Course Outcome covered in this Assignment:

MN507-3: Align public policy options to meet the needs of various stakeholders.

Directions:

For this Assignment, you will create a slide and audio presentation in which you will present information to support the passage of HR 5223. You may use PowerPoint, Google Slides, or another presentation software of your choosing. Your audio presentation should put forth a convincing argument based on your research and should be designed as if you were addressing a group of legislators whose support you are trying to obtain.

Your slide and audio presentation must address:

• A description of current risks that healthcare providers face from violence in the workplace.
• Information from professional nursing associations which support your argument for minimizing the risk of violence in the healthcare setting.
• Identification of a theoretical or regulatory model which would be applicable to the passage of HR 5223.
• Identification of stakeholders who will benefit from the passage of HR 5223 and how they would benefit.
• Potential barriers to passage of HR 5223 and how they can be overcome.
• Include a minimum of 8 slides (not counting the title or reference slide).
• Your slides should contain speaker notes, to assist in your audio delivery.
• Your slides should be professional in appearance and tone, and reflect a thoughtful and meaningful application of your research to your argument. Speak clearly and convincingly. Your presentation should not be longer than 10 minutes.
• You must include a minimum of (5) different scholarly references.

Assignment Requirements

Before finalizing your work, you should:

• be sure to read the Assignment description carefully (as displayed above);
• consult the Grading Rubric (under the Course Resources) to make sure you have included everything necessary; and
• utilize spelling and grammar check to minimize errors.

Your writing Assignment should:

• follow the conventions of Standard English (correct grammar, punctuation, etc.);
• be well ordered, logical, and unified, as well as original and insightful;
• display superior content, organization, style, and mechanics; and
• use APA formatting and citation style.

Select and read one peer-reviewed article. Ideally, this should be one on your topic that you may ultimately use in your final project. Highlight at least one threat to internal or external validity or reliability. Explore why this threat is problematic and how it could be remedied. Comment on the articles discussed by your classmates. Consider which validity threats are most common. Which are the most difficult to deal with?

To complete this assignment, review the Discussion Rubric document (attached).

I have also attached my chosen topic so you can use that to continue on the same topic for this discussion as well.

Assignment 2: Resolving Intellectual Property Rights

Note: The companies mentioned herein are merely hypothetical organizations with characteristics developed to enable students to respond to the assignment. You may create and / or make all necessary assumptions needed for the completion of this assignment if those assumptions are consistent with the facts presented. Do not make assumptions which obviate the need to conduct a legal analysis of the issues.

In this assignment, you will act as the fictional character of Betty Fuller, Head of Marketing at Simply Green Products, while you draft a memorandum to the company President. In this memorandum, you must explain how you would resolve the legal issues discussed in the scenario.

Scenario

Simply Green Products (SGP) is a $10 million company that produces biodegradable packing materials that orchards use in the Shenandoah Valley to transport their apples, peaches, and pears nationwide. Biodegradable materials are more eco-friendly because they break down into the environment. Such packing materials are marketed under the name “SafePac,” which is heavily advertised in trade journals. Simply Green Products have had the name “SafePac” imprinted on all of their packing material since 2008. Although SGP never filed for either state or federal trademark protection, following the advice of one of their summer interns, they did register the domain name “SafePac.com.” With the movement toward more eco-friendly agricultural production, the fact that such packing materials are biodegradable provides a primary marketing advantage over non-biodegradable competitors.

Despite the fact that SGP is highly eco-friendly, it is not particularly technologically advanced. SGP mostly advertises in trade journals and magazines, with most orders coming via the mail or phone orders. Shep Howard, President of SGP realizes his company needs to increase its marketing presence and recently hired Betty Fuller, a recent Strayer graduate with an MBA, to be the new Director of Marketing for the company. Ms. Fuller has been charged with bringing SGP’s marketing plan into the 21st century.

In preparing the new Marketing plan, Ms. Fuller, quickly noticed that although SGP owned Safepac.com, the name SafePac, itself had never been registered with the Trademark and Patent Office. Accordingly, one of the first things Ms. Fuller did was start the registration process. When searching the USPTO office database to see if a mark has already been filed she found the following entries shown below:

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!PLEASE SEE ATTACHMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

She immediately realized SGP had a problem. Ms. Fuller did some additional research and found that a company called Safe Choices, Inc. uses the SafePack name to market an emergency weather kit in the form of a backpack; and had received a federal registration for the mark from the Patent and Trademark Office in 2002. This backpack is sold both online at SafePack.com and in sporting goods stores nationwide.

Note: “A complete search is one that will uncover all similar marks, not just those that are identical. In this regard, searching for trademark availability is not the same as searching to register a domain name. A domain name search may focus on exact or “dead on” hits, with no consideration given to similar names or use with related products and services. Basically, a domain address is either available or it is not. The trademark process, on the other hand, is more complex. As part of the overall examination process, the USPTO will search its database to determine whether registration must be refused because a similar mark is already registered for related products or services (i.e., even identical marks may co-exist if used on goods or services not considered to be related in any way). Please note that the USPTO does not offer advisory opinions on the availability of a mark prior to filing of an actual application.”

http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks-application-process/search-trademark-database

Legal Issues

Ms. Fuller contacted Shep Howard to discuss SGP intellectual property problems and to devise a plan on how to proceed. In her meeting with Howard Ms. Fuller explained the legal issues to Howard as follows:

1. SGP has been using the product name SafePac since 2008 but never trademarked or otherwise registered that named. A company called Safe Choice had registered the names SafePack and SafePacs back in 2002 and those names were listed live marks by the USPTO. Arguably, SafePac may be confusingly similar to Safe Choices marks to preclude registration of the marks. Moreover, use of the name may “constitutes a false designation of origin which is likely to confuse customers as to the source of the goods”. However, safe Choice and SGP are in different product lines and, therefore, arguably are not competitors, a requirement for infringement. The intellectual property issue at hand involves the Lanham Act.
2. Even if the USPTO finds that SGP’s proposed mark and Safe Choices marks are not similar or that SGP and Safe Choice are not competitors, registrations may nonetheless be denied under the provisions of the Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c). For additional information, see Duvall, S.A. (2007). The Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006: balanced protection for famous brands. The Trademark Reporter, 97(6), 1252-1285.
3. Since we purchased the domain name SafePac.com, Safe Choice may attempt to accuse SGP of cybersquatting and try to have that domain name transferred to their control. Any such action would proceed under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d).

Finally, she outlined her plan on how to proceed with the marketing plan based on how she though the legal issues would be resolved. Mr. Howard then asked Ms. Fuller to put the information she had just given him in memo form.

Assignment Requirements

In the role of Betty Fuller, prepare the memorandum requested by Shep Howard. The memo should be three to four (3-4) pages in which you:

1. Decide whether or not SGP can register SafePac as a trademark given the issues discussed in “legal issue: a”.
2. Decide whether or not the Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2006 would be violated if the USTPO granted SGP a trademark on SafePac.
3. Decide whether or not the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act would be violated by SGP’s use of safepac.com.
4. Describe how your resolution would affect the marketing options available to the company.
5. Use at least three (3) quality academic or legal resources in this assignment, such as a government Website, Law school Websites, Restatements of laws, and other treatises of Law.  Your paper must include internal citations indicating the sources of your legal statements. 
   Note: Wikipedia and other Websites do not qualify as academic or legal resources.
6. Format your assignment according to the following formatting requirements:
   1. Typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides.
   2. Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page is not included in the required page length.
   3. Include a reference page. Citations and references must follow APA format. The reference page is not included in the required page length.

The specific course learning outcomes associated with this assignment are:

• Describe the legal environment of business, the sources of American law, and the basis of authority for government to regulate business.
• Use technology and information resources to research issues in business law.
• Write clearly and concisely about business law using proper writing mechanics.

Synthesizing the Week’s Controversy and Looking Ahead

Throughout this course, your instructor has summarized each discussion forum conversation and provided you with lingering questions and/or considerations. Now, it is your turn to do this and to go a step further.

For this journal, there are two tasks. First, by Day 7 of this week, write a brief 100-word journal entry summarizing the conversation in “The Role of Big Pharma” discussion forum. Offer and reflect on any conclusions that the class came to regarding the discussion forum topic. What were the conclusions and what are your thoughts regarding these? If you do not see that the class came to any significant conclusions, what kept conclusions from being drawn in the discussion? What lingering questions remain to be answered, and how might they be answered? What other issues regarding this controversy need to be considered?

Second, reflect on and write about how the themes discussed over the past five weeks, within this course, may be applicable in your future career and/or relationships at work. How will having an increased understanding about Abnormal Psychology better prepare you for dealing with situations that may arise throughout your life?

Your journal will be graded based on whether or not you provided a substantial and thoughtful entry.

Please don’t bid if you are asking for more than $6. 

NO PLAGIARISM, NO GRAMMAR, NO PAST DUE, PLEASE!! 

(QUESTION 1-2 AT LEAST 120 WORDS, QUESTION 3 AT LEAST 250 WORDS, REFERENCE NOT COUNTED, REFERENCE UNDER EACH ANSWER.) 

1. Section 100 of the Rules of the Code of Conduct discusses independence.  How do we distinguish between independent in fact and independence in appearance?  Please include examples.

2. Did the accounting scandals of the early 2000s impact the Rules of Conduct under Sections 300, 400, and 500?  What changes in our perception of these rules have we seen over the last decade?

3. What is the purpose of the IMA Code of Professional Conduct?  What are the key elements?  How is this similar to the AICPA Rules of Conduct?  How is it different? (Minimum 250 words)