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.
March 28, 2006
ANNE M. MARCOUX, JILL LINDSAY, KIRSTEN EVANS, CONSTANCE LAMATTINA, ELIZABETH LEE PRICE, JUDITH ALEXANDER, DEBORAH DEAN, CHRISTINA FORD, PATTI GENTRY, LATONYA K. GILLMORE, JANET GOLD, DALE HAGAR, JULIE HORAN, LOUIS HORTER, CAROL JOHNSON, MOLLY KAIMAN, BEVERLEY KALKHOF, NANCYANNE KELLO, PATRICIA KENNEDY, JANET KIRBY, JOHN KLINE, DOTTIE LONG, KAREN RIVOIRA, LAURENCE E. SALOMON III, DANIEL SANTIAGO, REBECCA SMITH, AND DEBORAH WHITTINGTON ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED (I.E., THE "CLASS"); CONSTANCE LAMATTINA ALSO ON BEHALF OF SUBCLASS I, KIRSTEN EVANS, JILL LINDSAY AND ELIZABETH LEE PRICE ALSO ON BEHALF OF SUBCLASS II; DEBORAH WHITTINGTON ALSO ON BEHALF OF SUBCLASS III, AND JANET KIRBY ALSO ON BEHALF OF SUBCLASS IV, PLAINTIFFS,v.AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., A.M.R. CORPORATION, ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL FLIGHT ATTENDANTS, AND JOHN WARD, AS PRESIDENT OF ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL FLIGHT ATTENDANTS, DEFENDANTS.
This action is one in a series of lawsuits arising out of defendant American Airlines Inc.'s ("American's") 2003 reorganization and the activities surrounding the negotiation and ratification of the subsequent concessionary agreements with American's employees' unions. Plaintiffs are "former and retired employees of American, members of the defendant union, the Association of Professional Flight Attendants ("APFA"), and current or former members of APFA's Bargaining Unit." Plaintiffs' First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint, ¶ 6 ("Amended Complaint"). They bring this action to set aside what they characterize as an "unlawful and unratified agreement between American Airlines and the labor union representing its flight attendants . . . ." Amended Complaint ¶ 1. Plaintiffs originally filed three related actions in this court, Ford v. Association of Professional Flight Attendants, et al. 03-CV-4987, Lindsay v. Association of Professional Flight Attendants, 04-CV-634, and Marcoux v. American Airlines, Inc., 04-CV-1376. The actions were consolidated, and plaintiffs filed the Consolidated Class Action Complaint on July 12, 2004, and amended it on November 30, 2004. Plaintiffs, who have not yet moved for class certification, identify four subclasses: (1) members of APFA who were entitled to vote on the ratification question, (2) members of APFA who voted in opposition to ratification, (3) members of the class who were furloughed, and (4) members of the class who have retired since the time of the alleged wrongdoing. Unless noted otherwise, plaintiffs' claims are brought on behalf of the class and all subclasses.
In addition to claims against American, the Amended Complaint asserts claims against American's parent company, AMR Corporation ("AMR") (jointly, the "Company Defendants"), as well as claims against APFA and its then-President, John Ward (jointly, the "Union Defendants"). In twenty-two Counts, plaintiffs allege violations of the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. §§ 151 et seq. ("RLA"), and the duty of fair representation ("DFR"), as well as violations of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 401 et seq. ("LMRDA"), the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 et seq. ("RICO"), and state common law.
Company Defendants move to dismiss all of plaintiffs' state claims as preempted by federal law. Union Defendants move to dismiss someof plaintiffs' claims under the LMRDA. All defendants move to dismiss plaintiffs' claims alleging violations of RICO.
The allegations in the Amended Complaint, described below, are taken as true for the purposes of defendants' motions to dismiss.*fn1
Prior to May 1, 2003, the terms and conditions of plaintiffs' employment were governed by a collective bargaining agreement that had been in effect since November 1, 1998 (the "1998 Agreement"). The 1998 Agreement was duly ratified by union members and was implemented in accordance with the RLA. The amendable date-the earliest time that either party could require the other to enter into negotiations to modify the agreement-for the 1998 Agreement was November 30, 2004. Notwithstanding this date, American approached APFA in or around December 2002 to begin to negotiate voluntary concessions from the flight attendants. American communicated to APFA that it had been experiencing a steady financial decline that was exacerbated by the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. Citing a fragile economy, problems in the airline industry, and a large drop in air travel, American asked APFA if it would voluntarily roll back flight attendant pay increases of three percent (3%) that were scheduled for 2003. Shortly thereafter, American announced that it would need "permanent" labor cost savings of $1.8 billion per year, of which APFA members were expected to contribute $340 million, through a collectively bargained mid-term agreement, called the Restructuring Participation Agreement ("RPA"). American further represented that, to avoid bankruptcy-which carried an additional loss of $130 million in cost savings and the furlough of 2,500 more flight attendants than originally contemplated in the initial spending cuts-APFA would need to enter into the RPA with American by March 31, 2003. This deadline was later extended to April 15, 2003.
APFA's constitution requires collective bargaining agreements to be ratified by the membership. The Negotiating Committee presents the proposed agreement to the Executive Committee. If the Executive Committee accepts the agreement, it is presented to the membership for ratification. However, if the Executive Committee rejects the proposed agreement, the Negotiating Committee may present it to the Board of Directors, which has the power to override the Executive Committee's rejection and submit the proposed agreement to the membership for approval. In either event, the membership is entitled to take at least 30 days prior to voting to consider the agreement. The APFA constitution also provides for secret, mail-in, paper balloting and requires that the membership receive the complete changes to any proposed collective bargaining agreement prior to or at the start of the balloting period. An agreement is ratified and thus binding upon the membership once a majority of members in good standing vote in favor of ratification.
To meet American's April 15, 2003 deadline, APFA's Board of Directors passed a resolution on March 19, 2003, suspending the 30-day consideration period prior to the commencement of balloting and permitting the use of electronic ballots. On March 31, 2003, APFA's Negotiating Committee reached agreement with American on the final terms of the RPA, and the Executive Committee recommended presenting it to the APFA membership for ratification. The balloting was scheduled to begin the first week of April, and end on April 15, 2003.
Throughout the balloting period, APFA maintained a hotline that broadcast various messages purporting to provide updated information to the membership. Plaintiffs allege that these recorded messages served only to present false and misleading information to the APFA members regarding American's economic forecast and to pressure APFA members into ratifying the RPA by stating, among other things, that if the membership rejected the proposal, negotiations would be discontinued. Plaintiffs also suggest that APFA misrepresented its position regarding the members' ability to change their votes by stating that "[APFA] determined that it would be most in keeping with APFA's normal, prescribed voting procedures to not allow a member to change their vote." In fact, as discussed below, APFA members were permitted to change their votes during the one-day extension of voting.
Plaintiffs also allege that defendants engaged in additional activities to induce APFA members to ratify the RPA. Plaintiffs assert that defendants knew that the membership had voted to reject the RPA on April 14th and sought to exert "undue pressure and scare tactics" to get individuals who had not voted to cast ballots in favor of the RPA before the deadline. For example, defendants, among other things, called flight attendants and suggested that, if the RPA were rejected, American would declare bankruptcy; and they held "impromptu" meetings at airports to garner support for the RPA. Plaintiffs assert that these pressure tactics were targeted specifically to those flight attendants that American and APFA knew had not yet voted. Despite these efforts, on April 15, 2003, the APFA membership voted to reject the RPA, with the final tally being 9,842 against ratifying the RPA, and 9,309 for ratifying the RPA.Subsequently, American and APFA agreed to extend the voting until April 16, 2003.
During the additional day of voting, APFA allowed members who had previously voted to change their votes. Plaintiffs assert that the second round of voting was tainted by illegal electioneering practiceswhich were initiated by American and willfully ignored by APFA. These practices included American and APFA, both subtly and overtly, creating a "frenzy" and "sheer panic" among APFA members by suggesting that American would declare bankruptcy if the RPA were rejected. Defendants' objectionable conduct included placing "pop-up" notices supporting ratification on the flight services' website and providing money or a "minor gratuity" to flight attendants who had voted "No" to ratification in exchange for their changing their votes to "Yes." As a result of these efforts, 1,262 votes were cast, and the membership ratified the RPA, with the final tally being 10,761 votes in favor of ratifying the RPA, and 9,652 votes opposing ratification.
On or around April 17, 2003, it was revealed that American had, despite its precarious financial position, established a Supplemental Executive Retirement Program for its top 45 executives and cash retention bonuses for its top six executives. Upon learning of the bonus programs, defendant John Ward immediately sent a letter to American demanding that the APFA membership be given a "fresh opportunity to vote on the proposed terms of the restructuring agreement in an untainted environment." Shortly thereafter, Ward sent another letter asserting that American's "material breach of its obligation to disclose all relevant information"necessitated a reballoting. APFA's Board of Directors formalized this request by passing a resolution on April 22, 2003, directing APFA's National Ballot Committee to conduct a re-ballot.
On or around April 23, 2003, APFA and American began negotiating additional terms to the RPA. The resulting provisions shortened the life of the RPA by eight months, made the collective bargaining agreement amendable in three years, allowed pay increases in the event that American became financially viable and granted the right to substitute another concession in exchange for reinstating a previously-surrendered concession relating to the calculation of flight attendants' salaries. These additional terms, which John Ward maintained were still a "tremendous sacrifice" on APFA's behalf, were added to the RPA on April 25, 2003 by way of a letter agreement which purported to "resolve all disputes" concerning the negotiation, ratification, and effectiveness of the RPA.
The Amended Complaint contains other allegations directed expressly to the RICO claims. These will be addressed below.
All defendants having answered, they move, pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for judgment on the pleadings dismissing certain claims in the Amended Complaint. A motion for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c) is reviewed under the same standard as a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. Burnette v. Carothers, 192 F.3d 52, 56 (2d Cir. 1999). That is, the motion should be granted only where it "appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief." Cooper v.Parsky, 140 F.3d 433, 440 (2d. Cir. 1998). Plaintiffs' factual allegations must be accepted as true, Zinermon v. Burch, 494 U.S. 113, 118 (1990), and the court must draw all inferences in favor of plaintiffs. Thomas v. City of New York, 143 F.3d. 31, 37 (2d Cir. 1998).
A. State Law Claims
In addition to their claims under the RLA and the DFR, plaintiffs, relying on the same factual allegations which form the bases of their RLA and DFR claims, assert nine state common law claims. American or the Company Defendants move to dismiss the eight claims directed against them.*fn2 Count Ten alleges that American breached individual employer contracts with its employees by interfering with their rights under RLA Section 2, Third and Fourth, to designate and be represented by bargaining representatives of their choice. See 45 U.S.C. § 152, Third and Fourth. Counts Twelve and Sixteen allege that the Company Defendants intentionally interfered with contractual relations between APFA and its members by causing APFA to breach certain provisions of its constitution and bylaws relating to balloting and electioneering practices. Counts Seventeen and Eighteen assert breach of implied contract claims against the Company Defendants based on an implied duty not to interfere with internal union balloting. Counts Nineteen and Twenty assert unjust enrichment claims against the Company Defendants for allegedly wrongful conduct in obtaining APFA members' approval of the RPA. Finally, Count Twenty alleges that the Company Defendants engaged in fraud and misrepresentation during the RPA negotiations by falsely communicating that American was on the verge of bankruptcy and by failing to disclose material facts relating to its financial state. Like plaintiffs' claims under the RLA and the DFR, all of these state law claims arise out of occurrences during the negotiation and ratification of the collectively bargained RPA. The Company Defendants argue that they are therefore preempted by federal law.
The RLA provides a comprehensive federal regulatory scheme for the resolution of disputes in the rail and air transportation industries. Specifically, the RLA governs the process of negotiation of "agreements concerning rates of pay, rules and working conditions" between carriers and their employees. 45 U.S.C. §§ 152, 156. It protects the right of employees to designate the bargaining representative of their choosing and imposes obligations on carriers and unions with respect to the negotiation of agreements and the settlement of disputes. See 45 U.S.C. § 152. Under the RLA, disputes between labor and management are categorized as either "major" or "minor". See Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Railway Labor Exec. Ass'n., et al., 491 U.S. 299, 302 (1989) ("Conrail"). "Major" disputes seek to create contractual rights; they involve disputes arising out of the formation of collective bargaining agreements or efforts to secure such agreements. See id.; 45 U.S.C. §§ 152, Seventh and 156.*fn3 This category of disputes looks to the "acquisition of rights for the future, not to assertion of rights claimed to have vested in the past." Elgin, J. & E.R. Co. v. Burley, 325 U.S. 711, 723 (1945). Major disputes arise only when there is no existing collective bargaining agreement in place or where a party seeks to change the terms of an existing agreement, in effect, formally creating a new agreement. In the event of a major dispute, the RLA requires the parties to undergo a lengthy process of bargaining and mediation. See Conrail, 491 U.S. at 302-3. If the bargaining and mediation fails, the parties are encouraged to submit to arbitration. Id.
The parties to "minor" disputes, on the other hand, seek to enforce contractual rights arising out of an existing collective bargaining agreement. See Conrail, 491 U.S. at 303. Labor disputes are deemed minor disputes if they arise or grow out of "grievances or out of the interpretation and application of agreements concerning rates of pay, rules or working conditions." Id.; see also Hawaiian Airlines Inc. v. Norris, 512 U.S. 246, 252-53 (1994) ("Hawaiian Airlines"). Under the RLA, parties to minor disputes are required to submit to "compulsory and binding arbitration before the National Railroad Adjustment Board" or "before an adjustment board established by the employer and the unions representing the employees." See Conrail, 491 U.S. at 303-4. The adjustment boards have exclusive jurisdiction over minor disputes, and judicial review of any arbitral decision is limited. See id. at 304.
Here, plaintiffs' state law claims attack Company Defendants' conduct while negotiating and pursuing ratification of the collectively bargained RPA. While couched in state law terminology, all of these claims rely on the identical factual allegations supporting the RLA claims and therefore are "major" disputes under the RLA. Under the preemption doctrine set forth in San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon, 359 U.S. 236 (1959), state law claims are presumptively preempted if they concern conduct that is actually or arguably either prohibited or protected by federal labor law. See Belknap v. Hale, 463 U.S. 491, 498 (1983). Although Garmon preemption first arose in the context of the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA"), and Garmon itself concerned the primary jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB"), the Garmon preemption doctrine has been extended to conduct governed by the RLA. See Broth. of R.R. Trainmen v. Jacksonville Terminal Co., 394 U.S. at 369, 383-84 & n.19 (applying Garmon preemption principles while noting that "[t]here is . no administrative agency equivalent to the NLRB with jurisdiction over railway labor disputes"). Thus, state claims that attempt to regulate conduct protected or prohibited by the RLA are preempted. In the RLA context, as in cases arising under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, ("LMRA"), as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 141 et seq., preemption is driven by the need for uniform federal regulation of labor-management relations. See Peterson v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, 759 F.2d 1161, 1169 (4th Cir. 1985) (finding that "the risk of state interference with the effective administration of national labor policy is present [in the RLA context] even though the exclusive jurisdiction of the arbitrator is not at issue"); cf. Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Lueck, 471 U.S. 202, 211 (1985) (noting, in a Section 301 case, that interests in interpretive uniformity and predictability require that labor-contract disputes be resolved by reference to federal law).
In this case, there is no dispute that American owed plaintiffs certain statutory duties under the RLA and that APFA had a duty of fair representation with respect to plaintiffs.*fn4 There is also no dispute that, under the RLA, hybrid DFR claims may be asserted against an employer and that such claims are governed by federal law. See Czosek v. O'Mara, 397 U.S. 25, 29-30 (1970). Counts One through Nine in the Amended Complaint, which defendants do not move to dismiss, allege RLA and DFR or hybrid DFR violations based on all defendants' conduct during the negotiation for and ratification of the RPA. For example, plaintiffs challenge defendants' actions in "extending the balloting to April 16, 2003," "denying the flight attendants the opportunity to cast their ballots in a calm atmosphere," "deliberately creating a firestorm of fear and frenzy,"and "failing to assure the integrity of the balloting process and the accuracy of any tallies." Plaintiffs' state law claims assert common law theories based on identical conduct.
Garmon carved out two narrow exceptions to the preemption doctrine which recognize that major disputes are not preempted where state regulation of conduct "deeply rooted in local feeling and responsibility" or matters of "merely peripheral concern" to federal labor relations law are at stake. Garmon, 359 U.S. at 243-44. These exceptions highlight the court's responsibility "to determine the scope of the general rule by examining the state interests in regulating the conduct in question and the potential for interference with the federal regulatory scheme." Farmer v. United Broth. of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 25 et al., 430 U.S. 290, 297 (1977). Here, none of the challenged state law claims falls within either exception. Rather, each goes to the heart of the federal interest in ensuring the fair and orderly negotiation of working conditions by carriers and employees. The interests asserted by the plaintiffs are precisely those protected by federal labor law, not interests "deeply rooted in local feeling and responsibility." See Bensel v. Allied Pilots Ass'n., 387 F.3d 298, 321-32 (3d Cir. 2004). "Far from being of only 'peripheral concern' to federal labor law, plaintiffs' state law claims strike at the core of conduct and relationships governed" by the RLA. Cooper v. TWA Airlines, LLC, 349 F.Supp.2d 496, 506 (E.D.N.Y. 2003).
Plaintiffs attempt to avoid preemption as to some of their state law claims by arguing that they do not arise from the effort to achieve a collectively bargained agreement, but rather arise from the breach of separate, individual contracts. Plaintiffs claim the existence of two types of independent contractual obligations. Count Twelve -which is alleged only on behalf of members of the class who were entitled to vote on ratification- and Count Sixteen assert that the Company Defendants interfered with the plaintiffs' contractual relations with APFA as set forth in the union's constitution and bylaws. Counts Ten, Seventeen and Eighteen rely on the RLA itself. In Count Ten, plaintiffs argue that, since Section 2, Eighth of the RLA provides that the Third, Fourth, and Fifth paragraphs of Section 2, are part of the contract of employment between the carrier and each employee, "to the extent that American has violated Section 2, Third and Fourth of the RLA, it has also violated its contracts of employment."*fn5 Counts Seventeen and Eighteen allege breaches of implied contracts between the Company Defendants and the flight attendants not to interfere with union balloting procedures. On oral argument, plaintiffs acknowledged that these implied contracts also arise solely from obligations imposed on the carrier under the RLA.
First, as discussed earlier, plaintiffs are alleging major disputes as all of these claims deal explicitly with alleged misconduct by American or the Company Defendants during the negotiation and ratification of the RPA, and these claims are in essence no different from their RLA and hybrid DFR claims.*fn6 Second, plaintiffs' allegations do not amount to claims of individualized contracts protected by state law. The rights set forth in the RLA, which plaintiffs allege create implied individual contracts, are governed by federal law and are rights that employees have during the course of their effort to obtain a collectively bargained agreement. Such rights are wholly within the purview of the RLA, and thus any state law claims alleging violations of those rights are assuredly preempted.
Plaintiffs' reliance on Hawaiian Airlines to argue that these so-called individual claims should be viewed as not subject to preemption obfuscates the difference between federal preemption over major disputes under the RLA, which is at issue here, and federal preemption of disputes regarding the interpretation of collectively bargained agreements, which is not at issue, but was the subject of Hawaiian Airlines. The defendant in Hawaiian Airlines argued that the plaintiff's claim under a state whistleblower statute could be heard only by the RLA's arbitral boards and thus was preempted. The Supreme Court disagreed on the grounds that the only source of the claimed rights was state law and not the collectively bargained agreement and that interpretation of the collectively bargained agreement was not required. In essence, the state law claims were not minor disputes and therefore could proceed in state court. Nothing in the Supreme Court's decision suggests that major disputes regarding the negotiation and ratification of collectively bargained agreements can be heard as state law claims.*fn7
In sum, the eight state law claims against American or the Company Defendants are dismissed as preempted by federal law.
B. LMRDA Claims
Counts Thirteen, Fourteen and Fifteen assert claims under Section 411 of the LMRDA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 411(a)(1), which provides that:
Every member of a labor organization shall have equal rights and privileges within such organization to nominate candidates, to vote in elections or referendums of the labor organization, to attend membership meetings, and to participate in the deliberations and voting upon the business of such meetings, subject to reasonable rules and regulations in such organization's constitution and bylaws.
Defendants seek dismissal of Counts Fourteen and Fifteen, and parts of Count Thirteen, on the ground that the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the claims.
In Members for a Better Union v. Bevona, 152 F.3d 58 (2d. Cir. 1998), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that there is no jurisdiction unless the "specific allegations in the complaint reflect an infringement of rights protected under Title I of the LMRDA." In Bevona, union members sought to enjoin certain voting procedures mandated by the union leadership regarding a vote on proposed amendments to the union's constitution. Specifically, plaintiffs charged thattheunion wrongfully refused to publish the proposed amendments in the union newspaper, scheduled the vote at times that did not accommodate all employment shifts, and published the executive committee's negative recommendation in the union newspaper without giving plaintiffs the opportunity to present an opposing view. The Court found that, although the union's actions may have dissuaded some members from voting, there was no discriminatory denial because the "same detriments applied equally to the class." Id. at 65. Under Bevona, then, mere allegations of unfairness do not state a claim under Section 411(a)(1). Rather, to be within the court's jurisdiction under that Section, plaintiffs' claims must allege that APFA granted rights to some of its members, but denied those same rights to others, in order to carry out a discriminatory goal.
Plaintiffs have satisfied the jurisdictional threshold with respect to the claim alleged in Count Thirteen.*fn8 Defendants do not dispute that the language of paragraph 312 of Count Thirteen, which alleges that "[t]he Union violated 29 U.S.C. § 411 by permitting members to change their votes from 'No' to 'Yes,' but not vice versa," meets the Bevona test. Defendants recognize that this allegation meets the jurisdictional prerequisite because it pleads that the union favored certain of its members (those voting in opposition to ratification), by granting them the right to change their vote to "yes," but denied that same right to those who had voted in favor of ratification and wanted to change their votes to "no." In essence, this alleged denial of voting rights sought to ensure ratification of the RPA, by discriminating against those employees in opposition to ratification.
Defendants nonetheless ask the court to treat the allegations of Count Thirteen as three separate claims in order to obtain dismissal of the other two "claims," namely, paragraph 310, which alleges that APFA "violated 29 U.S.C. § 411 by reopening a vote that was already officially closed so that there could be no extended voting," and paragraph 311 which alleges that APFA permitted members to change their votes during the extension period. Defendants' application to dismiss individual sentences within Count Thirteen is denied. A claim is not to be dissected sentence by sentence. It is enough, at this stage of the litigation, that Count Thirteen, as noted above, states a claim under the LMRDA.
Count Fourteen alleges, on behalf of members of the class who voted in opposition to ratification, that the Union Defendants improperly used the National Balloting Committee's resources to distribute only information in support of ratification, and thereby denied those opposed to ratification the same privileges enjoyed by the "yes" voters. The Second Circuit rejected a similar argument in Bevona-where the union had refused to publish opposing views in the union newspaper-on the ground that, even though the information provided to the membership was one-sided, all of the membership received it. Therefore, the court held, no individual was granted rights or information that was discriminatorily denied to others. See Bevona, 152 F.3d at 58.
Finally, Count Fifteen alleges, on behalf of all members entitled to vote on the ratification question, that APFA wrongfully dispensed with the membership's vote by "substituting" for it the Board of Directors' vote, thereby effectively denying to the union members their rights and privileges as voting members of the union. Plaintiffs urge the court to consider this claim in light of Smith v. Bowers, 337 F.Supp.2d 576 (S.D.N.Y. 2004). There, the ballots of three local unions were disqualified after the locals allowed their members to vote after the time that was designated by union leadership to end balloting. Although the votes of these locals were originally counted in the national totals, the national leadership disqualified the votes. The Court held that, under Bevona, the jurisdictional threshold was met because plaintiffs undisputedly alleged disparate treatment by the national union leadership, in that the votes of certain of the unions' members (those who voted before the end of balloting) were counted, while others (those of the three locals) were not. Id. at 588. In contrast, here, no such disparate treatment within the voting class is alleged. Rather, since the alleged denial of voting rights extended across the entire membership, regardless of whether members voted for or against ratification of the RPA, no members were granted any greater or lesser privileges than others. See Local Union 20, et al. v. United Broth. of Carpenters and Joiners of America, et al., 223 F.Supp.2d 491, 498 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).
In sum, the court has jurisdiction over Count Thirteen, but not over Counts Fourteen and Fifteen, and Counts Fourteen and Fifteen are dismissed.
C. RICO Claims
In Count Twenty-two, plaintiffs assert as to all defendants both a substantive violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) and a conspiracy, under 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d), to violate Section 1962(c). 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) makes it unlawful, in relevant part, for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity.
RICO defines an enterprise as "any individual, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal entity." See 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4). Plaintiffs must allege a pattern of "racketeering activity" consisting of "at least two predicate acts . . . which amount to or pose a threat of continued criminal activity." First Capital Asset Mgmt., Inc. v. Satinwood, Inc., 385 F.3d 159, 178 (2d. Cir. 2004). "Racketeering activity" is defined to include "any act which is indictable under" 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (wire fraud), 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (mail fraud), 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (the Hobbs Act), 18 U.S.C. § 1952 (the Travel Act), and 29 U.S.C. § 186 (restrictions on payments and loans to labor organizations). See 18 U.S.C. 1961(b). Under the mail and wire fraud statutes, "any scheme or artifice to defraud or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises," which involves use of the mails or wire is indictable. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343. Plaintiffs here rely upon allegations of thousands of acts said to violate the aforementioned statutes. Defendants principally argue that, despite the number of alleged predicate acts, plaintiffs fail to plead the required pattern of racketeering.
In the Amended Complaint, plaintiffs greatly expand their original RICO claims. They allege that, beginning as early as December of 2002 and continuing through at least September of 2004, American and APFA formed an association-in-fact for the dual purposes of (1) devising and carrying out a scheme to fraudulently induce American's flight attendants to enter into the RPA and (2) devising and implementing the strategy allowing the APFA Board of Directors to substitute its own approval of the RPA for the decision of the APFA membership. Plaintiffs categorize defendants' alleged wrongful activity in furtherance of these plans into four "implementing schemes." As with the facts discussed above, any additional allegations described below are taken as true for purposes of the pending motions.
First Implementing Scheme
In mid-February 2003, American sought to scare APFA members into voluntarily relinquishing current wages and benefits packages by falsely asserting that American was suffering from a financial crisis arising, in part, from labor costs. Specifically, plaintiffs allege, APFA endorsed American's false statements, even though they had access to American's books and records, which should have indicated that American's economic outlook was more positive than previously communicated. Plaintiffs also allege that APFA reiterated American's false representations to the membership, with knowledge that the representations were false. Each telephonic message, union publication, and/or American publication that contained the allegedly false representations, and was communicated via mail or wire to the APFA members, is alleged as a separate predicate act under RICO.
Second Implementing Scheme
From April 15 to April 16, 2003, American and APFA allegedly used "coercion, vote rigging and, ultimately diktat or decree" to aggressively pursue votes in favor of ratification during the one-day extension of voting on the RPA ratification question. Specifically, plaintiffs assert that American and APFA formed "get-out-the-vote" squads to aggressively pressure members either to vote in favor of ratification or, if they had already voted "no," to change their votes to "yes." Plaintiffs also allege that American and APFA had insider knowledge as to whether and how members had voted on the ratification question. Plaintiffs contend that this alleged coercion and extortion violated the Hobbs and Travel Acts and, therefore, are predicate acts under RICO. Plaintiffs also allege that American, in effect, paid certain flight attendants a "gratuity" to vote, or arranged or paid for them to call in their vote to the American Arbitration Association, in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 186, with each payment constituting a predicate act under RICO.
Defendants are also charged with meeting, via telephone conference, between April 22 and April 23 of 2003, to devise and implement the strategy of causing APFA's Board of Directors to usurp the flight attendants' power to hold another vote on the ratification question. Plaintiffs claim that, when John Ward executed the letter agreement between American and APFA, the defendants effectively eliminated the members' opportunity to hold another vote regarding the proposed RPA. Plaintiffs allege that defendants violated the mail and wire fraud statutes by posting the Board of Director's resolution (which was in furtherance of the substitution scheme) on APFA's website and subsequently mailing it to the APFA membership.
Third Implementing Scheme
Defendants allegedly sought to continue the life of the RPA by ensuring that individuals associated with the "Ward Regime" remained in office. To this end, APFA and John Ward worked together to engage in deception and vote manipulation to re-elect Ward as President in the APFA election scheduled to occur on January 29, 2004. After a runoff between the final two candidates, John Ward and Tommie Hutto-Blake, APFA announced that Ward had won the election by five votes. However, in approximately mid-August of 2004, after investigating and reinstating certain disqualified votes, the Department of Labor determined that Tommie Hutto-Blake had actually won the January 29, 2004 election. APFA subsequently installed her as President. Plaintiffs allege that APFA "manufactured a majority" and, with knowledge of the falsity of the results, wrongfully announced that John Ward had won on January 29, 2004. Plaintiffs contend that each time the erroneous results were published, or either telephonically or electronically disseminated, defendants violated the mail and wire fraud statutes.
Fourth Implementing Scheme
In May of 2004, allegedly in furtherance of its plans to "sanction practices in which it was already engaged without constitutional authority" and to "further the goals of the criminal enterprise," the Union Defendants proposed several amendments to the APFA constitution to its membership. The amendments sought to: (1) allow union leadership to appoint members of the Negotiating Committee; (2) grant the Board of Directors wider discretion in deciding voting procedures; (3) codify the "voter eligibility" rule that had been used in determining eligibility in the January 29, 2004 National Officer election; (4) alter the number and composition of the Balloting Committee, and (5) limit the membership's ability to initiate the process of proposing amendments to the APFA constitution. On August 11, 2004, APFA's membership voted the amendments down. Plaintiffs claim that, although the proposed amendments were not in and of themselves criminal, they were related to pursuing the goals of the criminal enterprise. Therefore, each mailing in furtherance of the proposed amendments constituted an act of mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341.
Pattern of Racketeering Activity
Plaintiffs have failed to plead facts establishing a RICO pattern. Although a pattern requires only a minimum of two predicate acts, plaintiffs must also show that the predicates are (1) related and that (2) they amount to or pose a threat of continuing criminal activity. See Schlaifer Nance & Co. v. Estate of Andy Warhol, 119 F.3d 91, 97 (2d Cir. 1997); United States v. Indelicato, 865 F.2d 1370, 1381 (2d Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 811 (1989). Predicate acts are related if they "have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims or methods of commission, or are otherwise interrelated by distinguishing characteristics, and are not isolated events." H.J., Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229, 240 (1989). Continuity is established by facts demonstrating either an "open-ended pattern of racketeering activity (i.e., past criminal conduct coupled with a threat of future conduct) or a closed-ended pattern of racketeering activity (i.e., past criminal conduct extending over a substantial period of time)." See GICC Capital Corp. v. Tech.Fin. Group, Inc., 67 F.3d 463, 466 (2d Cir. 1995).
1. Relatedness
To begin with, plaintiffs' First, Second and Third Implementing Schemes relate to the single overarching goal of inducing the flight attendants to enter into the RPA, and ensuring the continuation of the RPA. Plaintiffs' characterization of the facts as setting forth three separate schemes is artificial. See Schlaifer Nance & Co., 119 F. 3d at 98 ("[C]ourts must take care to ensure that plaintiff is not artificially fragmenting a singular act into multiple acts simply to invoke RICO.").
The Fourth scheme, which pertains to the internal governance of the Union, alleges no conduct by the Company Defendants, is unrelated to the goal of defrauding the flight attendants into ratifying the RPA and cannot be fairly viewed as a means of continuing the criminal enterprise. It therefore is not properly included in the RICO pattern. See Schlaifer Nance & Co., 119 F.3d at 97 (schemes unrelated to pattern of racketeering activity where goals are unrelated to the underlying enterprise). Therefore, the Fourth scheme-and its alleged underlying predicate acts- are not properly considered in analyzing whether the continuity requirement has been met.
2. Continuity
Treating the First through Third implementing schemes as related, plaintiffs do not meet RICO's continuity requirements. "Closed-ended" continuity is demonstrated by a "series of related predicates extending over a substantial period of time" Cofacredit S.A. v. Windsor Plumbing Supply Co., Inc., 187 F.3d 229, 242 (2d Cir. 1999). The Second Circuit has indicated that a minimum of two years is required to show "a substantial period of time." Id. ("Since the Supreme Court decided H.J., Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co., 492 U.S. 229 (1989), this Court has never held a period of less than two years to constitute 'a substantial period of time'"). Thus, in this Circuit, closed-ended continuity is primarily a temporal concept, even though courts may weigh such other factors as "the number and variety of acts, the number of participants, the number of victims and the presence of separate schemes." See GICC Capital Corp., 67 F.3d at 467.
The First through Third schemes extended from mid-February of 2003 through January 29, 2004, indicating that the criminal enterprise continued for approximately eleven and a half months.
(Even if the scheme could be treated as beginning in December of 2002 and continuing until action by the Department of Labor, it lasted only until mid-August of 2004, or a period of twenty months).*fn9 Indeed, as to the Company Defendants, who are not alleged to have participated in the Third or Fourth schemes, the enterprise lasted only from mid-February of 2003 through April 25, 2003. This falls far short of the Second Circuit's two-year minimum requirement.Plaintiffs do not dispute that their allegations do not meet the two-year requirement, but argue that the existence of multiple schemes and thousands of predicate acts of mail and wire fraud overcome this deficit. However, as noted above, plaintiffs are artificially fragmenting what is essentially one alleged criminal purpose-inducing the flight attendants to ratify the RPA-into multiple schemes. Thus, without more, merely alleging a large number of mailings and calls is insufficient to meet plaintiffs' burden. Plaintiffs' speculative assertion that discovery may establish that defendants' first predicate act occurred at least three months earlier than alleged does not overcome the deficiency of the Amended Complaint.
Plaintiffs alternatively argue that they have sufficiently pled an open-ended pattern of racketeering activity. Even if the court were to consider all four schemes to be related, plaintiffs offer no facts indicating that a threat of continuing criminal activity exists beyond the period during which the predicate acts were performed. See DeFalco v. Bernas, 244 F.3d 286, 323 (2d Cir. 2001).
Open-ended continuity requires an assessment of "the nature of the RICO enterprise, and of the predicate acts." Cofacredit S.A., 187 F.3d at 242. Where, as here, defendants are operating legitimate businesses, plaintiffs are required to plead facts indicating that there existed the threat of continued criminal activity in furtherance of defendants' plans. See GICC Capital Corp., 67 F.3d 463 at 466. For example, in Cosmos Forms Ltd. v. Goldfinger, 113 F. 3d 309 (2d Cir. 1997), defendants, who were salespersons in two separate companies, engaged in a scheme of inflating prices on paper orders for personal profit. The Court of Appeals found that plaintiffs met the open-ended continuity requirement because defendants had committed the unlawful acts regularly for fifteen months and only stopped because they had been caught by their respective companies. In contrast, plaintiffs here have not demonstrated such an ongoing threat of criminal activity. The alleged criminal goal, the fraudulent ratification of the RPA, was accomplished on April 25, 2003, Ward's challenger assumed office as President of APFA in mid- August of 2004, and the proposed constitutional amendments were voted down by the APFA membership on August 11, 2004. Id. (finding that even if alleged acts were presumed to be true, it was clear that the scheme was "inherently terminable" and thus could not have continued).*fn10
RICO Conspiracy
Finally, plaintiffs claim that all defendants conspired to violate the substantive provisions of 18 U.S.C. 1962(c). Since plaintiffs' substantive RICO claim fails for lack of sufficient pattern allegations, the RICO conspiracy claim cannot survive. See Cofacredit, S.A., 187 F. 3d 229, 245 (2d Cir. 1999).
For the reasons discussed above, the Company Defendants' motion to dismiss Counts Ten, Twelve, Sixteen, Seventeen, Eighteen, Nineteen, Twenty, Twenty one and Twenty-two is granted. The Union Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted as to Counts Fourteen, Fifteen and Twenty-two, and denied as to Count Thirteen.
Nina Gershon United States District Judge
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:
You are hereHome > Blogs
Free Webinar Outlines Upcoming Trade Compliance Training
Created on March 6, 2015
On March 11th 1:30 pm EST, take advantage of this FREE presentation to learn about our exciting International Trade Compliance Webinar Training Program.
The program is a webinar series which consists of thirteen one hour to 90 minute webinars starting in early April running through late May 2015. These training webinars will cover
Retirement Savings Made Easy
Created on March 5, 2015
The U.S. Department of the Treasury created myRA (my Retirement Account), a new retirement account, to help people save for retirement. myRA is a simple, safe, and affordable way to take more control of your future. Here are the top questions employees have about myRA.
What is myRA?
myRA is a new type of Roth IRA* – a popular retirement savings tool – that has been specifically designed by the U.S. Treasury to address many of the most common barriers to saving, such as fees and minimum initial contributions. There is no cost to you to participate, and myRA carries no risk of losing money. The account stays with you when you change jobs, and if you have more than one job, you can contribute to it through multiple employers. myRA has no minimum contribution requirement, which means you can contribute the amount you choose.* And best of all, it's easy to set up and manage.
Who can sign up for myRA?
myRA could be a good option if you don't have access to a retirement savings plan through your job. myRA follows Roth IRA rules so it is generally available to anyone who earns an annual income of less than $129,000 a year for individuals and $191,000 for married couples filing jointly.* You can set up direct deposit into your myRA through your employer.
3 Resources To Help You Crack the Export Market
Created on March 5, 2015
U.S. businesses are selling more goods and services abroad than ever before, reaching an all-time record of $2.3 trillion in 2013 – and 98 percent of American companies that export are small businesses.
Despite the statistics, many small businesses still face big challenges when it comes to financing and managing their export business. A recent trade seminar, hosted by the Department of Commerce and several other federal agencies, identified three commonly cited financial obstacles small businesses have to going global:
Don't know how to obtain working capital and financing to support export transactions
Don't know where to seek assistance for entering, growing and succeeding in global markets
Don't know how to get paid by foreign buyers overseas
Minority-Owned Manufacturing Firms Employ 342,000 Thousand Workers!
Created on March 4, 2015
In the first of a series of new industry-based fact sheets released by MBDA, data reveals that minority-owned manufacturing firms employ 342,000 workers and grew faster than their non-minority counterparts in three areas—number of firms, employees and gross receipts.
This data supports MBDA's increased focus on manufacturers over the past few years and we've seen results. Between FY 2009 and 2013, MBDA facilitated $2.8 billion in contracts for minority-owned manufacturing firms. For the past two years, MBDA manufacturing clients have shown significant growth, becoming the top category for contracting revenue, a designation traditionally reserved for MBDA clients in the construction industry.
In an effort to continue this upward trend, MBDA awarded supplemental funding to four MBDA Business Centers to better assist clients in advanced manufacturing. Their specialty expertise will have a national scope while centrally located in Atlanta, Detroit, Indianapolis, and Cleveland – cities with a high population of minority-owned manufacturers.
Increasing Mentor-Protégé Opportunities for all Small Businesses
Created on March 3, 2015
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) recently published a proposed rule to amend its regulations to establish a government-wide Mentor-Protégé Program for all small businesses as directed by the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 and the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013 (NDAA). As directed by the statute, the proposed small business mentor-protégé program is modeled on SBA's existing 8(a) Business Development mentor-protégé program.
The expansion of the program will increase opportunities for small businesses to enter the federal marketplace as well as to pursue larger and more complex requirements. The mentor protégé program is designed to pair up nascent firms that are facing potential development gaps with larger, more experienced firms that can assist in filling those gaps.
Mentors typically provide support in areas such as managerial experience, past performance qualifications, project implementation know-how and the ability to manage larger and complex contracts.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
iHerb Customer Reviews
Savings of: $10.80 (43% off)
Posted by Reviewer3270327 on Nov 13, 2008
The best of the B formulas
Posted by Reviewer1095769 on Jun 22, 2010
This is a very good product and at an affordable price. In my use of this over the last year I feel the difference!
Best B Mix
Posted by Reviewer3001824 on Jun 07, 2010
This is great for low thyroid/adrenals.
Great Formula
Posted by Reviewer1652502 on May 18, 2010
I was looking for a B-Complex that was easy to swallow,and didn't STINK! This one fits my criteria, and i am very happy with it. Pat
Great product
Posted by Reviewer1735006 on Jul 18, 2010
My husband noticed a considerable difference in his energy level while taking these. We like Jarrow in general..have been happy with all their products so far.
Right price, no odor
Posted by Reviewer2522753 on Jun 03, 2010
I never liked taking B complex because of the smell, but this one has low odor so it's easier to take and the price is right!!
Best B Complex on website...
Posted by Reviewer2963961 on Jun 04, 2010
IMO this is the best B Complex formula on this website. Has all the right B's included for proper absorption. Taken during day decreases fatigue. Good price too.
very good
Posted by Reviewer3308983 on May 14, 2010
Gives me energy. Has the right kind of B-12 in it, methlycobalamin, which is easily absorbed by the body.
Perfect addition to diet
Posted by Reviewer3056362 on Aug 11, 2010
Since I started taking these I've been more energized and feeling great. They are the perfect addition to your regular set of vitamins. Take them with breakfast or lunch so that you get the full benefit by the time the afternoon rolls around. One per day is plenty for me, and I rarely have the flush generally associated with niacin.
Only B complex I've ever been able to tolerate!
Posted by Reviewer2022209 on Dec 05, 2010
I have truly tried lots of B complex vitamins over the years and they always made my kidneys ache. This product is very gentle and is somehow more absorable. A friend recommended it to me and it has absolutely helped me with no ill effects. I am very grateful to have found this B formula as B's are necessary for a healthy nervous system and I certainly need help with that! Thanks!


text:
Affluent Lifestyle Guide
La Reserve by Wine Spectator is the exclusive 24-seat wine and food pairing restaurant-at-sea featured on Oceania's Riviera and Marina ocean liners. From its dining venues to a hands-on Bon Appétit Culinary Center (all of which are driven by celebrity chef Jacques Pépin), it comes as no surprise that Oceania won the Best for Foodies award in the 2015 Fodor's World's Best Cruises list.
Every year, Audi holds an epic weekend in Aspen for journalists, celebrities and invited guests, and this year truly outshined the rest. Not only was the brand new 2017 Audi Q7 SUV our main means of transportation, we also checked out the World Snow Polo Championship, schmoozed in The Little Nell's Paepcke Suite, hit the slopes, enjoyed a picture-perfect sleigh ride and partied at the Caribou Club with celebs. Oh yeah, and ate tons of delicious food.
It's just not a proper Christmas without traditional holiday desserts like gingerbread and peppermint bark. Count on master chef Thomas Keller to put the icing on the cake with his menu of sweet treats from Bouchon Bakery on the ground level of his Bouchon Bistro in Beverly Hills, just two blocks from Rodeo Drive.
I love to cook, but I rarely have the time. Okay, so I have the time, but let's be honest, I'd rather binge watch the newest Netflix series than figure out what I want to make for dinner. Besides, trekking to the grocery store always ends with my getting home just in time to realize that I forgot one of the most important items. This is why I decided to try Plated, one of the most popular food delivery services out there that sends recipes and ingredients straight to your door.
Yountville, California embodies many quintessential visions you undoubtedly have when planning a Napa Valley excursion. It all started in 1836 when George Calvert Yount founded the town and planted Napa Valley's first official vineyard. Today, vines stretch from the Mayacamas mountains to the Napa River. Yountville's compact layout clustered around Washington St. is also perfect for biking not only on the existing street grid, but along the ever-expanding Napa Valley Vine Trail, which when completed, will extend 47 miles from Vallejo to Calistoga.
With celebrities such as George Clooney, Robert De Niro and business magnate Richard Branson having vacation homes in the area, restaurants along Italy's beautiful Lake Como serve up some very creative dishes. By far, the best way to enjoy this Italian gourmet tour is to rent a car and meander along the lake shoreline to stop off at the below leading restaurants.
Whenever I get a new gadget to try, I generally bypass the directions and jump right into the action, which may not turn out so hot if the device in question is complicated. Thankfully, the Omega TWN30S Twin Gear Juicer let me go full steam ahead without any problems—well, none that were the fault of the machine, that is.
If you've ever eaten at Los Angeles' n/naka, then congrats, you've eaten at one of the nation's top 10 restaurants. Announced last week, OpenTable released their list of the best 100 eateries in America and five of the top 10 hail from the west coast (three from California). Based on an analysis of more than 5 million reviews, the rankings were from verified diners across over 20,000 restaurants.
OpenTable released its list of the 100 Best Restaurants in America for 2015 last week and Philly's very own Vetri cracked the top 10. The list is tallied by using the site's over five million restaurant reviews and whittling down 20,000 establishments to just 100. With over 1,100 reviews and a five-star rating, it's no surprise that the rustic Vetri came in tenth.
Dublin's gourmet dining scene is ever expanding, with old and new coming together to offer locals and visitors a wide variety of culinary options. Whether you're a carnivore or an all-natural vegetarian, this iconic city can provide. The below four restaurants bring some much-needed experimentation to local tradition, offering special menus, romantic settings, chef interactions and gorgeous scenery.
USA Today's 10Best Reader's Choice poll recently voted Naples, Florida the nation's top "Best Destination for Luxury Travelers," leaving high-roller contenders such as Beverly Hills, Palm Beach, Maui, and Aspen in the dust. Good call, since what's not to love about this charming resort town with its vibrant cultural scene, huge selection of eclectic restaurants (many with outdoor patios) and historic designer shopping streets, surrounded by a gorgeous tropical backdrop. If you're planning on taking a trip to the Eastern city next year, here are some quick recommendations for accommodations, dining and shopping:
Executive Chef Aron Schwartz at Marina Kitchen within San Diego's Marriott Marquis Hotel went away with the highly coveted "Chef of the Fest" title at the 2015 San Diego Bay Wine & Food Festival which took place from November 16-22.
Knowing that last year's Hurricane Odile did its best to crush the seaside tourist hotspot, I didn't quite know what to expect on my very first trip to Cabo San Lucas. It turns out that aside for some residual hotel renovations, the city has almost completely recovered from the weather disaster. It became pretty obvious within my first day there that locals and business owners are still trying to get the word out that Cabo is bigger and better than ever, with fun desert adventures to be had and gourmet food to be devoured.
The perfect location can make or break a restaurant, but that isn't an issue for Rustic Stone in downtown Dublin. Just a short stroll from Trinity College where literary luminaries such as Oscar Wilde and Samuel Beckett developed their penmanship, Rustic Stone sits across from one of Dublin's trendiest areas, Temple Bar.
As the nutritionist for NBC's The Biggest Loser, James Beard Award-winning chef Cheryl Forberg seems to know a thing or two about healthy eating, especially when it comes to our holiday favorites. Sure, you can go on a strict diet right after Thanksgiving as a punishment for that second (or fourth) slice of pie, or you can prepare a recipe that really isn't that bad to begin with.


text:
Yukon Gold Season 3 Episode 9 - Home Stretch
Watch Yukon Gold season 3 episode 9 online for free at WatchSeriesLite. Yukon Gold is a ten part series set to explore four professional gold-mining families and the competition in northern Canada. It follows 4 gold mining crews who…
Air Date: April 22, 2015
Share this episode on Facebook Twitter Google+
no available links yet


text:
(SOLD OUT) SORRY THIS FRIDAY SHOW IS NOW SOLD OUT – 9pm
Posted: September 24th, 2012 By: Comedy Union | No Comments »THIS FRIDAY NIGHT SHOW IS NOW SOLD OUT...ONLY SATURDAY NIGHT TICKETS REMAIN... Get Ready for an INCREDIBLE SPECIAL EVENT WEEKEND w/ KYM WHITLEY & DAVID A. ARNOLD IN 3 GIGANTIC SHOWS! Come get you Laugh On this FRIDAY JULY 15TH at 9pm AND SATURDAY JULY 16th at 8pm & 1030pm. The "HE SAID SHE SAID" Comedy Show kicks off on FRIDAY, JULY 15th @ 9pm!!! And continues on SATURDAY JULY 16th at 8pm OR 1030pm. Join us for more LAUGHS than you can handle... CALL 323-934-9300 NOW for reservations, more info, & to buy your tickets in advance! PRE-PURCHASING YOUR TICKET(S) GUARANTEE(S) YOUR SEATING & PRESALE TICKETS ARE $12 EACH. ALL PRESALE TICKETS ARE NON-REFUNDABLE!!!! GENERAL RSVP SEATING IS $20 EACH AT DOOR w/ 1ST COME, 1ST SERVE SEATING.
THIS IS A SPECIAL EVENT / INDEPENDENTLY PRODUCED COMEDY SHOW – – NO COMEDY UNION DISCOUNTS OR PROMOTIONS ACCEPTED –[caption id="attachment_8606" align="aligncenter" width="200"] Click HERE to Enlarge[/caption] Category: Uncategorized
Kevin Hart hosting VMAs TONIGHT! Black Comedy is Back!
Posted: September 6th, 2012 By: Comedy Union | No Comments »
The Comedy Union Family is proud and excited that KEVIN HART will be hosting the VMAs tonight. Bragging is not cute, but Kevin is and has always been a regular at the Comedy Union, so were not surprised. Ever since Kevin moved to Los Angeles, he has made The Comedy Union his home club and we are even more delighted that he visited us few nights ago to work out all his brilliant material....When asked by The Hollywood Reporter what his hosting philosophy will be, Kevin responded that he will do whatever it takes to offend people! We know Kevin is going to KILL it tonight- as he does at the Comedy Union whenever he performs here. The world will see what we already knew the best man won the job... doesn't get any better than Kevin hosting the VMAs! Kevin Hart on Hosting the VMAs As lovers of Black Comedy this is a huge event, In Kevin, we are witnessing first hand, the making of special type of comic.Tonight a star is born.....We Love You.!!!!!!!We'll definitely be watching tonight and supporting all you do. You are the measuring stick in black comedy RIGHT NOW, so please tell them all that it's a 2 drink minimum, they'll believe you. Go get em Kev http://youtu.be/8pIPwvaLJtg Category: Blog


text:
Smith's Edgeware Honing Solution
Product Information:
Use Smith's® edgeware™ honing solution on all of your sharpening stones. This non-petroleum based solution features built-in stone cleaning agents and rust and corrosion inhibitors. It is excellent for lubricating Arkansas or diamond stones.
- Non-petroleum based
- Built-in stone cleaning agents and rust and corrosion inhibitors
- For use on all sharpening stones
- Excellent for lubricating Arkansas or diamond stones
- Easy to use
Country of Origin: United StatesWeb ID: 11713057
Customer Reviews:
Rated 4.1 out of 5�by 10 reviewers.
Rated 3 out of 5�by Raldo Oil is oil, just depends on the stone I bought this oil for my sharpening stone, I guess it works but your stone needs to be "seasoned"....by thatI mean that your stone shouldn't be so dry that it absorbs all the oil. That's what happened to me and I ended up using quite a bit of oil just to get it to work properly. The oil did its job but I don't have enough oil for later usage. I would recommend soaking the stone in marvel's mystery oil fully submerge first. September 6, 2016
Rated 5 out of 5�by Moose Worked as deacribed Good product, worked as described. It was a little thick, I think if it were just a bit thinner it would work better. July 3, 2016
Rated 5 out of 5�by Koolaid highly recommend The name brand says it all, the best one I have tried November 4, 2014
Rated 2 out of 5�by chirokid Not Thick Enough I am not the greatest person to do a review, but am not thrilled with the quality of this product. I am using it. Prior honing solutions that I have used were a little bit thicker. This seemed to make them easier to work with. Smiths flows and runs down the stone. It may work well on a flat stone. I am using the Lansky Sharpening system so the stone is not laying flat. October 29, 2014
Rated 5 out of 5�by Nate904 Works great for both hunting & kitchen cutlery I have used this product for quite some time to sharpen my hunting knives as well as our kitchen cutlery set. Works great! October 23, 2014
Rated 4 out of 5�by CZ Honing solution. Solution works well but the bottle cap needs to be redesigned because everytime you tip the bottle it' shoots solution across the table. July 15, 2014
Rated 4 out of 5�by Mike676 So easy to use This is one of the best Honing Oils I have ever used. Goes on smooth, easy clean up and doesn't have a strong odor. July 13, 2014
Rated 4 out of 5�by lefty 58 good product this honing oil works very well with my try hone sharpening stones. October 29, 2013
Rated 5 out of 5�by Taldin Good honing solution This is a great honing solution. In particular it helps keep the stone clean by lifting out the metal - much more so than oil type solutions. It also doesn't smell and is cloth or paper towel wipe up. December 12, 2012
Rated 4 out of 5�by Bruce the Moose A neccesity when sharpening a knife Used on a diamond sharpening stone. Use sparingly. April 30, 2012
1-10 of 10


text:
Alt+0 to show this section, Tab to navigate forward, Shift+Tab key to navigate backward, Enter to access link, and Esc to reset
We use cookies to give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse the site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time but if you do, you may lose some functionality. More information can be found in our Terms and Conditions and Cookie policy.
More than 2 million people have safe water and sanitation thanks to the HSBC Water Programme.
HSBC has increased its global growth and inflation forecasts for the next two years. But, says Janet Henry, there are still plenty of reasons to be nervous.
More from
News and insight
China is ready to play a bigger global role, says Stuart Gulliver.
Our purpose
About HSBC
Investing in digital innovation
China: five key themes for 2017
The Technology Advisory Board is key to helping us adopt technology that makes HSBC simpler, better and faster for our 46 million customers
Find out opportunities we offer for students and graduates, including internships, global graduate programmes and entry-level positions.
More from
The UAE's economic transformation
Prices delayed by at least 15 minutes
© Thomson Reuters


text:
Welcome to CAPSolutions
CAPSolutions supply assembly and automation machines, vision inspection systems, induction sealing and plastic welding machines. We supply these into the packaging industry, first tier automotive companies and a range of end user industries such as food and beverage, pharmaceutical and healthcare.
We have for many years been leading suppliers to the caps and closures and packaging industry for High speed assembly machines, Wadding machines , Plastic taps, Induction sealing machines and our patented LINE PATROLMAN QA instrument and plastic dispensing taps.
The have also recently added high performance PC based High speed vision inspection systems to our product range. These advanced camera inspection systems are ideal for demanding applications such as 100% high speed inspection of bottles, caps and closures, print and decoration and other products.
We have selected all of these machines to be the best in their field and manufactured by market-leading suppliers. We will be pleased to evaluate your needs and make technical proposals for special purpose machines custom made to your requirements.
So, if you have an application involving assembly, automation, inspection, sealing or welding, please telephone us on 01405 763 040 or fill in the Contact Us form on this website. We will be pleased to discuss your requirement and offer you a standard or bespoke solution if at all possible.


text: A powwow is considered a celebration of life. It is called Wacipi (WAH CHEE PEE) in the Lakota/Dakota language and Ni-mi-win in Anishinabe (Chippewa/Ojibwa) language. This celebration is a time when people of all ages can gather together, to sing, dance, renew old friendships, make new friends, and share the beauty of life.


text:
Path To Better
Start today with chiropractic care.
Make your appointment today.
Relief is Possible
a serious impact on your health, leading to
months or even years of chronic pain.
Above The
is what you can expect from
Apollo Chiropractic.
Here at Apollo Chiropractor we also specialize in Functional Medicine like Type II Diabetes and Adrenal Fatigue.
Overall Wellness & Recovery Matter
Salt Lake City Chiropractors
Back pain? Injury from a sporting event? Whiplash from an auto collision? When it comes to comprehensive recovery, pain management, musculoskeletal treatments and general chiropractic care, our chiropractors in Salt Lake City here to help.
We offer a range of chiropractic treatments in Murray and surrounding areas, providing patients quick access to our experienced and friendly chiropractic physicians. We provide a full in-house clinic for all your health needs so you don't need to visit multiple offices for your recovery and injury treatment.
With our services and extensive clinical experience, you can expect individualized treatment for your specific condition and recovery requirements.
Offering a Comprehensive Range of Services
We don't just provide care to manage pain. Our Salt Lake City chiropractors will help restore balance to your body and reduce the risk of injuries in the future. Through thorough and personalized care, we will help you get back on your feet and begin your journey to recovery.
Providing the Highest Level of Patient Care
We apply a hands-on approach to ensure patient satisfaction. Our practice utilizes non-invasive techniques and the latest in chiropractic technology and treatment to help you maintain overall wellness while recovering from any back or musculoskeletal injury, auto accident, or sports injury. We also work with a network of doctors, physical therapists, insurance providers, and even attorneys to assist with your healthcare needs.
Your road to recovery and a chance at a better quality of life starts at Apollo Chiropractic. Contact us today to find out more about how our chiropractors in Salt Lake City can help.
Is Apollo Right For You?
The patients that seem to get the best results in our practice are people who:
- Enjoy friendly, reliable and quality service
- Want detailed doctors that genuinely care for their patients
- Want a doctor that understands the extent pain can affect your life
- Have tried other treatments without success
- Are ready for a dramatic life change with peak performance
We show our patients we care by taking the time to provide the friendliest, most detailed and effective services we can. We create relationships of trust by providing consistent and reliable experiences and services. We are committed to our patients, being knowledgeable, creating raving fans and being professional.
Dr Travis is amazing. He took such good care of me and made me feel important. I was having lower back and neck pain and just after 3 visits I feel wonderful. Thank you so much and plus your receptionist is amazing. She is such a sweetheart and remembers everyone's name. I will for sure come to you again as needed and refer people to you.
Hubby and I got in a car accident, Dr Travis was recommended to us by my mother, I was definitely trusting her advice and glad I did, this is already something we weren't looking forward to, but the Apollo group made it a very nice experience from their caring and friendly receptionist, their awesome massage therapists and physicians, Dr Travis was very nice, cares personally for his patients, and knows what he is doing. They worked with our super busy schedules, its a bitter sweet to let them go, but their care has me back to new! =) definitely recommend.
Such a great office, all around. Dr Scott has given the very best treatment and my experience has been wonderful. Everyone at the office is exceptional and Lagi is the very best office staff person I've ever had the privilege to meet. She is so fun and makes everyone feel right at home and like she's known you forever. My one hour massage by Emily was a huge turning point in my healing process and it's just gotten better and better since then. What a great team.
For several years I have suffered chronic lower back pain and have ignored my doctors' advice to see a chiropractor. This month I was suddenly hit with severe neck pain. After weeks of no improvement I decided it was time to get help. I discovered Apollo Chiropractor here in Murray was highly rated and they accepted walk in customers. On my first visit, Dr. Castillon reduced the pain substantially. Two weeks later, my pain is all but gone in both my neck and my lower back. The staff here are very friendly and personable. I was never a believer in chiropractors but I am now for life. Thank you Dr. Castillon and Apollo Chiropractic! You have me as a customer for life!
I felt I was extremely taken care of when I first went to Apollo. The staff is extremely professional and kind. My experience was definitely the best I have ever had. I have since moved away from the Murray area, and have stopped going. I have tried to find other Chiropractic offices that give the same experience that Apollo gave me and I just cannot find one. I am willing to drive the extra distance just to see them. I would recommend Apollo Chiropractic to anyone!
When I moved to Utah, I was worried about finding a chiropractor that was as good as the one that I had. Then I meet Dr. Travis and Dr. Asay who have far exceeded my expectations. They have really set the chiropractic bar high for me. Not only are the friendly, they take the time to listen to your problems and don't rush through your adjustment. It is always such a great experience every time I go to Apollo Chiropractic! From the moment you walk through the door and are greeted by Lagi (who is such a delight) through your adjustment you won't be disappointed.
I have always been a skeptic of Chiropractic care. Many years ago, I tore my Achilles tendon, and as part of my rehabilitation, I initiated my first chiropractic assessment. They found a gross imbalance in how I distributed my weight and carried my posture, so I started a quest to improve my structural self. Dr. Asay was instrumental in providing the original adjustment and care to put my body back in order. I now am able to play all the sports I once did and have the core and structural strength to support it. I still need adjustment about every 6 months when something gets misaligned, but after 1-2 treatments at Apollo, I'm good as new again. Everyone in their staff is positive and helpful. Thanks to their service, I'm now a firm believer in chiropractic care!
- I love this place and love the people even more. After a bad snowmobiling accident, I was adjusted by Dr. Travis Castillon and he did an amazing job. He was very professional and friendly. Also, I absolutely love their office manager, Lagi. She just the nicest person and she always knows how to put a smile on your face.
Dr. Asay is a wizard! I've had lower back issues for several years and after working with him for a few months, I feel better and can do more than I've been able to in a very long time. Not only is he a fantastic doctor, he is a great person and treats you like you're the only patient he has. The office is very well kept and staffed by great people. I highly recommend Apollo Chiropractic to anyone and everyone.


text:
WATERCOLOUR by Scarlett Damen is creating Watercolor Tutorials
Patreon launched 295 days ago (Mar 30th 2016)
● Patrons
● Earnings per month
● Avg support per patron
Popular Patreon Creators Patreon creators with a recent high growth rate.
Do you enjoy getting data on WATERCOLOUR by Scarlett Damen? Help improve it by supporting Graphtreon.


text:
[HOT] crow black chicken electric soup mp3 download file Wf5c free now
Description crow black chicken electric soup mp3
Name: crow black chicken electric soup mp3
Language: ALL
TECH SUPPORT: crow_black_chicken_electric_soup_mp3
Last updated: 04/15/2015 02:20:34
Views: 75342 :
Website | All Programs
FreewareRequires: Win 10 / 8 / 7 / Vista / XPDownloads: 41554 times
Avg. user rating:
5 stars 77% 144 stars 11% 23 stars 11% 22 stars 0% 01 star 0% 0
Start Download
Editors' Review:
04/15/2015 02:20:34
"These guys do the nasty blues like the devil hisself was hurting and rock like they'll skate come judgement day" Ray Wylie Hubbard. Tour Dates1/15/2013 · Recorded in Whelans at our album launch on the 20th July 2012 Debut Album 'Electric Soup' available to BUY from http://www.crowblackchicken.com/ Film ...SOUP is a Crossover Prog / Progressive Rock artist from Norway. This page includes SOUP's : biography, official website, pictures, videos from YouTube, MP3 (free ...We are "Go To" place for information about chicken care, breeds, & sustainable living. We search constantly for the latest news and information about chickens, so you ...The X-ACTO Model KS Table or Wall Mount Pencil Sharpener is an essential addition to schools, offices and workspaces that require a lot of pencil work.For a fast and simple way to cook and keep rice warm until you are ready to serve, use the Black & Decker 3-Cup Rice Cooker. Featuring a heavy-duty tempered glass lid ...Cuisinart SSB1U Soup Maker, Black: SSB1U Cuisinart Soup Maker Black: Amazon.co.uk: Kitchen & HomeThe pileated is a crow-size, crested woodpecker of forested areas that feeds largely on carpenter ants and beetles extracted from fallen logs, stumps, and living trees.MSN UAE's latest lifestyle news featuring style, beauty, celebrity, home & garde, wellness from all of the top sources6/18/2011 · Best Portuguese Chicken is an Etobicoke restaurant serving chicken, fish, and roast beef....
crow black chicken electric soup mp3
Other files:
how to look good women
hot bondage games
microsoft office activation assistant
intel 82801 ac 97 audio controller
pegasus verdanza shower head
hamasaki humming 7 4 mp3
how to roll a cigarette
how to build your own waterfall
samsung 50 plasma a650
among the nephites mp3
torrent for movie knocked up
usb secure driver v 2 1
holiday entertaining guide ideas
net sample program
caravan of love mp3
flir t335 pdf
usb pc camera 301p driver download
toshiba recovery a30 download
download barcode 39
Suede - Filmstar mp3
out handheld game
rapidshare manual mercedes s300 w140
how to open a fortress combination lock
nay gunz mp3
download mpeg pink president


text:
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic to the Top
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
Re: 1.18 patch FAL-SS?!
Re: 1.18 patch FAL-SS?!
Re: 1.18 patch FAL-SS?!
Re: 1.18 patch FAL-SS?!
wybrendeuling wrote:
:'( why do l hear this so much?!, people like it better. But really mine jams ALL THE TIME!!! I was BEAST when it didnt jam but then l started jamming ever since about a year ago!! whyyyyy
It's lag in my experience. either you or the host.
Connection issues cause a spread of shots to try to fire all at once (Shotgun M9/AK style) to prevent that the gun jams up because if a FAL or G-MAL fired all at once the opponent is dead. No questions asked.
Re: 1.18 patch FAL-SS?!
wybrendeuling wrote:
How do l know if l'm lagging?! Or how to fix?!
I could be wrong on some of this. Not all of it though.
- If you are in a party ask your friends how many bars your connection is showing
- Before a match check opponents connection bars, if they are all low, you'll get a laggy match regardless of who is actually lagging.
- There are instances when everything will look fine and you may just be losing connection data (Don't really know how to help you on that)
- The final one... Try to play during reasonable hours for you, you are more likely to find people nearer your location at your own locale peak time.
As for fixing the first two...
A better connection: Are you using wired or wireless? If you are using wireless that explains everything or should. Wireless has issues, think of the amount of time data flies through the air to your PS3.
If wired? Maybe the wired cable is broken or split somewhere? A new wire could help.
If those two fail, maybe your connection is not very good and you need to call your provider to clarify it's working properly.
or maybe it's the one I can't help you with being the losing data thing. I actually lose data too sometimes and have no idea how to stop it happening apart from maybe just changing my provider. calling your provider may help but it certainly didn't help me.
Re: 1.18 patch FAL-SS?!
Btw wycliff no offence but that is nonsense l always shoot the same rhythm and if l do the 2 shots slow then trigger it still jams! Sometimes it is 'jamless' a couple secs and then it starts jamming ALL OVER THE BLOODY PLACE!


text:
Master MAS304DFSXT 30" Natural Gas Dual-Fuel Self-Clean Range XT With 4 Brass Burners 18000 BTUs Power Burner 3.4 cu. ft. Electric Self-Clean Convection Oven
Home > Appliances Connection > Appliances > Ovens > Freestanding Ranges > Dual Fuel Range
|These handsome Bertazzoni Master Series ranges bring a true professional touch to your cooking They are fully engineered for performance and designed with standard dimensions to work with existing kitchen layouts and units
$25 Off Appliances Connection Coupon Code - Use SAVE25 at checkout on select purchases for a limited time.
Only $3,999.00 at AppliancesConnection.com


text:
LOS ANGELES R.B. Greaves, a pop singer whose "Take a Letter, Maria" was a 1969 hit, has died in Los Angeles. He was 68.
Ronald Bertram Greaves died of prostate cancer on Sept. 27 at his home, said Craig Harvey, chief of operations for the Los Angeles County Department of Coroner.
Greaves was a nephew of the legendary R& B singer Sam Cooke. He was born on a U.S. Air Force base in the former British Guyana.
Living in the United Kingdom in the 1960s, he recorded several soul singles as Sonny Childe.
It was after moving to the United States that he scored his biggest hit as R.B. Greaves.
"Take a Letter, Maria" tells the story of a man who comes home to find "the woman I thought I knew in the arms of another man."
He dictates a final letter to her through his secretary with the chorus: "Take a letter, Maria. Address it to my wife. Say I won't be coming home, gonna start a new life."
The tune ends on a hopeful note, however, as the man asks his secretary out to dinner.
The song, with its soul style, catchy chorus and brassy horn edge, went to No. 2 on the Billboard chart in 1969. It earned Greaves a gold record, selling a million copies, and remains a popular oldie.
Greaves also broke into the Top 40 in 1970 with his version of the Burt Bacharach-Hal David tune "(There's) Always Something There to Remind Me."
His career flagged in the 1970s, however.
Most Popular
- Man struck, killed after multi-vehicle crash on 241 toll road near 91 freeway
- Woman gets year in jail for scamming investors, church members out of millions
- Cops searching for men who sideswiped police vehicle in Anaheim, crashed in Yorba Linda
- Round 2: Second storm douses Orange County
- As Nordstrom exits Mainplace Mall, several new tenants are on tap for Santa Ana mall
User Agreement
Comments are encouraged, but you must follow our Privacy Policy Policy & Terms of Use
Keep it civil and stay on topic. No profanity, vulgarity, racial slurs or personal attacks. People who harass others or joke about tragedies will be blocked. By posting your comment, you agree to allow Orange County Register Communications, Inc. the right to republish your name and comment in additional Register publications without any notification or payment.


text:
Section 508 Website Accessibility
Certain documents on this site are available as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file. PDF content requires Adobe's Acrobat Reader and can be downloaded by visiting https://get.adobe.com/reader.
The University encourages anyone needing assistance in accessing content found on the University's website to contact the FGCU office or department that maintains the webpage. For an accessible version of PDF material, please contact FGCU Adaptive Services at firstname.lastname@example.com or by calling 239 590-7956.
Contact Us Library 4th Floor Room 458(239) firstname.lastname@example.com
Mission Statement The FGCU Physical Plant is dedicated to provide resources and to constantly maintain all university buildings, grounds, and equipment that are fundamental to a healthy academic environment. The Physical Plant team is committed to maintaining an atmosphere that will foster pride, teamwork, and cooperation among the university faculty, staff, students, and visitors.�
The Physical Plant has several projects and programs intended to increase environmental awareness and stewardship on campus. �Help is needed to both start new initiatives and to continue projects that have been implemented; evaluations and research are also needed to determine success of implemented plans.� Projects include, but are not limited to: building inspections, tree inventory and tree mapping on campus, electricity and water monitoring, marketing campaigns, and building relationships with student organizations, faculty and administrative staff.� �Students will count trees in certain segments on campus, identifying the different types of trees, research benefits to wildlife and air quality and post results on webpage. �They will also perform room inspections checking for phantom loads and excessive electricity use. �Students will monitor recycling efforts on campus and note where additional receptacles or signage is necessary and propose changes to increase compliance. �Students will also research other Universities to find additional efforts to encourage and increase environmental sustainability on campus and in the surrounding community.� Student work is intended to instill best practices in a hands-on manner that students will take to their field of practice, career location and home environment.
Work Experience, great atmosphere, and reference for resume.
Opportunity to be involved with making positive changes on the campus and working with others who want to learn practical ways to make a big difference.
<-- Back to Search