ukrainians was also discussed as was the prolongation of existing sanctions on Russia. French president Hollande and German Chancellor Merkel say the punitive measures will remain in place until Moscow fulfills its part of a peace deal aimed at ending fighting in eastern Ukraine. The Kremlin has been supporting separatist forces in the region for two years.
Watch also Diplomats from G7 call on Russia to release Ukraine's Savchenko

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Shoei RF 1200 Motorcycle Helmets
Read More About Shoei RF 1200 Helmets
Shoei RF 1200 Helmets are one of the best motorcycle helmets Shoei makes. Just under the X-1400 is the RF 1200 helmet. This helmet has been crafted from some of the best helmet materials, and built in one of the best helmet facilities in the world. Using over 55 years of helmet building experience, Shoei has created the all new and improved RF 1200 helmet. All Shoei Helmets come with a 5 year warranty, to reassure you of any questions or doubts you may have, but Shoei give you no reason to have those doubts.
Popular features of the Shoei RF 1200
Four shell sizes: Many motorcycle helmets will have 2 -3 shell sizes, but Shoei does not match that standard with the RF 1200 helmet. They make four different shell sizes to make sure the helmet can be as light weight, proportionate to the riders body, and overall a better fit.
Multi-Ply Matrix AIM Shell: Some of the motorcycles helmets most important materials are at the outside of the helmet. The RF 1200 first layer is a fiberglass and organic fibers combination creating incredible strength and remaining light weight.
E.Q.R.S : Shoei has incorporated the emergency check pads removal system taken from the VFX-W and X-1200 helmets, and implemented them into the RF 1200. This system allows emergency personnel to easily remove the cheek pads in case of an emergency.
3D Max-Dry II System: The RF 1200 interior was created to offer a customized and secure fit for the motorcycle rider. The 3D center pads are matched to fit the contours of the riders head. The 3D check pads are also available in multiple thickness to get that customized fit.
Shoei RF 1200 Helmet Sizing Chart


text:
Becker's ASC Review: What Does the ICD-10 Delay Mean for ASCs?
- By admin aapc
- In AAPC In The News
- April 23, 2012
- No Comments
The new proposed ICD-10 date allows many health care professionals a little breathing room for their ICD-10 implementation. AAPC ICD-10 director, Rhonda Buckholtz, CPC, CPMA, CPC-I, CGSC, COBGC, CPEDC, CENTC was recently highlighted in a Becker's ASC Review article discussing the changes and how they relate to ASC.
"Take a look at existing physician documentation and start working with them on diagnosis codes and conditions to get them ready," she says. "It takes a documentation focus and looks at clinical conditions as they relate to diagnosis codes, not just from a coding standpoint."
The article highlights five steps surgery centers can do to prepare for ICD-10 today.
Read the full article here.
Latest posts by admin aapc (see all)
- Why AAPC is Passionate About Their Codebooks - September 2, 2016
- AAPC Launches Healthicity - October 6, 2015
- OCT – Message from the AAPCCA Chair - September 30, 2015


text:
Sweet Scrub
A whipped exfoliating scrub containing shea butter, sea salt, and a soap blend makes a formula that rids your body of dead skin cells while softening and moisturizing.
Easy Opening
A wooden-handled oyster knife makes shucking for your next dinner party a breeze—it's the perfect gift for the seafood lover!
Table Matters
Talk about a fun stocking stuffer—patterned napkins in cheery hues are the perfect way to brighten up a tablescape.
- Buy it: Anthroplogie Caicos Napkin, $8
Full of Flavor
This sea salt is blended with fresh rosemary, making it the perfect way to season potatoes, poultry, pasta, and salads.
- Buy it: Hepp's Rosemary Salt, $14
Sunny Story
Mirrored lenses in olive green contrast nicely against bubblegum pink frames. Reach for them the next time you're headed to the shore.
Squeaky Clean
With a scent of lavender and sea salt, this soap (that contains shea butter and coconut oil) is hand-crafted in small batches, making it a rare find.
- Buy it: Sea Salt & Lavender Soap, $10
Sweet Find
The perfect wallet for vacation, this cute number immediately makes us feel happy, and is sure to do the same for the lucky receiver.
Lip Service
Made with argan and marula oils, this tinted lip balm is the best solution when you need a quick dose of color of moisture.
- Buy it: Albeit Nourishing Lip Balm, $12
Strong Hold
They look pretty in your hair or sitting on your wrist, but these stretchy wonders are a must for every girl's beach bag.
- Buy it: Yoga Ponytail Holder Set, $8
Coastal Cheers
For the downtown dweller, look to these rock glasses featuring city maps. They make a smart addition to any bar.
- Buy it: City Map Glass, $14
Cozy Chic
This pretty color block scarf is a cozy sidekick for winter walks on the beach.
- Buy it: H&M Color-block Scarf, $13
Pineapples, Please!
A cotton tea towel gets a glam makeover thanks to a metallic pineapple design.
- Buy it: H&M Tea Towel, $6
Hat Trick
A classic baseball cap in a hunter green hue is the perfect companion for a morning run by the harbor.
- Buy it: BP. Solid Baseball Cap, $15
Painted Lady
Every stocking needs a fun nail polish, and this shimmery neutral is the perfect shade for every holiday gathering this season.
- Buy it: H&M Nail Polish, $6
Shine a Light
Modern tea light holders make the perfect hostess gift for your next holiday party, and the brass finish goes with almost any tablescape.
- Buy it: H&M Metal Tea Light Holder, $7
Tag, You're It
This adorable leather tag boasts a gold palm tree and is the cutest way to personalize your carry-on or luggage.
Top It Off
This sweet bottle stopper makes for the perfect hostess happy when paired with a bottle of wine. Grab one for your next holiday party!
- Buy it: H&M Bottle Stopper, $5
Stirred Up
Glass swizzle sticks make a colorful addition to any bar and make a great gift for the aspiring bartender.
We love the warm color and woven texture of this classic woven tray.
- Buy it: Nate Berkus Letter Tray, $10


text:
This post is constantly being updated with the latest news and banking information available. Recently updated in October 2016.
As a self-employed freelancer, most of my financial business is done online or with mobile apps. But choosing the best business checking account can be daunting. Plus, you want to make sure you don't spend extra money on fees.
I've seen the benefits of technology and how going digital makes me more productive and streamlines my life. Oddly enough though, many consumers and small business owners (about half) still bank at traditional banks! It's time you embrace technology and the benefits it offers, by finding the best business checking account.
Click the link to jump to a particular section.
1. Capital One 360
2. EverBank Business
3. Ally Bank
4. PayPal Business
5. Discover Bank
6. Chase Business
7. TD Bank BusinessDirect
Or click here to get the free checking account comparison checklist!
Some business owners I've spoken to don't even have separate accounts for their business and personal transactions. Eek! Separating out your business and personal income, expenses, and other financial records is very important. Here's what I mean.
Open separate business & personal accounts
If you do nothing else for your business opening a separate business checking account is a must! The main reason is because it will be a whole lot less of a headache for you. By separating your business transactions you create a line between professional and personal.
This is especially handy come tax time when you create year-end reports for your bookkeeper or CPA. And if you're ever audited, you can prove your business is legit much more effectively. Besides, you wouldn't want the IRS (or your CPA) poking through your personal income and expenses in order to locate your business transactions. Would you?
You can also customize the name on your account, and your checks, so you appear more credible to other contractors and freelancers you pay. Even if your business isn't a LLC yet, you can still apply for a DBA (Doing Business As certificate) and different Tax ID number.
Lastly, another advantage is that you can link your bookkeeping software to your dedicated business account, which makes it super easy to print out monthly and yearly reports. You won't have the hassle of excluding personal transactions from the business ones while categorizing them.
For personal accounts and transactions I use Mint.com track all of the incoming and outgoing expenses, but for my Chase business checking account I use GoDaddy Bookkeeping to track the different types of income sources (PayPal, direct deposits, checks) and to calculate quarterly taxes.
For the simplicity of all these factors and that it casts a more professional light on your business, it's vital you open a business checking account.
Keep in mind that this is in addition to the business credit card that you may also have. Credit cards are a great way to generate start-up capital, provided that you use them properly. Look for a card that doesn't cost anything in annual fees, allows you to implement spending limits, and that provides you with protection should your card fall into the wrong hands.
Checking accounts for NON-LLC freelancers
So what are the best accounts for freelancers and business owners? I've done the research and tested the top business checking account picks.
Please note; you don't necessarily need to open a "business" checking account if you're a sole-proprietor. In the eyes of the IRS, a sole-proprietor isn't a legal business entity like an LLC or INC business is, so you can save money by using a personal account for business purposes.
The main reason for this is because my business is still small enough so it doesn't make a huge amount of income every month. This also allows me to avoid the costly monthly fee that's usually associated with a business account.
1. Capital One 360
While this bank used to be called ING Direct, I've had no issues with the Capital One takeover and still enjoy this bank as my account. Capital One 360 accounts come with no minimums, no fees, and free checks, so it's a no brainer for me and my business.
A Capital One 360 account provides customers with a free MasterCard debit card, access to 38,000 fee-free Allpoint ATMs and 2,000 fee-free Capital One ATMs, as well as free mobile check deposits.
These features are super useful since a lot of my business is done virtually and on-the-go and since Capital One Banks are pretty popular (at least in the South) I can find an ATM whenever I travel.
Interest rates for checking accounts are generally low, but at least a Capital One 360 account will help you grow your cash a little bit since they offer some of the better rates compared to a brick-and-mortar bank.
One of the things that I like most about Capital One 360 is the fact that you can have multiple checking and savings accounts — and they now have separate business savings accounts that have zero fees and offer 0.40% interest. This is very convenient for setting aside funds for income taxes throughout the year, money for conferences and business events, as well as a business emergency fund.
Additionally you can set up goals for your various accounts and track your progress throughout the year. This is something I love doing so I know where I'm with my revenue for the year!
2. EverBank Business
EverBank is an up-and-coming online bank (similar to Ally) and offers many different kinds of business bank accounts depending on your needs, but I'm only going to focus on these two main ones.
- Small Business Checking – This account is perfect for sole-proprietors (it's not available to LLC or corporations) and comes with no monthly fee. Plus, you'll earn a small interest for your daily checking account balance. You need $1,500 to open the account.
- Business Checking – This account is great if you're an LLC with a higher monthly balance and want more features. The $14.95 monthly fee is waived if you keep a balance of more than $5,000 every month. Plus, the first 200 transactions are waived. You need $1,500 to open this account as well.
3. Ally Bank
UPDATE: Ally Bank was originally listed as a great bank but after doing some research, and receiving comments from other freelancers, it's no longer a recommended bank for freelancers.
They are however great if you're using a checking account for your household funds or other personal needs. So if you're simply looking to keep personal funds separate, they require no minimum balance, no ATM fees and no monthly maintenance fees.
Ally Bank offers customers interest-bearing on personal checking accounts. They also offer CDs, IRAs, and savings accounts. Plus, their customer service is fabulous! I've even met some of the team at the Financial Blogger's Conference a few years back.
4. PayPal Business account
Another great option is to avoid checking accounts all together and just use a Premier or Business PayPal account. If you use a service like FreshBooks, you can choose PayPal as one of your payment options for freelance clients, or even coaching services, and then use the funds in the account just as you would a regular bank account.
Upon request PayPal will issue a debit card that's attached to your PayPal balance, and you may even qualify for a PayPal Smart Connect line of credit which can come in handy when you need to pay bills for your business.
The balance in your PayPal account also earns a small amount of interest similar to a Money Market business checking account would at a traditional bank. And the best part about using a PayPal account as a substitute bank for your freelance business is that it's completely free.
You can also make deposits to your PayPal account if you receive checks from clients. Just take a picture of the check with PayPal's mobile app on your Android or iPhone, and the funds will be deposited within 2-3 business days.
With your PayPal account you can print off profit and loss reports, earnings reports, pay bills, and transfer funds to other bank accounts. Basically anything you can do with a regular bank account, you can do with a PayPal business account — and more.
5. Discover Bank
You may not realize that Discover Bank isn't just for using credit cards to earn cash back, or balance transfers to get out of debt faster. They actually offer some pretty great checking accounts and banking options for individuals (see my point above about bank accounts for non-LLC businesses).
They have both regular checking accounts and money market accounts which is great to earn a bit of interest on your money. They also offer cash back with all their products — without using credit cards and going into debt. Yep, you can use your Discover Bank debit card to earn $0.10 on every purchase you make.
That can really add up when you're making purchases for your business, like flights, meals, books and office supplies. As small business owners we need all the extra cash back we can earn to re-invest into our businesses.
Their customer service is also outstanding and I've never had any issues with security. Their mobile app allows you to check your balance, make transfers and even deposit checks with one click.
They also have some of the best interest rates available with a money market account and you can get unlimited free checks while you have an account.
Checking accounts for an LLC business
What if your business is not a sole-proprietor but an actually LLC or INC entity? Here are the best checking accounts for your LLC small business.
5. Chase Business checking
Chase offers 3 different tiers of business checking accounts depending on your needs.
- Chase Total Business Checking. This is the business account I currently use since I filed for a DBA and Tax ID number here in Texas. It comes with a $10 monthly account fee, which is waived if you keep a regular balance of $1,500 or more each month. It allows for international wire transfers, up to 200 transactions and $7,500 worth of deposits, for no additional fees.
- Chase Performance Business Checking. This is the next level up in checking accounts and offers the same features as the Total Business Checking except it allows you to have 350 transactions and up to $20,000 in deposits for no additional fee. The $20 monthly fee is waived if you keep a minimum balance of $50,000 or more.
- Chase Platinum Business Checking. This is the most robust option of all three, and is likely for large businesses and corporations. It has a $95 monthly account fee that's waived if you keep a qualifying balance of $100,000 or more. It provides up to 500 transactions and $25,000 in deposits each month, with no additional fees.
Generally you have to find a local branch to open your business checking account, but that isn't too difficult as they have quite a few branches all over the U.S. and the world. It's how Starbucks is for coffee — there's usually one on every corner.
The online site and mobile app make it extremely easy to keep track of your balance, income, and expenses. Like I said, there are ATMs everywhere, and pretty much all online software, invoicing programs, and bookkeeping software will link to Chase because it's so popular.
7. TD Bank BusinessDirect
For another solid business account option, TD Bank BusinessDirect is a great choice! They offer free bill pay, full compatibility with Quicken and QuickBooks and a free business Visa card with special discounts for cardholders.
Since it's owned by the same company that does TD Ameritrade, you can access your business finances along with your investments.
TD Bank BusinessDirect provides you with peace of mind with enhanced account security and real time transaction information. It also has the benefit of brick-and-mortar banks if you aren't quite ready for the virtual-only business yet.
Currently, TD Bank does not offer interest on its checking accounts, with the exception of its Business Interest Checking Plus Account, for which it offers 0.05%. You should know that they only offer checking accounts in certain states with the U.S. so this might not be the best option for your business.
How to choose the best bank for your business
Confused yet? There are lots of different factors that go into choosing the best checking account as a freelancer. You want to make sure it's simple and easy to access your funds, especially if you're a location independent freelancer who travels a lot (like I am).
Secondly, you don't want to pay a lot of monthly account maintenance fees since your business is small and may not have large amounts of money coming and going.
In order to determine the best checking account for your freelance business, I've created a handy checklist comparison. And it's completely free!
What bank account do you use as a freelancer business owner? Leave a comment below sharing your experience.


text:
Japan's Modern Prophet Paperback
Uchimura Kanzo, 1861-1930
by John F. Howes;
In Stock - Usually dispatched within 24 hours
Free UK delivery when you spend £10 or more
Offer price: £39.95 Free Delivery
Price and PurchaseOffer price: £39.95 Free UK Delivery Go to Basket
If you're buying for a church, school or business, why not Buy Now Pay Later?Find Out More
Japan's Modern Prophet
Full Product Description
This is the spiritual biography of one of Japan's foremost thinkers, Uchimura Kanzo, who died in 1930 and whose ideas influenced contemporary historians, political scientists, and international religious followers. Known as the originator and proponent of a particularly "Japanese" form of Christianity known as mukyokai, Kanzo attempted to purge the Protestantism that was flowing into Japan from the accretions to the biblical faith that had developed after several centuries of Western history. In his lifetime, Kanzo was a well-known figure, becoming famous in Europe. His major English-language works were translated into numerous languages. Best known among these works, "How I Became a Christian" attracted much criticism and attention. After his death, however, Uchimura's reputation grew significantly. His Christian followers produced an enormous canon of literature, influencing the cosmopolitan intellectual milieu far beyond that of any other Japanese Christian thinker. Through the prism of this exceptional man's life, Howes charts what it meant to live in Japan during the rise of Christianity. It was also a time of increasing modernization.During Uchimura's life, Japan developed into a leading world power, and one year after his death its military propelled its people into a disastrous war.
Japan's Modern Prophet by John F. Howes was published by University of British Columbia Press in January 2006. The ISBN for Japan's Modern Prophet is 9780774811460.
Reviews of Japan's Modern Prophet
Customer reviews and testimonials Write a review
Product Q&A
Got a question? No problem! Just click here to ask us about Japan's Modern Prophet.
Details for Japan's Modern Prophet
|Page last updated
|19th November 2016
|Author / Artist
|John F. Howes
|Book Format
|University of British Columbia Press (January 2006)
|New edition
|Number of Pages
|34 mm
|229 mm
|152 mm
|Product Code


text:
Patagonia - Bivy Down Vest - Men's (Fall 2015)
The Patagonia Bivy Down Vest is a classic, durable outdoor staple made of bluesign® approved, quilted nylon canvas with a DWR (durable water repellent) finish and insulated with humanely-sourced 100% Traceable Down. The two side-entry handwarmer pockets are lined with brushed polyester, and an internal zippered chest pocket keeps your essentials secure. Full-length zipper has a snap-closure storm flap; stand-up collar and drop-tail hem keep the wind and cold at bay. Hip length.
Technical specifications & features
|609 g (21.5 oz)
|Made in
|Mfg Sku/Part Number
|Shell: 5.5-oz 100% nylon canvas with a DWR (durable water repellent) finish
Yoke: 4.2-oz 100% nylon canvas with a DWR finish
Lining: 2-oz 100% polyester plain weave
|Insulation Type
|100% Traceable Down (600-fill-power duck down)
|Hood Type
|No Hood
|Other Features
|• Made of bluesign® approved 100% nylon canvas with a DWR (durable water repellent) finish on body and yoke
• Insulated with 100% Traceable Down (600-fill-power duck down that can be traced back to birds that were never force-fed, never live-plucked)
• Full-length center-front zipper and external storm flap secured with exposed snap closure
• Two insulated, side-entry handwarmer pockets on lower torso; internal zip chest pocket to keep your essentials secure
• Drop-tail hem
• Hip length
• Shell and yoke fabrics are bluesign® approved
Questions & Answers
No questions yet. Be the first to ask the question!
Related Blog Posts
- Features
- Product Reviews
- Questions & Answers


text:
Bought this to try a while ago and both cats love it but one will only eat any type pf pouch food of he has his crunchies sprinkled on top. Need to use them sparingly though in case we run out.
|Available flavours
|Felix Sensations Crunchies Meat
|Beef in Jelly, Chicken in Jelly, Rabbit in Jelly, Lamb in Jelly
|Multipack (7 x 100g) plus 1x Crunchy Crumbles Dry Topping
|Felix Sensations Crunchies Fish
|Salmon in Jelly, Tuna in Jelly, Pollack in Jelly, Sardine in Jelly
|Multipack (7 x 100g) plus 1x Crunchy Crumbles Dry Topping
Feeding guide for an average adult cat (1-7 years, 4kg)
In at least 2 separate meals. Dry topping pouch contains enough Crunchy Crumbles to top seven wet meals (1 tsp = 4g per wet pouch).
Serve at room temperature. Clean, fresh drinking water should always be available.
The adult maintenance averages are based on moderately active cats at normal environmental temperatures. Individual needs vary and feeding should be adjusted as required to maintain your cat at a lean, healthy body weight. For further information visit www.purina.co.uk
FELIX® – irresistible taste that provides 100% of your cat's daily needs!
Wouldn't you want to give your cat an irresistible meal every day that is full of healthy goodness?
All the FELIX® recipes in our range are made from high quality, delicious ingredients that all clever cats demand.
But, that's not all.
FELIX® recipes also contain all the proteins, vitamins and minerals a healthy cat needs.
To completely satisfy 100% of your cat's daily needs*.
*Please make sure you follow the feeding guidelines as outlined in the Feeding Guide.
Bought this to try a while ago and both cats love it but one will only eat any type pf pouch food of he has his crunchies sprinkled on top. Need to use them sparingly though in case we run out.
This is the only cat food that all five of my cats agree on. It's not just the meat, oh no, it's also the crunchies which when sprinkled over yucky tinned food, turns it into an amazing feast!
I have 5 cats, and 2 that aren't mine but keep coming over to mine, so I'm feeding 7 cats. They all love Felix products, they absolutely love them. My cat Felix loves the sensations crunchies
My cat is getting on in years now and very choosy but he loves this Sensations range particularly the Crunchies. They perk him up no end and the years roll away. Thankyou Felix !
I buy the fish selection because Tilly prefers them. She really likes the crunchy sprinkles in the box with the wet food. I wish they were available on their own too!
My cats always come running when they hear the crunchy bites and with the wet and dry combination it has the added bonus of helping to keep there teeth healthy.
I've been buying the Felix crunchies range for around 4 months now and my cat simply loves them! Perfect mix of wet and dry food if your cat is fussy like mine
I can no longer give them any Felix food without putting crunchie crumbles on top. If it's not there they walk at from the bowls and meiow until they get them.
we bought a box of the sensations crunchies range and our cat loved the crunchy topping, she has always been a fussy eater but her bowl was clean, thank you!!
I brought for my cat a few months ago and she loves it, but sadly she passed away so I but she was so very full up after eating this and wanted more!!!!!!!!!
We bought this food some time ago and the wife thought that they wouldnt like the crunchies. They love them and get excited when they know they are coming
My cats love all types of Felix but the one with crumbles is by far the favourite! One of my Maine coons won't start eating till I put the crumble on top!
We cannot run out of the crunchies in my house - almost every meal has crunchies added to it because my two LOVE them so much! Most favourite food ever!
My two cats only ever eat Felix, so we tried the sensations range and they love them! The little crunchies ad extra flavour and texture to the food.
I have three cats and all of them love biscuits and cat food so this is perfect for them! A bit of both. The crunchie crumbles also make great treats!
My cat adores these, I had to keep pushing him away so I can put all the sachet in his dish and add the sprinkles, he simply can't get enough!
Both our cats love this food. Ollie won't eat it if we've forgotten to add the crunchies and sometimes won't eat it unless we add even more!!
Thought I'd be ok trying this out on my three, but they wont eat the food with the crunchies which is odd as they like cat biscuits.
All of my cats love this product - Harry seems to find the Crunchies packet and can get it out of the box but won't share them!
My kitty loves all these flavours. But the crunchies on top makes it for her. She won't eat up until the crunchies are on top.
I always buy Felix as my cat, Felix, will only eat the crunchies. He sit's and waits for me to put them on before he will eat.
My cat has eaten this now since the first time it was on the shelf. Brought it to try and now she won't eat anything esle :)
my old cat loves a little crunch with her dinner, she normally has senior meals but likes the little crunch with these ones
Wen I have the box in my hand all 3 cats go mad and nudge me saying come on feed me. They can't get enough of the food. .
Brought for my 2 as something differant and boy did they like this ,liked all the flavours.and the crunchie bits on top.
My cat adores the crumbles range. He loves the sprinkles and it makes his mealtime a little more interesting for him.
Now a firm favourite with my usually fussy cat. Seems to really enjoy the flavours available - eats it all; no waste.
We have bought this product multiple times before and they love it every time. they love Felix so much. Thanks Felix!
100% quality food for cats. All 14 of our cat's love the variety and insist on having the crunchy fumbles each time.
Thought I'd buy this selection for a very picky cat and she seems to love the combination of textures.


text:
Korean Romantic Comedy Film titled "All About My Wife" tells Doo-hyun (Lee Sun-kyun), Jung-in (Lim Soo-jung), and Casanova Seong-ki (Ryu Seung-ryong) as the third main character. Doo-hyun and Jung-in has been married seven years, where their first meeting occurred while in Japan. All tasted very beautiful (if the standard really is, love is often depicted beautifully in the beginning, and end up bitter) but after realizing her husband was getting tired with his wife in the eyes of nature he was very talkative, filthy, and annoying. But obviously the wife is not just bad, he is still a beautiful woman, sexy, smart cooking and charming. Until one day Doo-hyun get different projects the state of his wife, and she asks Jung-in to remain in their homes, aka not need to catch up and accompany during mroyek still there. He made the decision that he feels free and regardless of quibbling wife.
Langganan: Poskan Komentar ( Atom )


text:
Gender: Girl
Meaning: Daughter of Jahnu
Origin: Gujarati, Hindi, Indian, Malayali, Marathi
Religion: Hindu
Jahnavi is a Hindu Girl name, meaning of the name is Daughter of Jahnu and origin of the name is Gujarati, Hindi, Indian, Malayali, Marathi. This name is mostly used in Hindu.
If you select the name Jahnavi for your baby, Congratulations! But if you don't like Jahnavi then please continue searching our site.
External References
Similar Names
No similar names found...


text:
The most comfortable and concealable holster available has a bulletproof construction and a design that won't give you away.
Purchase a Holster and get a Mini Flashlight for $5!
Must Order Mini Flashlight & Enter Promo Code: USBMIN5 at Checkout.
*Enter only one code per order
Sign up to receive emails from Beretta for special sales, new product developments, and select Beretta news.


text:
GERMANY: Metro "steps up" expansion after 2009 lull
German retail giant Metro Group has outlined plans to "step up" its international expansion in 2010 after a challenging 12 months for the business.
Get full access to all content, just $1 for 30 days
A Message From The Editor
just-food gives you the widest food market coverage.
Paid just-food members have unlimited access to all our exclusive content - including 16 years of archives.
I am so confident you will love complete access to our content that today I can offer you 30 days access for $1.
It's our best ever membership offer – just for you.
Dean Best, editor of just-food
Dean's offer to you
Risk-free, money-back guarantee
Most Popular
- Unilever 2016 investor day - the top takeaways
- Have food promotions reached tipping point?
- Quorn CEO sets out stall for 2017 - interview
- How Tyson's new CEO plans to grow the meat group
- Mondelez goes beyond certified cocoa - analysis
- Nestle unveils process to cut sugar by 40%
- Putin 'wants embargo to run as long as possible'
- Unilever sets new margin target with help from ZBB
- Unilever focuses on "value" of spreads arm
- McCormick to buy flavours business Enrico Giotti
Market research


text:
Please refer to JobSuchmaschine in your application
Join the Wingtra team and become part of this fast growing startup from ETH Zurich! With our convertible aerial robots, we aim for a positive impact on a global scale. The Wingtra 1 is a tool that improves search & rescue chains, inspects linear infrastructure, protects large wildlife areas and increases agricultural efficiency.
We want to bring this first convertible aerial robot to market. For that we are looking for intellectually curious leaders and dedicated team players who drive Wingtra forward. People at Wingtra are enthusiastic about what they do, learn fast from each other and demonstrate a high degree of empathy. Working with us, you will receive a competitive package composed of salary and phantom stocks.
Together with us, you are responsible to find the optimal solution for our first customers. In this exciting phase, you will be part of our sales team and responsible for:
• Communicating with the customers in all technical matters
• Identifying the customers' technical needs
• Finding solutions for the customers' problems to create added value
• Giving input to product development to iterate the drone workflow and operation
Joining the Wingtra team, you will gain a deep insight into applied robotics and you will have a personal impact on both the new technology and the organization itself.
Become part of this exciting journey and submit your application using the button below.
We are a company that values diversity and seek to have a balanced team of women and men. We specifically encourage women to apply to this position.