Auto news on Youtube Feb 18 2019

Update | Alabama mans fight with Post Office over answer to undeliverable mail reaches US Supreme C

Mitch Hungerpiller thought he had a first class solution for mail that gets returned as undeliverable, a common problem for businesses that send lots of letters.

But the process he helped develop and built his small Alabama technology company around has resulted in a more than decadelong fight with the U.S. Postal Service, which says his solution shouldnt have been patentable. The David vs. Goliath dispute has now arrived at the Supreme Court. On Tuesday, the justices will hear Hungerpillers case, which involves parsing the meaning of a 2011 patent law.

"All I want is a fair shake," said Hungerpiller, who lives in Birmingham and is a father of three.

Hungerpiller, 56, started thinking seriously about returned mail in 1999 when he was doing computer consulting work. While visiting clients he kept seeing huge trays of returned mail. He read that every year, billions pieces of mail are returned as undeliverable, costing companies and the Postal Service time and money.

So he decided to try to solve the problem. He developed a system that uses barcodes, scanning equipment and computer databases to process returned mail almost entirely automatically. His clients, from financial services companies to marketing companies, generally direct their returned mail to Hungerpillers company, Return Mail Inc., for processing. Clients can get information about whether the mail was actually correctly addressed and whether theres a more current address.

Hungerpiller says developing Return Mails system took several years. As part of the process, the company applied for a patent. In 2004, right before Thanksgiving, Hungerpiller got a call with good news. The company would be issued U.S. Patent No. 6,826,548.

"Oh I was so thankful. Best Thanksgiving of my life," he said, describing the phone call as "just a wow moment."

To celebrate he bought decorative copies of the patent for company leaders. His copy, a plaque about the size of a piece of paper, hangs in his office next to a painting of his late father.

Even early on, the Postal Service expressed interest in Return Mails invention, Hungerpiller said. By 2006, the government and Return Mail were talking about licensing options and a formal pilot program. Partnering with the Postal Service, Hungerpiller said, would have "changed my life." But the Postal Service ultimately developed its own, similar system for processing returned and undeliverable mail, announcing its launch in 2006.

"I was crushed. I got a dagger in my back," Hungerpiller said.

And his business suffered.

"Bottom line is that we had to lay off employees," Hungerpiller said, adding that it "suffocated the business."

The Postal Service soon went further. It tried to get Return Mails patent invalidated, but failed. Return Mail sued the Postal Service, arguing that the government should pay for using Return Mails invention without permission.

A spokesman for the Postal Service declined to comment on the case because it is ongoing.

Just as Hungerpiller thought his company might be gaining the upper hand, the Postal Service switched tactics, successfully using a 2011 patent law overhaul law to invalidate Return Mails patent.

Now, at the Supreme Court, Return Mails lawyers are arguing that the Postal Service cant use that law, the Leahy Smith America Invents Act, to challenge Return Mails patent. The law says that a "person who is not the owner of a patent," can file a patent challenge using the law. The Postal Service doesnt count as a "person," Return Mails lawyers say. The government disagrees. The Supreme Court will decide who is right.

Hungerpiller said hes pleased the Supreme Court wants to at least hear his case. He said what he has been through to get to this point hasnt made him lose faith in his government. Most days he wears an American flag pin, something he has done since 9/11. He calls himself a "proud American."

This is just a process, he said. I honestly believe that one day Ill get justice.

For more infomation >> Update | Alabama mans fight with Post Office over answer to undeliverable mail reaches US Supreme C - Duration: 2:30.

-------------------------------------------

Gk in hindi 20 important question answer, compitive question answer, gk in in hindi, railway gk gs, - Duration: 9:46.

#top20gk_answer

For more infomation >> Gk in hindi 20 important question answer, compitive question answer, gk in in hindi, railway gk gs, - Duration: 9:46.

-------------------------------------------

Alabama mans fight with Post Office over answer to undeliverable mail reaches US Supreme Court - Duration: 2:24.

Alabama mans fight with Post Office over answer to undeliverable mail reaches US Supreme Court

Mitch Hungerpiller thought he had a first class solution for mail that gets returned as undeliverable, a common problem for businesses that send lots of letters.

But the process he helped develop and built his small Alabama technology company around has resulted in a more than decadelong fight with the U.S. Postal Service, which says his solution shouldnt have been patentable. The David vs. Goliath dispute has now arrived at the Supreme Court. On Tuesday, the justices will hear Hungerpillers case, which involves parsing the meaning of a 2011 patent law.

"All I want is a fair shake," said Hungerpiller, who lives in Birmingham and is a father of three.

Hungerpiller, 56, started thinking seriously about returned mail in 1999 when he was doing computer consulting work. While visiting clients he kept seeing huge trays of returned mail. He read that every year, billions pieces of mail are returned as undeliverable, costing companies and the Postal Service time and money.

So he decided to try to solve the problem. He developed a system that uses barcodes, scanning equipment and computer databases to process returned mail almost entirely automatically. His clients, from financial services companies to marketing companies, generally direct their returned mail to Hungerpillers company, Return Mail Inc., for processing. Clients can get information about whether the mail was actually correctly addressed and whether theres a more current address.

Hungerpiller says developing Return Mails system took several years. As part of the process, the company applied for a patent. In 2004, right before Thanksgiving, Hungerpiller got a call with good news. The company would be issued U.S. Patent No. 6,826,548.

"Oh I was so thankful. Best Thanksgiving of my life," he said, describing the phone call as "just a wow moment."

To celebrate he bought decorative copies of the patent for company leaders. His copy, a plaque about the size of a piece of paper, hangs in his office next to a painting of his late father.

Even early on, the Postal Service expressed interest in Return Mails invention, Hungerpiller said. By 2006, the government and Return Mail were talking about licensing options and a formal pilot program. Partnering with the Postal Service, Hungerpiller said, would have "changed my life." But the Postal Service ultimately developed its own, similar system for processing returned and undeliverable mail, announcing its launch in 2006.

"I was crushed. I got a dagger in my back," Hungerpiller said.

And his business suffered.

"Bottom line is that we had to lay off employees," Hungerpiller said, adding that it "suffocated the business."

The Postal Service soon went further. It tried to get Return Mails patent invalidated, but failed. Return Mail sued the Postal Service, arguing that the government should pay for using Return Mails invention without permission.

A spokesman for the Postal Service declined to comment on the case because it is ongoing.

Just as Hungerpiller thought his company might be gaining the upper hand, the Postal Service switched tactics, successfully using a 2011 patent law overhaul law to invalidate Return Mails patent.

Now, at the Supreme Court, Return Mails lawyers are arguing that the Postal Service cant use that law, the Leahy Smith America Invents Act, to challenge Return Mails patent. The law says that a "person who is not the owner of a patent," can file a patent challenge using the law. The Postal Service doesnt count as a "person," Return Mails lawyers say. The government disagrees. The Supreme Court will decide who is right.

Hungerpiller said hes pleased the Supreme Court wants to at least hear his case. He said what he has been through to get to this point hasnt made him lose faith in his government. Most days he wears an American flag pin, something he has done since 9/11. He calls himself a "proud American."

This is just a process, he said. I honestly believe that one day Ill get justice.

For more infomation >> Alabama mans fight with Post Office over answer to undeliverable mail reaches US Supreme Court - Duration: 2:24.

-------------------------------------------

Let's practice SIMPLE PAST Irregular Verbs - AFFIRMATIVE, NEGATIVE, QUESTION & ANSWER Chant - Duration: 10:17.

did she live in Paris she didn't live in Paris where did she live she she lived

in Rome did you eat pizza I didn't eat pizza

what did you eat I I add a sandwich did he drink coke he didn't strain coke what

did he drink he he drank water did you go to China I didn't come to China where

did you go I I went to Japan did we wear boots we didn't wear boots what did we

wear we we wore shoes did they buy a dress they

didn't buy a dress what did they buy they they bought a skirt

did you sing in the car I didn't sing in the car where did you sing I I sang in

the shower did she bring your guitar she didn't bring your guitar what did she

bring she she brought her keyboard did he catch the bus to school he didn't

catch the bus to school what did he catch he he caught the train

did we teach your friend we didn't teach your friend who did we teach we we

taught my sister did they think in English they didn't think in English

what did they think in they thought in French did you feel tired you didn't

feel tired how did you feel I I felt hungry did she sell her bike she didn't

sell her bike what did she say she she sold her car did you tell your

mom you're here I didn't tell my mom I'm here who did you tell I I told my dad

did he do his homework he didn't do his homework

what did he do he he did the washing up did you fly to London I didn't fly to

London where did you fly to I I flew to Rome did you ride your horse I didn't

ride my horse what did you write I I wrote my bike did they drive to work

they didn't drive to work where did they drive to they they drove to school

did you see Jim I didn't see Jim who did you see I I saw Jane did you write a

letter I didn't write a letter what did you write I I wrote an email did you

take her jacket I didn't take her jackets what did you take I I took a

coat did you speak English I didn't speak English what did you speak I I

spoke French did you begin your diet I didn't begin my diet what did you

begin I I began my exercises did you swim in the sea I didn't swim in the sea

where did you swim I I swam in the lake did you lose your keys I didn't lose my

keys what did you lose I lost my back did you grow a beard I didn't grow a

beard what did you

I I grew a moustache did you fall off a horse I didn't fall off a horse

what did you fall off I I fell I fell off my bike did you sit at the front I

didn't sit at the front where did you sit I sat at the back did you make lunch

I didn't make lunch what did you make I I made the dinner did you send a letter

I didn't send a letter what did you send I I sent an email did you find your bag

I didn't find my bag what did you find I I found my keys did you forget your hat

I didn't forget my hat what did you forget

I I forgot my umbrella did you give it to her

I didn't give it to her who did you give it to I I gave it to him did you throw

the rubbish I didn't throw the rubbish what did you throw I

I threw the trash because I'm American did you get the bread I didn't get the

bread what did you get I I got the milk did you say anything I didn't say

anything what did you say I I said nothing

did you tell your dress I didn't tell my dress what did you tell I I tore my

trousers did you break your leg I didn't break my leg what did you break I I

broke my arm did you steal that bag I didn't steal that bag

well did used to you I I stole this jacket did you choose your

dress I didn't choose my dress what did you

choose I I chose my shoes did you ring the church bells

I didn't ring the church bells well did you ring I I rang the doorbell did you

freeze the fish I didn't freeze the fish well did you freeze I I froze the meat

did you hide the presents I didn't hide the presents

well did you hide I I hid the money did you wake the children I didn't wake

the children who did you wake I I worked the

babysitter did you beat Tomic chess I didn't beat

Tom at chess who did you beat I beat Jim did you know Spanish I didn't know

Spanish well did you know I I knew French did you bite this Apple

I didn't bite this Apple what did you bite I did this pear did you come to

school by bike I didn't come to school by bike how did you come to school I I

came by did you fight your brother I didn't fight my brother who did you

fight I fought my friend did you smell those flowers I didn't smell those

flowers what did you smell i I smelled these flowers did you spend a lot I

didn't spend a lot how much did you spend I I spent very little did you burn

the spinach I didn't burn the spinach what did you burn I I burned the peas

did you keep your schoolbooks I didn't keep my schoolbooks what did you keep I

I kept my exercise books did you lend your pen

I didn't lend my pen what did you lend I I lent my pencil did you win the race I

didn't win the race well did you win I I won the competition did you hear that

song I didn't hear that song well did you hear I I heard this one did you

stand in the corner I didn't stand at the corner where did you stand I I stood

on the stairs did you leave your umbrella

I didn't leave my umbrella well did you leave I I left my keys did you meet him

at school I didn't meet him at school where did you meet him I met him on

holiday did you light a candle I didn't write a candle what did you light I'll

eat a lot of candles

For more infomation >> Let's practice SIMPLE PAST Irregular Verbs - AFFIRMATIVE, NEGATIVE, QUESTION & ANSWER Chant - Duration: 10:17.

-------------------------------------------

Alabama mans fight with Post Office over answer to undeliverable mail reaches US Supreme Court - Duration: 2:21.

Alabama mans fight with Post Office over answer to undeliverable mail reaches US Supreme Court

Mitch Hungerpiller thought he had a first class solution for mail that gets returned as undeliverable, a common problem for businesses that send lots of letters.

But the process he helped develop and built his small Alabama technology company around has resulted in a more than decadelong fight with the U.S. Postal Service, which says his solution shouldnt have been patentable. The David vs. Goliath dispute has now arrived at the Supreme Court. On Tuesday, the justices will hear Hungerpillers case, which involves parsing the meaning of a 2011 patent law.

"All I want is a fair shake," said Hungerpiller, who lives in Birmingham and is a father of three.

Hungerpiller, 56, started thinking seriously about returned mail in 1999 when he was doing computer consulting work. While visiting clients he kept seeing huge trays of returned mail. He read that every year, billions pieces of mail are returned as undeliverable, costing companies and the Postal Service time and money.

So he decided to try to solve the problem. He developed a system that uses barcodes, scanning equipment and computer databases to process returned mail almost entirely automatically. His clients, from financial services companies to marketing companies, generally direct their returned mail to Hungerpillers company, Return Mail Inc., for processing. Clients can get information about whether the mail was actually correctly addressed and whether theres a more current address.

Hungerpiller says developing Return Mails system took several years. As part of the process, the company applied for a patent. In 2004, right before Thanksgiving, Hungerpiller got a call with good news. The company would be issued U.S. Patent No. 6,826,548.

"Oh I was so thankful. Best Thanksgiving of my life," he said, describing the phone call as "just a wow moment."

To celebrate he bought decorative copies of the patent for company leaders. His copy, a plaque about the size of a piece of paper, hangs in his office next to a painting of his late father.

Even early on, the Postal Service expressed interest in Return Mails invention, Hungerpiller said. By 2006, the government and Return Mail were talking about licensing options and a formal pilot program. Partnering with the Postal Service, Hungerpiller said, would have "changed my life." But the Postal Service ultimately developed its own, similar system for processing returned and undeliverable mail, announcing its launch in 2006.

"I was crushed. I got a dagger in my back," Hungerpiller said.

And his business suffered.

"Bottom line is that we had to lay off employees," Hungerpiller said, adding that it "suffocated the business."

The Postal Service soon went further. It tried to get Return Mails patent invalidated, but failed. Return Mail sued the Postal Service, arguing that the government should pay for using Return Mails invention without permission.

A spokesman for the Postal Service declined to comment on the case because it is ongoing.

Just as Hungerpiller thought his company might be gaining the upper hand, the Postal Service switched tactics, successfully using a 2011 patent law overhaul law to invalidate Return Mails patent.

Now, at the Supreme Court, Return Mails lawyers are arguing that the Postal Service cant use that law, the Leahy Smith America Invents Act, to challenge Return Mails patent. The law says that a "person who is not the owner of a patent," can file a patent challenge using the law. The Postal Service doesnt count as a "person," Return Mails lawyers say. The government disagrees. The Supreme Court will decide who is right.

Hungerpiller said hes pleased the Supreme Court wants to at least hear his case. He said what he has been through to get to this point hasnt made him lose faith in his government. Most days he wears an American flag pin, something he has done since 9/11. He calls himself a "proud American."

This is just a process, he said. I honestly believe that one day Ill get justice.