#g.r. morris | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

maxwellyjordan · 6 years ago

Text

Relist Watch

John Elwood reviews Monday’s relists.

With the recent reduction in trusted sources for Supreme Court news, we untrusted news sources must do our best to fill the gap. So even though I have an argument approaching, I will once again try to rise to the occasion. Happily for me, it’s a light week for relists.

First the old business. The court finally resolved that tangle of 56 Armed Career Criminal Act cases pretty much the way I expected. Otherwise, from last week’s installment, we had one denial, one grant and one relative rarity: a summary reversal that didn’t involve qualified immunity, habeas corpus or the death penalty. Although there were those who thought it wasn’t summary enough.

With that, we’re ready for the new business. That’ll be quick this week, because there is only one new relist. Near as I can tell, it involves a lawsuit between the director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and Kanye West’s latest persona. Although in the interest of “accuracy,” I should note that I just now made that up. Iancu v. NantKwest Inc., 18-801, involves an oddly named immunotherapy company’s lawsuit challenging a decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office finding its cancer-treatment patent application obvious and therefore unpatentable. NantKwest lost the suit, and the PTO sought attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 145, which requires an applicant to pay “[a]ll the expenses of the proceedings.” A divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that NantKwest was on the hook for “the attorney’s fees the [PTO] incurred to defend applicant’s appeal,” but the court, on its own motion, reheard the case en banc and reversed course. The majority held by a 7-4 vote that courts presumptively assess expenses under the “American rule,” which requires litigants to pay their own lawyers’ fees, and that Congress did not act explicitly enough in Section 145 to displace that presumption. The federal government now seeks review of that decision, arguing that the ordinary meaning of “expenses” includes attorneys’ fees. As a non-germane aside, NantKwest is represented by the law firm where Andrei Iancu served as managing partner until his appointment to the PTO in 2017.

That’s all for this week. Thanks to Ben Moss for compiling the relists.

New Relists

Iancu v. NantKwest Inc., 18-801

Issue: Whether the phrase “[a]ll the expenses of the proceedings” in 35 U.S.C. § 145 encompasses the personnel expenses the United States Patent and Trademark Office incurs when its employees, including attorneys, defend the agency in Section 145 litigation.

(relisted after the February 22 conference)

Returning Relists

Newton v. Indiana, 17-1511

Issues: (1) Whether Miller v. Alabama applies to discretionary sentences of life without parole imposed for juvenile offenses, as 16 states have held, or whether it is limited to mandatory sentences of life without parole, as 10 others have found; and (2) whether an evidentiary hearing is required to assess whether juveniles sentenced before Miller are irreparably corrupt.

(rescheduled before the September 24 and November 30 conferences; relisted after the December 7, January 4, January 11, January 18, February 15 and February 22 conferences)

Mathena v. Malvo, 18-217

Issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit erred in concluding—in direct conflict with Virginia’s highest court and other courts—that a decision of the Supreme Court, Montgomery v. Louisiana, addressing whether a new constitutional rule announced in an earlier decision, Miller v. Alabama, applies retroactively on collateral review may properly be interpreted as modifying and substantively expanding the very rule whose retroactivity was in question.

(relisted after the December 7, January 4, January 11, January 18, February 15 and February 22 conferences)

Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, 17-1618

Issue: Whether discrimination against an employee because of sexual orientation constitutes prohibited employment discrimination “because of … sex” within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2.

(relisted after the January 4, January 11, January 18, February 15 and February 22 conferences)

Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda, 17-1623

Issue: Whether the prohibition in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), against employment discrimination “because of … sex” encompasses discrimination based on an individual’s sexual orientation.

(relisted after the January 4, January 11, January 18, February 15 and February 22 conferences)

R.G. and G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 18-107

Issues: (1) Whether the word “sex” in Title VII’s prohibition on discrimination “because of … sex,” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(1), meant “gender identity” and included “transgender status” when Congress enacted Title VII in 1964; and (2) whether Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins prohibits employers from applying sex-specific policies according to their employees’ sex rather than their gender identity.

(relisted after the January 4, January 11, January 18, February 15 and February 22 conferences)

Morris County Board of Chosen Freeholders v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, 18-364

Issues: (1) Whether using generally available historic preservation funds to repair or restore a house of worship constitutes a “religious use” that falls outside the scope of Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia Inc. v. Comer; and (2) whether the categorial exclusion of all active houses of worship from historic preservation grants violates Trinity Lutheran and the First Amendment as an exclusion based on religious status.

(relisted after the January 4, January 11, January 18, February 15 and February 22 conferences)

The Presbyterian Church in Morristown v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, 18-365

Issue: Whether the categorical exclusion of active houses of worship from a competitive government grant program advancing the secular interest of historic preservation violates the free exercise clause of the Constitution of the United States.

(relisted after the January 4, January 11, January 18, February 15 and February 22 conferences)

Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc., 18-8

Issues: (1) Whether a state may require health-care facilities to dispose of fetal remains in the same manner as other human remains, i.e., by burial or cremation; and (2) whether a state may prohibit abortions motivated solely by the race, sex or disability of the fetus and require abortion doctors to inform patients of the prohibition.

(relisted after the January 4, January 11, January 18, February 15 and February 22 conferences)

Ramos v. Louisiana, 18-5924

Issue: Whether the 14th Amendment fully incorporates the Sixth Amendment guarantee of a unanimous verdict.

(relisted after the January 4, January 11, January 18, February 15 and February 22 conferences)

Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, 18-587

Issues: (1) Whether the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to wind down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals policy is judicially reviewable; and (2) whether DHS’ decision to wind down the DACA policy is lawful.

(relisted after the January 11 conference; now held)

Trump v. NAACP, 18-588

(relisted after the January 11 conference; now held)

Nielsen v. Vidal, 18-589

(relisted after the January 11 conference; now held)

Kahler v. Kansas, 18-6135

Issue: Whether the Eighth and 14th Amendments permit a state to abolish the insanity defense.

(relisted after the January 11, January 18, February 15 and February 22 conferences; record requested and received)

Kansas v. Garcia, 17-834

Issues: (1) Whether the Immigration Reform and Control Act expressly pre-empts the states from using any information entered on or appended to a federal Form I-9, including common information such as name, date of birth, and social security number, in a prosecution of any person (citizen or alien) when that same, commonly used information also appears in non-IRCA documents, such as state tax forms, leases, and credit applications; and (2) if IRCA bars the states from using all such information for any purpose, whether Congress has the constitutional power to so broadly pre-empt the states from exercising their traditional police powers to prosecute state law crimes. CVSG: 12/04/2018.

(rescheduled before the January 4, January 11, and January 18 conferences; relisted after the February 15 and February 22 conferences)

Lewis v. English, 18-292

Issue: Whether a federal prisoner may file a petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in order to raise arguments that were foreclosed by binding (but erroneous) circuit precedent at the time of his direct appeal and original application for post-conviction relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, but that are meritorious in light of a subsequent decision overturning that erroneous precedent.

(rescheduled before the December 3 conference; relisted after the February 15 and February 22 conferences)

United States v. Wheeler, 18-420

Issue: Whether a prisoner whose 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging the applicability of a statutory minimum was denied based on circuit precedent may later seek habeas relief on the ground that the circuit’s interpretation of the relevant statutes has changed.

(relisted after the February 15 and February 22 conferences)

Delancy v. Pastrana, 18-5773

(relisted after the February 15 and February 22 conferences)

Dusenbery v. Holt, 18-5781

Issue: Whether a prisoner whose motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 challenging the applicability of a statutory minimum was denied based on circuit precedent may later seek habeas relief on the ground that the circuit’s interpretation of the relevant statutes has changed.

(relisted after the February 15 and February 22 conferences)

The post Relist Watch appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from Law https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/02/relist-watch-137/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

#law #justice

1 note · View note

serataino · 3 years ago

Photo

Hello, all! How about some mythology-based romance? Pre-order today for only $.99! Link in bio!!! ⭐Check out the cover!⭐ Blurb: Born from foam Fallen from grace Their immortal love awaits. From the icy shores of Scandinavia to the desert sands of Egypt, from Native American legends to ancient Mesopotamia, the goddesses awaken. They've watched civilizations rise and fall, human life come and go. They're known as love, beauty, and fertility, but there's so much more to these goddesses and their descendants, so much more to discover. Dive into tales of female empowerment, ever-lasting love, and sizzling passion in this limited edition anthology. Watch the goddesses rise. Grab your limited edition copy today! Including Stories from: Stephanie Morris - USA Today bestselling author S. K. Gregory- USA Today Bestselling Author Torie James - USA Today Bestselling Author Charmaine Louise Shelton Sierra Christenson Anna G Berry Janna Ruth January Rayne G.R. Loreweaver Marie Johnston Gillian Zane Evelyn Shine C. E. DeRosier Joline Pearce Lacuna Reid Sera Taíno Ciara Skye Rebekah Lewis E.S. McMillan #romanceauthor #romanceanthology #mythology #preorder #indieromanceauthor #indieromanceauthor #indieromance https://www.instagram.com/p/CluMGj-JKID/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

#romanceauthor #romanceanthology #mythology #preorder #indieromanceauthor #indieromance

0 notes

valerieullmerromanceauthor · 3 years ago

Text

Tomorrow's End by G.R. Morris

Tomorrow’s End by G.R. Morris

Tomorrows End (book one) Scifi/Horror Date Published: March 31, 2022 Publisher: Dark Light Publishing … … “It’s mind-blowing for sure. I repeat. This book blew my mind. (Cozy With Books) It’s the type of book where, were it to be a Youtube video and if I were to do any form of drugs I’d comment, “I’m way too high for this s***.”- 10-time award winning author, G.R. Morris writes, “A…

View On WordPress

#RABTBookTours TomorrowsEnd GRMorris Scifi horror @RABTBookTours @grmorrisbooks

0 notes

grmorrisbooks · 4 years ago

Photo

BOOK REVIEW: A cosmic force of evil is rising, come to consume whole worlds and plunge them into darkness. Earth is next, and the only chance for humanity to survive is a pair of young, destined heroes who have no idea what dangers lurk in their future. Kevin Knight is a sixteen-year-old savior, the warrior foretold in an alien prophecy. Kevin comes face to face with aliens, monsters, and a staggering truth about humanity. He must follow Robert’s teachings, an alien Changeling who reveals just as much as he keeps hidden. Oh, Kevin must also face down the very forces of Hell. G.R. Morris fills this story with fantastic descriptions. The aliens and monsters are painted with inventive designs, creating visuals that are wholly unique and distinctive. The creatures, in particular, and the places they come from are visceral depictions of roiling, hellish things, all cast in darkness. The villains of Tomorrow’s End are intensely evil characters who commit graphic violence against nearly everyone around them—even innocent children, which Morris never shies away from showing. Within the settings, expansive action scenes stretch for pages on end, mixing advanced technology with dangerous supernatural power, creating fight scenes larger than life. Tomorrow’s End sets up its bizarre settings quickly, giving the characters space to breathe and ask questions ─ and their questions abound. This story’s world is full of mysterious societies and convoluted plans that stretch back and forth through time, involving cosmic beings, societal control, and Matrix-like technological constructs. Tomorrow’s End centers on a philosophy of free will and choice in every conflict. Evil and good are chosen rather than innate, and situations that appear random are always driven by earlier choices. Kevin must choose truth and have faith in his own purpose if he will have any chance to win the battle against the darkness. It’s not always so easy to pick light over darkness. All in all, readers will more than likely line up for Book II! https://www.instagram.com/p/CMzpj2_MyVG/?igshid=eascc9yebldj

0 notes

azizsiad · 6 years ago

Text

A DIGITAL INNOVATION BLOG POST

Introduction

The world is continuously evolving so does digital technologies, researchers and scientists are coming up with new innovations that are capable enough to change and support business applications and operations. This blog sheds lights of quantum computing and how it is going to improve business operation. Quantum computing is expected to become the next generation of high performance computers.

What is quantum computing?

Quantum computing is one of the most innovative emerging technologies that the world is going to witness. This technology is going to overcome each and every limitation of transistors based computers. The processors of computers are made of several million transistors and this technology is going to replace transistors by qubitz. The computers based on transistors are relied on binary bits encoding which is 0 and 1. As per the view of Linke et al. (2017), qubitz have different operation properties when compared to transistors and the state of qubitz is superposition. This innovation uses the properties of quantum physics and qubitz could comprise up to two bits of binary data which is eventually called superdense coding.

Quantum computing is completely based on the quantum theory; Niels Bohr came up with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory. The theory comprised two interpretations and the quantum computing uses the second interpretation of quantum theory. The second interpretation is superposition and qubitz could be stated as electrons in the magnetic field. The interpretation focuses on the spinning behaviour of electrons and observes how the electron changes their spinning state.

Quantum computing can deliver high performance at lower energy cost when compared to the transistor based supercomputers. At the present time, quantum computing is a concept but it is going to be available for the world very soon. As per the view of Dumitrescu et al. (2018), quantum computing involves algorithm which could be used in the production machines. The business operation is going to completely changed after the release of quantum computing. Tech giants like Intel, Google and IBM are developing their own quantum computers for gaining competitive advantage

Why is quantum computing essential for business organisations?

Cryptography

Quantum computing composes advanced cryptography which makes data sharing more secure. The transistor based computer does not have strong encryption and the data could be easily decrypted by using different tools. According to Steeb and Hardy (2018), quantum computing makes the decryption too trivial and leads to stronger protection. The companies are going to break the traditional encryption at a much faster rate.

Data Analytics

Quantum computers are capable are solving problems and numerical at a large scale. As per the view of Brandl et al. (2016), quantum computing is going to enhance the topological analysis which is the study of geometric shapes. Data management is going to be enhanced through quantum computing. The business organisations are going to acquire, store, protect and process data more adequately. The real estate companies could use quantum computing for architectural and designing purpose.

Pattern Matching and Forecasting

Quantum computing finds pattern in data at a much faster rate and stores the previous data in the memory for predicting future patterns. As stated by Chen et al. (2016), the business organisation could easily predict their sales, growth and revenue by using quantum computing. The business organisation could also understand the possible outcome of external and internal changes through quantum computing. Volkswagen is currently working on quantum computing to inform people about the traffic in advance.

Supply Chain

Quantum computers could be integrated with any other technologies and machinery so the production department is going to witness a great improvement after the release of quantum computers. Machine learning and artificial intelligence is being currently used in the supply chain and these technologies could be integrated with quantum computers.

What are the impacts of quantum computing?

Quantum computing has become a great deal for researchers and tech giants as the companies wants to invest in quantum computing to utilise its benefits. Quantum computing is going to create a great impact on the IT Companies as well as venture capitals. As suggested by Childs (2017), quantum computing is going to become the future as it provides a much better performance and lower energy consumption. The industries and business organizations have understood the importance and benefits of quantum computing. Companies are investing huge amount of money on their research and development programs so they could utilise the quantum computing benefits.

Rationale

Quantum computing has absorbed enormous resources and has promised too much to offer, quantum computing has not been to deliver a great deal until now in practical terms. Numerous experiments and researches have been going on for a long time over quantum computing but quantum computers have not been used in any industries till now. The rationale of investing in quantum computing is impeccable as the innovation has not displayed any practical integration or benefits. Theoretically, quantum computers work much faster than traditional transistor based computers and quantum computers are capable enough to solve impossible problems.

The business organisations need to think before investing in quantum computing as it is a scientific phenomenon. The problems of engineering are formidable and quantum computing is based on entanglement and superposition. As stated by Bäuml and Azuma (2017), quantum computing is going to come with numerous opportunities and benefits not only for the business sector but for the entire world. The main question is about the implemententaitoon and the official release of quantum computing. The components and other costing of quantum computer is very high so how small business organisations are going to obtain quantum computers. Quantum computer is going to be worth the money, time and hard work invested in it and how long the world needs to wait for witnessing the practical use of a quantum computer.

Conclusion

Quantum computer is going to be the future and it is considered one of the most innovative and complex technology that is going to be released soon. Quantum computing holds the capability of completely changing the business operation as the quantum computing comes with lots of opportunities and benefits. The industries and business organisations are spending huge amount of money on the quantum computing research.

Reference List

Bäuml, S. and Azuma, K., (2017). Fundamental limitation on quantum broadcast networks. Quantum Science and Technology, 2(2), p.024004.

Brandl, M.F., Van Mourik, M.W., Postler, L., Nolf, A., Lakhmanskiy, K., Paiva, R.R., Möller, S., Daniilidis, N., Häffner, H., Kaushal, V. and Ruster, T., (2016). Cryogenic setup for trapped ion quantum computing. Review of Scientific Instruments, 87(11), pp.113-203.

Chen, L., Chen, L., Jordan, S., Liu, Y.K., Moody, D., Peralta, R., Perlner, R. and Smith-Tone, D., (2016). Report on post-quantum cryptography. US Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology. 4(2). pp. 236-451.

Childs, A.M., (2017). Quantum computing: Quantum advantage deferred. Nature Physics, 13(12), p.1148.

Dumitrescu, E.F., McCaskey, A.J., Hagen, G., Jansen, G.R., Morris, T.D., Papenbrock, T., Pooser, R.C., Dean, D.J. and Lougovski, P., (2018). Cloud quantum computing of an atomic nucleus. Physical review letters, 120(21), p.210-501.

Linke, N.M., Maslov, D., Roetteler, M., Debnath, S., Figgatt, C., Landsman, K.A., Wright, K. and Monroe, C., (2017). Experimental comparison of two quantum computing architectures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(13), pp.3305-3310.

Steeb, W.H. and Hardy, Y., (2018). Problems and solutions in quantum computing and quantum information. World Scientific Publishing Company. 2(1). pp. 65-78.

0 notes

kingstonbaillustrationanimation · 5 years ago

Text

Dissertation Workshop

Dissertation title

What makes a book unique?

Examining the physicality of books and the role of materiality in reading.

Themes and issues

Human touch as an essential part of reading. How does our touch change a book?

Differences between art books, mass produced books, and E-Books.

Does the digitisation of books / reading change the way we interact with physical books?

Book arts and the rise of hand-made books

The semiotics of reading

Methods and sources

Interviews: Simon Goode & Ira Yonemura, Flaminia Rossi, poss. Julian Walker

Studio / Site Visits: British Library LCBA, Penguin?

Experiments: handling rare / mass published / e-books

Books & Archival research

Visual material

Common / Mass published books

Rare / unique / art / Self published books

E-Books

Bibliography

Stephen Bury, 2019. The Artist’s Book in the Age of Digital Reproduction: Walter Benjamin and the Artist’s Book. Arts, 8(4), p.138.

Lyons, J., 1985. Artists' books : a critical anthology and sourcebook, Rochester, N.Y. : Layton, Utah: The Visual Studies Workshop Press ; (Distributed by) G.M. Smith, Peregrine Smith Books.

Desjardin, A. & Bloomberg SPACE, 2011. The book on books on artists books,

Morris, W. & Peterson, William S., 1982. The ideal book : essays and lectures on the arts of the book, Berkeley ; London: University of California Press.

Bettley, J. & Victoria Albert Museum, 2005. The art of the book : from medieval manuscript to graphic novel, London: V&A.

Bury, S. (2015) Artists’ Books: The Book as a Work of Art, 1963 - 2000. London, Bernard Quatrich LTD.

Cave, R. & Ayad, Sara, 2014. The history of the book in 100 books : the complete story, from Egypt to e-book,

Kress, G.R. & Van Leeuwen, Theo, 2006. Reading images : the grammar of visual design 2nd ed., London: Routledge.

Cirlot, J.E., 1962. A dictionary of symbols, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Jaworski, A. & Thurlow, Crispin, 2010. Semiotic landscapes : language, image, space, London: Continuum.

Benjamin, W., 2008. The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction, London: Penguin.

Barthes, R., 1990. S/Z, Oxford: Blackwell.

#HA5106_CicelyPilkington

0 notes

plamenyordanov-blog · 7 years ago

Link

www.fineartamerica.com/profiles/plamen-yordanov.html?tab=artwork

http://www.artwanted.com/artist.cfm?artid=40263

https://www.flickr.com/photos/38721248@N07/

EDUCATION: 1997 • Salzburg International Summer Academy of Fine Arts, the Public Art Program with Prof. Agnes Denes – Salzburg, Austria 1995 • Antonio Ratti Foundation, the Advanced Course in Visual Arts with Prof. Joseph Kosuth – Como, Italy 1992 • Vermont Studio Center, the program with Prof. Robert Henry and Prof. Roger Winter – Johnson, VT, U.S.A. 1985-90 • National Academy of Art, Department of Painting with Prof. Svetlin Rusev – Sofia, Bulgaria, MFA degree link

SOLO EXHIBITIONS/PROJECTS: 2012 • “Indigenous Memories”, Jack Olson Gallery, School of Art, Northern Illinois University – DeKalb, IL, U.S.A. link 2008 • “Portrait of a Collector“, Chicago Art Center – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. 2000 • “3-D Reality Project”, University of Illinois at Chicago – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 1999 • “Recent Paintings and Paper Works”, Illinois Institute of Art – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 1994 • “Installations and Assemblages”, National Palace of Culture – Sofia, Bulgaria link 1, link 2 1992 • “Recent Paintings”, Red Mill Gallery, Vermont Studio Center – Johnson, VT, U.S.A. 1991 • “Noah's Ark”, Wolfgang Riegelsberger Gallery – Mannheim, Germany (catalogue) • International Foundation “St. Cyril and St. Methodius” – Sofia, Bulgaria

GROUP EXHIBITIONS/PROJECTS: 2018 • “20th Annual Postcards from the Edge”, Gallery 524 – New York, NY, U.S.A. 2017 • “Postcards from the Edge”, Metro Pictures – New York, U.S.A.

• “Self-Expession” online competition, Saatchi Gallery, London, GB, link • “Biennial 2017”, Museum of Non-Visible Art – New York, U.S.A. link

• “Sculpture Exhibit”, Bridgeport Art Center – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 2016 • Chicago Sculpture Exhibit – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link • “18th Annual Postcards from the Edge”, Sikkema Jenkins & Co. – New York, U.S.A. link 2015 • ArtExpo – New York, U.S.A. link • “Postcards from the Edge”, - Luhring Augustine Gallery – New York, U.S.A. link 2013 • “What Do You Hear”, SoundCloud DropBox in conjunction with Soundings: A Contemporary Score, MoMA – New York link • #summerdream, Yoko Ono’s project, Bullukian Foundation, La Biennale de Lyon – Lyon, France • “Personal Structures”, La Biennale di Venezia - 55th International Art Exhibition, Palazzo Bembo – Venice, Italy link (catalogue) 2012 • “Visions of Death”, Couvent des Cordeliers – Paris, France • “Visions of Death”, Salon du Chocolat – Paris, France • “Visions of Death”, Queens Museum of Art – New York, U.S.A. link • “Triumph of Caïssa. Dedication to Marcel Duchamp”, Tretyakov State Gallery – Moscow, Russia link • “Re/Invention”, ARC Gallery and Educational Foundation – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link • 7th Berlin Biennale for Contemporary Art and artwiki.org – Berlin, Germany link • “Postcards from the Edge”, Cheim & Read Gallery – New York, U.S.A. link 2011 • “Drawing Connections”, Siena Art Institute – Siena, Italy link (catalogue) • “frag-men-tal”, Richard J. Daley Center – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 1, link 2 • “frag-men-tal”, 4th Moscow Biennale of Contemporary Art, Parallel Program – Moscow, Russia link (catalogue) • Nord Art 2011, KiC Kunst in der Carlshütte – Büdelsdorf, Germany link 1, link 2 (catalogue) • “In Bloom”, Oakbrook Center, Guggenheim Partners commission – Hinsdale, IL, U.S.A. link • “The Popular Show”, Townhouse Gallery – Cairo, Egypt link • 6th Annual KIWA Woodblock Print Exhibition, Kyoto Municipal Museum – Kyoto, Japan link (catalogue) • 7th Annual Fine Art Auction Exhibit, Contemporary Art Center Peoria, Peoria, IL, U.S.A. link • “An Exchange with Sol LeWitt”, MASSMoCA – Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art, North Adams, MA, U.S.A link • “Postcards from the Edge”, CRG Gallery – New York, U.S.A. link 1, link 2 2010 • “ABSENCE”, Queens Museum of Art – New York, U.S.A. link 1, link 2 • 4th Beijing International Art Biennale, National Art Museum of China – Beijing, China link 1, link 2 (catalogue) • “Beyond Borders 4”, Richard J. Daley Center – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 1, link 2 • “Re: Contemplating the Void”, Guggenheim Museum – New York, U.S.A. link • G.R. N’Namdi Gallery – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link • Fracking: Art and Activism Against the Drill - Exit Art, New York, U.S.A. (closed, 2012) • “Immigrant Art”, SICA - The Shore Institute of The Contemporary Arts – Long Branch, NJ, U.S.A. link • “Bound & Gathered”, Edge Zones Art Center – Miami, FL, U.S.A. link • “Michael Landy: Art Bin”, South London Gallery – London, United Kingdom link • “Artist Made Books”, Dittmar Memorial Gallery, Norris University Center, Northwestern University – Evanston, IL, U.S.A. link 2009 • "Design it" Shelter Competition, Guggenheim and Google Flickr Group, Guggenheim Museum – New York, NY • “Under the Viaduct”, Architrouve Gallery – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link • “A Book about Death” Queens Museum of Art – Queens, NY, U.S.A. • “ArtPrize”, Blue Bridge/City of Grand Rapids – Grand Rapids, MI, U.S.A. (catalogue) • “Nude”, Manifest Creative Research Gallery and Drawing Center – Cincinnati, Ohio, U.S.A. link (catalogue) • Arts Horizons LeRoy Neiman Art Center – New York, U.S.A. link • “Immigration Journeys Jukebox Project “, Queens Museum of Art – Queens, NY, U.S.A. link • “Beyond Borders 3”, Richard J. Daley Center – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 1, link 2 2008 • Chicago Art Center – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. • “Beyond Borders 2”, Richard J. Daley Center – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 1, link 2 2007 • “Beyond Borders 1”, Richard J. Daley Center – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 1, link 2 • “Peace Tower”, a project by Mark di Suvero – Chicago Cultural Center – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 2004 • “Artist’s Toys”, Kraft/Lieberman Gallery – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link •”LPCAI”, Outdoor Sculpture Exhibition, Department of Cultural Affairs – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 2003 • Pier Walk, Outdoor Sculpture Exhibition – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link (catalogue) • Maquette Show, Gallery 37 – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 2002 • “Being“, LIPA Art Gallery – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link •”LPCAI”, Outdoor Sculpture Exhibition, Department of Cultural Affairs – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 2001 • “Suite Home Chicago“, Public Art Project of the Department of Cultural Affairs – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link (catalogue) 2000 • “Many Colored Artworks“, Queens Museum of Art – New York, U.S.A. 1999 • “30 Times 15"x15"“, Fassbender Gallery – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link • “Border Crossings”, the 9th International Sculptors’ Symposium – Arnbruck, Germany link (catalogue) 1998 • “Border Crossings”, the 8th International Sculptors’ Symposium – Braunau, Austria (catalogue) • 5th International Sculpture Symposium – Brienz, Switzerland (catalogue) • “Bulgarian Graphic Art Today”, Rathausgalerie – Brühl, Germany • “Bulgarian Artbook”, BRINZ 39 Foundation – Zürich, Switzerland (catalogue) 1997 • “Bulgarian Artbook”, Ata Gallery for Contemporary Art – Sofia, Bulgaria (catalogue) • The 3rd International Sculpture Symposium – Sur En/Sent, Switzerland (catalogue) • “Voyage”, Installation in the Old Salt Mine – Hallein, Austria link • Stedelijk Museum Hof Van Busleyden – Meechelen, Belgium 1996 • “Plastic Image of the 90s”, the National Palace of Culture – Sofia, Bulgaria link • The 4th International Sculpture Symposium – Hojer, Denmark link (catalogue) • Cultural Centre A. Spinoy – Mechelen, Belgium • Section “13” Annual Exhibition, Shipka 6 Gallery (exhibition halls of Union of Bulgarian Artists) – Sofia, BG 1995 • 3rd International Sculpture Symposium – Hojer, Denmark (catalogue) • “Located Work”, Antonio Ratti Foundation – Como, Italy, link 1 link 2 (catalogue) • International Festival of Painting – Cagne-sur-Mer, France (catalogue) • “T. E. S. ’95” 4th European Sculpture Triennial (IV Triennale Européenne de Sculpture, Jardin des Plantes) – Paris, France (catalogue) • “VideoHarT”, Soros Center for the Arts Annual Exhibition, Archaeological Museum – Sofia, Bulgaria (catalogue) • The 18th International Independent Exhibition of Prints in Kanagawa – Kanagawa, Japan 1994 • S.O.F.A. Art Event – Nyborg, Denmark (catalogue) • “Selected from the Bulgarian Contemporary Art (60s – 90s years of 20th Century)”, Gallery for Foreign Art of the International Foundation “St. Cyril and St. Methodius” and Norman Art Gallery – Sofia, Bulgaria • “The Autumn Salon”, Shipka 6 Gallery (exhibition halls of the Union of Bulgarian Artists) – Sofia, Bulgaria (catalogue) • Annual Exhibition of the Union of Bulgarian Artists, Shipka 6 Gallery – Sofia, Bulgaria (catalogue) • “13”, Shipka 6 Gallery (exhibition halls of the Union of Bulgarian Artists) – Sofia, Bulgaria (catalogue) • “Olympic Ideals in Bulgarian Art”, Shipka 6 Gallery (exhibition halls of the Union of Bulgarian Artists) – Sofia • The 3rd International Print Biennial – Belgrade, Serbia 1993 • Annual Exhibition of the Union of Bulgarian Artists, Shipka 6 Gallery – Sofia, Bulgaria (catalogue) 1992 • “Bulgarian Art”, Gagliardi Gallery – London, United Kingdom link (catalogue) 1991 • Budapest Art EXPO '91 – Budapest, Hungary (catalogue) 1990 • International Gallery of Portrait Tuzla – Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina

AWARDS/GRANTS/PUBLIC COMMISSIONS: 2016 • Chicago Sculpture Exhibit – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 2015 • “Infinity”, Rigby Group, London link 2014 • “Infinity”, University of Minnesota, Morris , MN, U.S.A. 2012 • “Genesis”, Orland Park Public Art commission (2008-2013) – Orland Park, IL, U.S.A. 2011 • “Infinity Mobile”, In Bloom, Oakbrook Center – Hinsdale, IL, U.S.A. (Guggenheim Partners commission) • “Spin Art”, In Bloom exhibition, Oakbrook Center – Hinsdale, IL, U.S.A. (Hinsdale Bank and Trust commission) 2010 • Green Office Challenge Awards, ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability USA – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. 2003 • Live Performance Series – Museum of Science and Industry – Chicago, IL, U.S.A. link 1998 • Diploma – 2nd place of public from the 5th International Woodcarving Symposium – Brienz, Switzerland • Diploma – 2nd place of jury from the 5th International Woodcarving Symposium – Brienz, Switzerland • Grant of KulturKontakt – Wien, Austria link • Grant of Summer Academy of Fine Arts – Salzburg, Austria 1995 • Grant of Soros Center for the Arts – Sofia, Bulgaria 1992 • Full fellowship for Residency of the Vermont Studio Center – Johnson, VT, U.S.A. 1991 • Grant of the International Foundation “St. Cyril and St. Methodius” – Sofia, Bulgaria link 1989 • Honor Diploma from the 4th International Competition for Young Painters – Sofia, Bulgaria • Honorable Mention from the 3rd International Competition for Drawing – Ell Ferrol, Spain

#plamen yordanov #contemporary art #abstract sculpture

0 notes

bookjunkiez · 3 years ago

Photo

Tomorrow's End by G.R. Morris. - Sci-Fi / Horror Amazon: https://amzn.to/3O50h0y @RABTBookTours #RABTBookTours #TomorrowsEnd #GRMorris #Scifi #horror Kevin Knight’s been training his whole life to fulfill a galaxy-saving prophecy. But when a grisly tragedy lands him in jail and demonic forces flood his consciousness, the fate of time and space seems doomed. Until a trench coat-wearing alien renegade shatters his understanding of reality. Discovering Earth is merely an alien illusion to manipulate humankind, Kevin struggles to know whom to believe—his strange scaly new friend or the dark voices in his head. But with Hell itself planning to slaughter everyone, he must resist the darkness and master his powers to reprogram the future. Can Kevin, a possessed Messiah, claim a destiny of his own before humanity goes extinct? https://www.instagram.com/p/CgxLGq0OHkC/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

#rabtbooktours #tomorrowsend #grmorris #scifi #horror

1 note · View note

magictransistor · 11 years ago

Photo

G.R. Morris. Illustrations for Herbert Sherman Gorman's James Joyce: A Definitive Biography. Paris Circle, Family Album, Paris Portrait, Corridor of Classics, Trieste, Ulysses is Published, Folkstone, American Reception, Yes (top to bottom). 1941.

#g.r. morris #illustrations #gorman #james joyce: a definitive biography #collage #photomontage #surrealism #joyce #ireland #paris #magictransistor #alejandromerola #1941

164 notes · View notes

emmaklee · 8 years ago

Photo

G.R. Morris / WWII blackout safety poster

#wwii #graphic design #poster design

189 notes · View notes

maxwellyjordan · 6 years ago

Text

Relist Watch Returns

John Elwood reviews the first relists of 2019.

Happy New Year and welcome back! Most of D.C. started 2019 nice and slow, enjoying offices (and roads) made quiet by vacations, both planned and unexpected. But not the Supremes. They jumped in with both feet, when most of the lawyering class was still lazily finishing off their fruit baskets. On January 4, the court gave plenary review to the Maryland and North Carolina political-gerrymandering cases and set them for expedited briefing so they could be heard in the March sitting. And at the same time, the justices granted certiorari to review four cases – none of them relisted – that will likely be the first cases on the court’s April argument calendar. The court also got busy with all the serial relists identified in our last installment. True to the statistics, none of those repeated relists led to grants, just summary vacaturs and dissents from denial of cert.

A full April calendar would probably consist of around 12 cases, which means the court is looking for something in the neighborhood of eight more cases to round out the last of the October Term 2018 arguments. Some cases considered at the court’s January 18 conference could squeeze in to the tail end of the April argument sitting by shaving a few days off the 30 days petitioners ordinarily would have to file reply briefs. But this Friday’s conference is where the court is likely to decide on the bulk of the April sitting.

Luckily for law nerds everywhere, the court has plenty to work with – the court has relisted a whopping 19 new cases this week, joining the seven returning relists. This is such a high-traffic area that I’ll have to be a little summary in describing the cases.

There are a ton of important cases at this conference. But there’s no question which of the relists have gotten the most attention – and which hold out the most promise of helping to make October Term 2018 noteworthy. Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, 17-1618, and Altitude Express Inc. v. Zarda, 17-1623, raise the question of whether discrimination against an employee because of sexual orientation constitutes prohibited employment discrimination “because of … sex” within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. R.G. and G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 18-107, raises the related question of whether that prohibition includes a person’s gender identity so as to protect people from discrimination based on their transgender status.

You have your choice of hot-button issues after that. Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc., 18-483, involves the constitutionality of an Indiana law prohibiting abortions performed solely because of the race, sex or disability of the fetus, and also requiring facilities to dispose of fetal remains in the same manner as other human remains, i.e., by burial or cremation, rather than as medical waste. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit enjoined those laws by a 2-1 vote. The appeals court voted for rehearing en banc, but then reinstated the panel decision when one judge who had voted for rehearing recused himself, leaving the court equally divided.

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. City of New York, New York, 18-280, is similarly high-profile. That case involves a challenge to the constitutionality of New York City’s law that regulates where a handgun owner can carry their handgun. It limits them to possessing their gun at the address listed on their handgun license, with the sole exception of transporting the gun “directly to and from” one of approximately seven “authorized small arms range/shooting club[s], unloaded, in a locked container, the ammunition to be carried separately.” The challengers, represented by former Solicitor General Paul Clement, argue that the transport restrictions violate the Second Amendment, the commerce clause and the constitutional right to travel, noting that the restrictions would even prevent a handgun owner from transporting their gun to a second home outside the city for purposes of protecting themselves within the home. We’ll see whether this becomes the first gun-rights case the court takes up in many years or whether the Second Amendment remains (in Justice Clarence Thomas’ words) “a disfavored right in this Court.”

Sexual orientation/gender identity, abortion and guns – I have this nagging feeling that we haven’t quite hit every divisive topic yet. Oh yes, we still need religion. Morris County Board of Chosen Freeholders v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, 18-364, and The Presbyterian Church in Morristown v. Freedom from Religion Foundation, 18-365, will take care of that. Those cases involve Morris County, New Jersey’s preservation grants for historic buildings. A state court interpreted the New Jersey state constitution to forbid using public funds to repair or restore churches, however historic they are. The court rejected the argument that the First Amendment prohibits excluding houses of worship from generally available preservation funds earmarked for repairing or restoring historic buildings. Morris County’s Board of Chosen Freeholders and a group of affected churches seek to revisit that ruling. The ubiquitous Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of Berkeley Law School, has made time to represent respondents the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

The hits just keep coming. Aaron Schock was a political wunderkind in Illinois politics, becoming at 19 the youngest person serving on a school board in Illinois, at 23 the youngest person ever to serve in the Illinois General Assembly, and at 27 the youngest member of Congress and the first-ever member born in the 1980s. Schock resigned from Congress in 2015 amidst press allegations of spending and financial-disclosure irregularities, and in 2016 was charged with misuse of government funds and related charges. Schock moved to dismiss the indictment on the ground that the charges were based on supposed violations of ambiguous House of Representatives rules, which he argued violated the Constitution’s rulemaking clause and the speech-or-debate clause. The district court rejected the motion. On appeal, the 7th Circuit ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to review an interlocutory appeal of a rulemaking clause claim; although the court acknowledged it had jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal of Schock’s speech-or-debate-clause claim, the court rejected that argument on the merits. In Schock v. United States, 18-406, the former congressman argues that the 7th Circuit erred.

We have a couple more juicy constitutional issues. Ramos v. Louisiana, 18-5924, presents the question whether the 14th Amendment incorporates the Sixth Amendment guarantee of a unanimous verdict in criminal cases. In Apodaca v. Oregon, the Supreme Court concluded that the Sixth Amendment required that juries convict by a unanimous vote, but concluded that this requirement does not apply to the states; accordingly, a state criminal defendant may lawfully be convicted based on (for example) a 9-3 vote. As Professor Eugene Volokh has explained, “Apodaca was a 4-1-4 decision, in which both of the groups of 4 Justices took the view that the rule should be the same for federal and state trials. Only one Justice, Lewis Powell, believed that the rule should differ; but since he was the swing vote, his position became the law.” In October Term 2010, Volokh asked the court to overrule Apodaca. Back then, the Supreme Court denied the petition without even relisting it. We’ll know soon whether Evangelisto Ramos has any more luck. Given Justice Neil Gorsuch’s reaction during the recent argument in Timbs v. Indiana to the idea that portions of the Bill of Rights would not be incorporated against the states (“Really? Come on, General.”), he might.

That brings us to Mitchell v. Wisconsin, 18-6210. Wisconsin has enacted an “implied consent” law that provides that “[a]ny person who … drives or operates a motor vehicle upon the public highways of this state … is deemed to have given consent to one or more tests of his or her breath, blood or urine” for purposes of determining the presence of alcohol or controlled substances in their system. The same law also provides that “[a] person who is unconscious or otherwise not capable of withdrawing consent is presumed not to have withdrawn consent,” which as a practical matter allows the state to draw an unconscious person’s blood if the police have probable cause to suspect drunk driving. Petitioner Gerald Mitchell argues that by allowing warrantless blood draws, the statute violates the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement.

Quarles v. United States, 17-778, United States v. Herrold, 17-1445, Secord v. United States, 17-7224, Ferguson v. United States, 17-7496, and Moore v. United States, 17-8153, all present the same issue. The Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), imposes a mandatory 15-year prison term upon any convicted felon who unlawfully possesses a firearm and who has three or more prior convictions for any “violent felony,” which includes any felony burglary conviction. In Taylor v. United States, the Supreme Court held that Section 924(e) uses the term “burglary” in its generic sense, to cover any crime “having the basic elements of unlawful or unprivileged entry into, or remaining in, a building or structure, with intent to commit a crime.” All four cases ask whether Taylor’s definition of generic burglary requires proof that intent to commit a crime was present at the time of unlawful entry or first unlawful remaining, or whether it is enough that the defendant formed the intent to commit a crime at any time while “remaining in” the building or structure. (Herrold v. United States, 17-9127, is a conditional cross-petition that raises related issues.)

The government has conceded that there is a split and acquiesced in Supreme Court review of Quarles, which it said was a better vehicle than Secord, Ferguson and Moore. This seems like a good time for a [Disclosure: Vinson & Elkins LLP, whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioner in that case]. Later, the government filed its own petition in Herrold, and said that perhaps that was the vehicle the court should take, or it should take both that and Quarles. The court is widely believed to be experiencing a bit of “ACCA fatigue” because of the large number of cases it has decided in recent years involving that statute. Perhaps for that reason, it held these cases pending the decision in United States v. Stitt in the hopes that Stitt (involving whether burglary of a structure or vehicle adapted or customarily used for overnight accommodation was “generic burglary”) would shed light upon them. It didn’t. We’ll know soon whether the court will look into the meaning of ACCA once again.

I’m going to have to get a bit summary here if we’re going to finish this post before the court starts issuing grants. McDonough v. Smith, 18-485, involves the statute of limitations for a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on fabrication of evidence in criminal proceedings; it asks whether the statute begins to run when criminal proceedings terminate in the defendant’s favor, as the majority of circuits have held, or whether it begins to run when the defendant becomes aware of the tainted evidence and its improper use, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit held in Edward McDonough’s case. North Carolina Department of Revenue v. The Kimberley Rice Kaestner 1992 Family Trust, 18-457, asks whether the due process clause prohibits states from taxing trusts based on trust beneficiaries’ in-state residency. Lastly, Parker Drilling Management Services, Ltd. v. Newton, 18-389, involves whether California state overtime and wage laws apply to drilling rigs in the ocean on the outer continental shelf under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. [Vinson & Elkins LLP, whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel on an amicus brief in support of the petitioner in that case as well.]

Phew. That’s all for this week. Thanks again to Ben Moss for making the heroic effort of compiling all these relists.

New Relists

Quarles v. United States, 17-778

Disclosure: Vinson & Elkins LLP, whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the petitioner in this case.

Issue: Whether Taylor v. United States’ definition of generic burglary requires proof that intent to commit a crime was present at the time of unlawful entry or first unlawful remaining, as two circuits hold; or whether it is enough that the defendant formed the intent to commit a crime at any time while “remaining in” the building or structure, as the court below and three other circuits hold.