Renewable Energy Law and Policy covers the aspects of most renewable energy deals, including issues pertaining to structuring, real estate, finance, land use, contracts, environmental, corporate, tax, and securities law.

American Renewable Energy Act of 2021 – This bill establishes an annual renewable energy standard for retail electricity suppliers. The standard requires suppliers to increase their renewable energy generation each year and generate at least 70% renewable electricity by 2030.

Sun Action Trackers, LLC  - Improve Your Solar Plant Performance

Our company has supplied 1GW of proven solar tracking and racking systems worldwide combined with our world-class dual axis tracking deployment of 400 MW in the state of Texas.  We offer bankable solutions to residential, commercial and utility scaled projects in the U.S., and worldwide. Our world-class products include Dual Axis Solar Trackers and, Solar Carport Systems, and Fixed Tilt mounting systems to fit your solar energy needs.

Our tracking systems are engineered to provide better performance and value. That is why we’ve integrated them with our patented Real-Time Sensing (RTS) Technology which offers complete tracking. RTS works in real-time, it positions our trackers to the highest point of irradiation helping them absorb the maximum sunlight.

We centralize on making clean renewable energy accessible to everyone, and are committed in delivering high quality products on time, within budget, and to our customer’s expectations. Through concerted dedication to our principles of Quality, Production and Safety. We envision continued growth within the renewables industry and to be a world-class total solutions manufacturer.

Social media platform X said Saturday it will close its operations in Brazil, claiming Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes threatened to arrest its legal representative in Brazil if they did not comply with orders.

X is removing all remaining Brazil staff in the country “effective immediately,” though the company said service will still be available to the people of Brazil. The company did not clarify how it could claim to suspend operations while continuing to provide services to Brazilians.

Earlier this year, the company clashed with de Moraes over free speech, far-right accounts and misinformation on X. The company said his most recent orders amounted to censorship, and shared a copy of the document on X.

The Supreme Court’s press office didn’t immediately respond to Associated Press email requests seeking comment, or to confirm the veracity of the document, on Saturday.

In the United States, free speech is a constitutional right that’s much more permissive than in many countries, including Brazil, where de Moraes in April ordered an investigation into CEO Elon Musk over the dissemination of defamatory fake news and another probe over possible obstruction, incitement and criminal organization.

Brazil’s political right has long characterized de Moraes as overstepping his bounds to clamp down on free speech and engage in political persecution.

Whether investigating former President Jair Bolsonaro, banishing his far-right allies from social media, or ordering the arrest of supporters who stormed government buildings on Jan. 8, 2023, de Moraes has aggressively pursued those he views as undermining Brazil’s young democracy.

“Moraes has chosen to threaten our staff in Brazil rather than respect the law or due process,” the company said in a statement on X.

In a tweet Saturday morning, the self-proclaimed “free speech absolutist” and owner of X, Musk, said de Moraes “is an utter disgrace to justice.”

KOREAN AIR OFFERS A RANGE OF UNIQUE BENEFITS FOR EXPAT PILOTS THAT ENHANCE YOUR PROFESSIONAL LIFE WHILE ENSURING A BETTER QUALITY OF LIFE.

Tailored Commuting : Commute from home with the privilege of selecting your Home Base from Korean Air’s global network. What’s more, you can commute in Business Class, free of charge. No lines, no bid, you simply choose the days you want to be home.

Flexible Time Off :  Enjoy a generous time-off policy that includes 11 consecutive days at home, in addition to 3 travel days each month, allowing you to select the days you wish to spend at home.

Sick Leave :  Benefit from 14 days of paid sick leave per year (10 for First Officers) to ensure your well-being is a top priority.

Competitive Pay :  We offer competitive compensation, including per-diems and overtime payments, ensuring your hard work is duly rewarded.

Renewable Contract :  A renewable 5-year contract, with potential extensions to age 65, provides you with long-term stability.

Travel Benefits :  Enjoy generous travel benefits for you and your family, making exploration and adventure a part of your lifestyle.

Premium Hotels :  Seoul/Incheon serves as the operational base, providing you with top-tier accommodation at the Grand Hyatt Incheon offering access to 5-star amenities and dining options.

World-Class Airport :  Incheon International Airport (ICN) has earned its place as one of the world’s best airports, guaranteeing you a seamless and enjoyable travel experience.

https://flytas.com/benefits/

Two higher-end models of the Apple Watch can go on sale again after a federal court temporarily lifted a sales halt ordered by the International Trade Commission over a patent dispute.

The ITC, a federal agency, ordered the halt in October to block Apple from using specific technologies underpinning a blood-oxygen measurement system in its Series 9 and Ultra 2 watches. Apple has been embroiled in an intellectual property dispute with the medical technology company Masimo over those technologies.

Apple cut off online sales of the watches in the U.S. last week just days from the Christmas holiday to comply with the ITC ruling. The court’s action will allow sales of the two Apple Watch models pending its decision on whether to also permit sales as it weighs Apple’s appeal.

The two watch models will be available at Apple’s online store by noon Pacific Time on Thursday, according to the company. They will return to some Apple stores Wednesday, with wider availability expected by Saturday.

This isn’t the first patent roadblock the Apple Watch has run into as the company morphs its watches into health-management devices. Last year, the ITC ruled that Apple had infringed on the wearable EKG technology of AliveCor — a decision the Biden administration declined to overturn. That dispute hasn’t directly affected Apple Watch sales yet because another regulatory body had ruled that AliveCor’s technology isn’t patentable. The legal tussle on that issue is still ongoing.

The patent headaches facing Apple as it tries to infuse more medical technology into its watch models make it increasingly likely the company will either have to start working out licensing deals or simply acquiring startups specializing in the field, Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives predicted.

In a historic ruling, Panama’s Supreme Court this week declared that legislation granting a Canadian copper mine a 20-year concession was unconstitutional, a decision celebrated by thousands of Panamanians activists who had argued the project would damage a forested coastal area and threaten water supplies.

The mine, which will now close, has been an important economic engine for the country. But it also triggered massive protests that paralyzed the Central American nation for over a month, mobilizing a broad swath of Panamanian society, including Indigenous communities, who said the mine was destroying key ecosystems they depend on.

In the unanimous decision Tuesday, the high court highlighted those environmental and human rights concerns, and ruled the contract violated 25 articles of Panama’s constitution. Those include the right to live in a pollution-free environment, the obligation of the state to protect the health of minors and its commitment to promote the economic and political engagement of Indigenous and rural communities.

The ruling would lead to the closure of Minera Panama, the local subsidiary of Canada’s First Quantum Minerals and the largest open-pit copper mine in Central America, according to jurists and environmental activists.

The court said the government should no longer recognize the existence of the mine’s concession and Panama’s President Laurentino Cortizo said “the transition process for an orderly and safe closure of the mine will begin.”

Analysts say it appears highly unlikely that Panama’s government and the mining company will pursue a new agreement based on the resounding rejection by Panamanians.

“There are sectors in the country that would like a new contract, but the population itself does not want more open-pit mining, the message was clear,” said Rolando Gordón, dean of the economics faculty at the state-run University of Panama. “What remains now is to reach an agreement to close the mine.”

Analysts say the mining company is free to pursue international arbitration to seek compensation for the closure based on commercial treaties signed between Panama and Canada. Before the ruling, the company said it had the right to take steps to protect its investment.

With the ruling, the Panamanian government and the mining company are headed for arbitration at the World Bank’s international center for arbitration of investment disputes, in Washington, said Rodrigo Noriega, a Panamanian jurist.

Marta Cornejo, one of the plaintiffs, said “we are not afraid of any arbitration claim” and that they are “capable of proving that the corrupt tried to sell our nation and that a transnational company went ahead, knowing that it violated all constitutional norms.”

In a statement after the verdict, the mining company said it had “operated consistently with transparency and strict adherence to Panamanian legislation.” It emphasized that the contract was the result of “a long and transparent negotiation process, with the objective of promoting mutual economic benefits, guaranteeing the protection of the environment.”

Cortizo, who had defended the contract arguing it would keep 9,387 direct jobs, more than what the mine reports, said that the closing of the mine must take place in a “responsible and participative” manner due to the impact it would have.

The company has said the mine generates 40,000 jobs, including 7,000 direct jobs, and that it contributes the equivalent of 5% of Panama’s GDP.

The court verdict and the eventual closure of the mine prompted more protests, this time by mine workers.

Google on Monday confronted the second major U.S. antitrust trial in two months to cast the internet powerhouse as a brazen bully that uses its immense wealth and people’s dependence on one of its main products to stifle competition at consumers’ expense.

The trial that opened in a San Francisco federal court targets the Google Play Store that distributes apps for the company’s Android software that powers virtually all the world’s smartphones that aren’t made by Apple.

The case, stemming from a lawsuit filed by video game maker Epic Games, alleges Google has created an illegal monopoly on Android apps primarily so it can boost its profits through commissions ranging from 15% to 30% on purchases made within an app.

“The result of what Google is doing is higher prices, lower quality and less choice for everybody,” Epic attorney Gary Bornstein said Monday during a 45-minute opening statement before the 10-person jury that will decide the case.

Google attorney Glenn Pomerantz attempted to debunk the portrait of the company having a stranglehold on Android apps by outlining a wide gamut of competition from rival mobile and video game console stores, as well as Apple’s store for apps that run on its iPhone software.

“Because Google faces strong competition from Apple and others, it cannot be and is not a monopolist,” Pomerantz asserted in his opening statement.

Google’s strategy to lean on Android’s competition with Apple and the iPhone in its trial with Epic is tinged irony. That’s because Google in September became immersed in the biggest U.S. antitrust trial in a quarter century — a case largely centered on payments that the company makes to Apple to ensure its dominant search engine automatically fields queries made on iPhones.

A federal judge on Friday will decide whether disgraced Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes should serve a lengthy prison sentence for duping investors and endangering patients while peddling a bogus blood-testing technology.

Holmes’ sentencing in the same San Jose, California, courtroom where she was convicted on four counts of investor fraud and conspiracy in January marks a climactic moment in a saga that has been dissected in an HBO documentary and an award-winning Hulu TV series about her meteoric rise and mortifying downfall.

U.S. District Judge Edward Davila will take center stage as he weighs the federal government’s recommendation to send Holmes, 38, to federal prison for 15 years. That’s slightly less than the maximum sentence of 20 years she could face, but far longer than her legal team’s attempt to limit her incarceration to no more than 18 months, preferably served in home confinement. Her lawyers have argued that Holmes deserves more lenient treatment as a well-meaning entrepreneur who is now a devoted mother with another child on the way.

Prosecutors also want Holmes to pay $804 million in restitution. The amount covers most of the nearly $1 billion that Holmes raised from a list of sophisticated investors that included software magnate Larry Ellison, media mogul Rupert Murdoch, and the Walton family behind Walmart.

While wooing investors, Holmes leveraged a high-powered Theranos board that included former U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis, who testified against her during her trial, and two former U.S. Secretaries of State, Henry Kissinger and the late George Shultz, whose son submitted a statement blasting Holmes for concocting a scheme that played Shultz “for the fool.”

Davila’s judgment – and Holmes’ reporting date for a potential stint in prison -- could be affected by the former entrepreneur’s second pregnancy in two years. After giving birth to a son shortly before her trial started last year, Holmes became pregnant at some point while free on bail this year.

Federal prosecutors have asked a judge to sentence disgraced Theranos CE0 Elizabeth Holmes to 15 years in prison, arguing she deserves a lengthy prison term because her massive scheme duped investors out of hundreds of millions of dollars by falsely convincing them her company had developed a revolutionary blood testing device.

Calling the case “one of the most substantial white collar offenses Silicon Valley or any other District has seen,” prosecutors vehemently rejected defense attorneys’ characterization that Holmes had been unfairly victimized, in part by media coverage.

Holmes is set to appear for sentencing on Nov. 18 in federal court in San Jose, California, nearly a year after she was convicted of three felony counts of wire fraud and one felony count of conspiracy to commit fraud. She faces up to 20 years in prison for each count.

“She repeatedly chose lies, hype and the prospect of billions of dollars over patient safety and fair dealing with investors,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert S. Leach wrote in a 46-page brief filed Friday. “Elizabeth Holmes’ crimes were not failing, they were lying — lying in the most serious context, where everyone needed her to tell the truth.”

Holmes’ attorneys filed an 82-page document late Thursday calling for a lenient sentence of no more than 18 months, saying her reputation was permanently destroyed, turning her into a “caricature to be mocked and vilified.”

Besides asking that Holmes receive a lengthy prison sentence, prosecutors called for the 38-year-old pay $803,840,309 in restitution for her role in the yearslong scheme that turned her into one of the most widely respected and immensely wealthy entrepreneurs in the Silicon Valley and the United States.

“She preyed on hopes of her investors that a young, dynamic entrepreneur had changed healthcare. She leveraged the credibility of her illustrious board,” Leach wrote. “And, through her deceit, she attained spectacular fame, adoration, and billions of dollars of wealth.”

Leach also pointed to how, after Wall Street Journal reporter John Carreyrou exposed the scheme, Holmes “attacked him, along with his sources” and desperately tried to pin the blame on others.

“At trial, she blamed her COO (and longtime boyfriend), her board, her scientists, her business partners, her investors, her marketing firm, her attorneys, the media — everyone, that is, but herself,” Leach wrote.

The company’s former chief operating officer, 57-year-old Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, was convicted on 12 felony counts of investor and patient fraud in July during separate trial. He is scheduled to be sentenced Dec. 7.

And Leach wrote that the health of actual patients was put into jeopardy by what Holmes had done.

“As money was drying up, she went to market with an unproven and unreliable medical device,” he wrote. “When her lead assay developer quit as Theranos launched, she chillingly told the scientist: ‘she has a promise to deliver to the customer, she doesn’t have much of a choice but to go ahead with the launch.’”

Holmes’ attorneys have argued that if U.S. District Judge Edward Davila does decide to send her to prison, she deserves a lenient sentence because she poses no danger to the public and has no prior criminal history.

Romeo design is a high-end web design, web development, and branding agency based in San Antonio, Texas. We specialize in building professional-grade interactive solutions for mid- to large-sized companies from around the world.

We are an award-winning design company providing full-service creative solutions and internet marketing services.  Romeo design  has been building amazing websites and driving organic search results since 2004.  Form and function come together in each and every design that Romeo design creates. We firmly believe that you only have one chance to make a good impression with your website; Romeo Production can give your visitors a great first impression.

Whether you are in the market for a new website, want to redesign your current website, add or enhance your eCommerce shopping cart, implement blog or improve your overall brand, our designers will work with you to develop a creative cutting edge design and artistic way to enhance your brand messaging.

A judge ruled on Friday that Facebook owner Meta repeatedly and intentionally violated Washington campaign-finance law, and must pay penalties, the Washington state Attorney General’s Office said.

Attorney General Bob Ferguson’s office said the penalties will be determined at a later date and that the court also denied Meta’s effort to invalidate Washington’s law on political ad transparency.

The oral ruling happened during a hearing before King County Superior Court Judge Douglass North, The Seattle Times reported.

In a statement, Ferguson said his office defeated Facebook’s “cynical attempt” to gut Washington’s campaign-finance transparency law.

“On behalf of the people of Washington, I challenge Facebook to accept this decision and do something very simple – follow the law,” Ferguson said.

California-based Meta did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the newspaper.

The social media giant, which also owns Instagram and other social media platforms, has repeatedly objected to the requirements, and argued in a summary judgment motion that Washington’s law “unduly burdens political speech” and is “virtually impossible to comply with.”

The law allows financial penalties of $10,000 per violation, which can be tripled when violations are deemed intentional. The Attorney General’s Office asserts Facebook has committed hundreds of violations since 2018.

Social media has had a rough 2022 with lingering questions about advertising spending, political ads and a $44 billion takeover of Twitter that may or may not be happening, depending on which Elon Musk tweet you read.

Then late Monday Snap, which runs the Snapchat app that features vanishing messages and video special effects, issued a rather dire profit warning, saying that “the macroeconomic environment has deteriorated further and faster than anticipated,” since just last month.

Social media companies are competing for the same pool of advertising money that is increasingly under threat from spiking inflation and also changes at Apple Inc. that can restrict the information social media platforms can collect on users, a big selling point for advertisers.

Shares of Snap Inc. plunged 43% Tuesday. And with Wall Street unsure if the company is an outlier or a canary in the social media coal mine, shares of Facebook parent Meta Platforms, Twitter, Alphabet and Pinterest all slumped alongside it.

Snap late Monday said it now foresees revenue and adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization coming in below the low end of its prior forecasted range.

Justin Patterson of KeyBanc Capital Markets who follows social media warned investors not to read too much into Snap’s profit warning, calling it “a cautionary flag but not one to sound the alarm on the entire sector.”

Proponents in Maine of a stalled $1 billion energy corridor that sought to bringing Canadian hydropower to the New England power grid asked the state’s high court to breathe new life into the project Tuesday.

Attorneys for developers argued that a referendum in which voters rejected the project had the effect of retroactively overturning developers’ vested rights — and violating the constitutional separation of powers.

“The credibility of the state of Maine is at stake in this case,” said John Aromando, attorney for the New England Clean Energy Connect.

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court was asked to weigh in on two separate lawsuits involving the high-profile project.

Developers are seeking to declare the November referendum unconstitutional. Another lawsuit focuses on a lease allowing transmission lines to cross a short segment of state land.

Chief Justice Valerie Stanfill, noting the packed courtroom, acknowledged that there’s a high level of interest in the case. She said a written decision will be issued “as soon as we can.”

Obviously we are addressing only the legal issues — not the propriety or wisdom of the project,” she said.

Funded by Massachusetts ratepayers, the New England Clean Energy Connect would supply up to 1,200 megawatts of Canadian hydropower. That’s enough electricity for 1 million homes.

Critics contend the environmental benefits are overstated, and that the project would destroy woodlands in western Maine.

Supporters say bold projects are necessary to battle climate change and that the electricity, although earmarked for Massachusetts ratepayers, would help an entire region that’s heavily reliant on natural gas, which can cause spikes in energy costs in the winter.

Most of the proposed 145-mile (233-kilometer) power transmission line would be built along existing corridors, but a new 53-mile (85-kilometer) section is needed to reach the Canadian border.

Central Maine Power’s parent company and Hydro Quebec teamed up on the project, and workers were already clearing trees and setting poles when the governor asked for work to be suspended after Mainers voiced their disapproval. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection later suspended its permit but that decision can be reversed depending on the outcome before the state’s Supreme Court.

The utilities contend the referendum was unconstitutional because it retroactively put the brakes on a project that was properly permitted by the Maine Land Use Planning Commission, Maine Public Utilities Commission and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in addition to the Maine Department of Environmental Protection.