Positve Psychology and Aristotles Virtue Ethics Converge...

Positive psychology and Aristotle: A convergence of ideas The field of positive psychology, founded by Martin Seligman (1998), seeks to influence individuals whose lives are â€Å"neutral† and increase their psychological well-being. Positive psychology offers a unique perspective on mental health through focusing on individual strengths rather than dysfunction, pathology, and mental illness (Seligman Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). The goal of positive psychology is to assist individuals in creating meaningful lives through the promotion of positive emotions, individual character strengths, as well as, eudemonic happiness, as key components to optimal mental health. Like many other contemporary theories, positive psychology borrows principles and†¦show more content†¦Contemporary research suggests that eudemonia is a better predictor of life satisfaction than hedonistic pleasure; findings from a study conducted by Huta, Park, Peterson, Seligman (2005) demonstrate that tho se who pursue eudemonic goals and activities are more satisfied than those who solely pursue pleasure. (Peterson, 2006) It has been stated â€Å"happiness is the aim of life, but virtue is the foundations of happiness† (Thomas Jefferson, 1819). Seligman proposes that the identification and use of positive individual strengths of character, associated with virtue, are important components to achieving eudemonic happiness and in creating and sustaining a meaningful life. Virtues and strengths can serve as defenses during times of adversity, as well as, have the ability to enhance the healthier moments in life. The Values in Action (VIA) classification system contains 24 strengths of character that are sub-categories of six cross-culturally accepted core virtues: Wisdom and knowledge, courage, humanity, justice, temperance, as well as, transcendence. The VIA classification was created in order to provide conceptual and empirical means of describing and measuring positive develop ment. (Peterson, 2006; Seligman, 2002) Virtue strengths of wisdom include positive traits such as, perspective,

The Religion Of The Hajj - 1734 Words

Throughout time, many aspects of life have changed in drastic ways. One common thing around the world, no matter where you are, that has evolved is over time is religion. One religion that has changed has been Islam. Something that unites all Muslims is a common belief they have; The Five Pillars. These Pillars allow the Muslim community to become one regardless of their social statue. One of the most changed of these would be the Pilgrimage to Mecca. Also known as the Hajj, â€Å" Every adult Muslim who if physically and financially able is expected to perform the pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia at least once in his or her lifetime.† (Wired.com) In the pre modern time, it was a very dangerous journey to perform the Hajj. Many thought†¦show more content†¦This caused an increase in the total population of Muslims. This also caused a mass increase in the number of Muslims that participated in the Hajj every year. Another problem that modernity presented to the Haj j was the constant fighting that was going on in the areas where Islam was dominant. Although there are more Muslims in Southeast Asia, the Middle East’s population is 91% Muslim. Even though majority of the citizens in this region practice the same religion, they are often very different. These differences of Islam caused fighting and warfare all over the Middle East, and made traveling through these regions very different. Today, many of the same problems apply. One of the biggest problems that the Muslim community had pertaining to the Hajj was the massive amount of people who attended each year. In 1941, there were about 24,000 pilgrims from countries other than Saudi Arabia. In 2013, there were 1,379,500 international pilgrims that took the pilgrimage and about 800,000 Saudi Arabians took the Hajj. Combined, over 2 million pilgrims traveled to Mecca in 2013 for the Hajj. This causes many problems for the city of Mecca. Mecca has a population of about 1.6 million resident s, over the 5 days of the Hajj, their city holds over two times as many people as it does the rest of the year. This overpopulation causes chaos throughout the entire city as pilgrims try to visit.

Tracking Measuring Crime Free Essays

In Chapter 3 of our text we learn how about the different tools to track crime, criminal behaviors, measure crime, and crime rate. Discuss and define the different types of measuring tools used such as the UCR, National Incident-based reporting, victim surveys, and self-reported survey. Discuss both the positives and negative of each of the methods used to measure crime. We will write a custom essay sample on Tracking Measuring Crime or any similar topic only for you Order Now Then respond to at least two peer posts. 1. Discuss and define the different types of measuring tools used such as the UCR. The Uniformed Crime Report; (UCR): This is a report used by the Federal Bureau of Investigations; this report aids the FBI by giving them an indication as to criminal activities her in the United States. The FBI collects its data of information from all the Law Enforcement Agencies here in the USA. Upon receiving all the current activity throughout the USA, the FBI is able to generate with almost complete accuracy as to the type of crime, as well as what, when, where, and why a type of incident may occur. The (UCR) is based on three parts. (a) The accurate number of people arrested. b) The number of Crimes reported by Victims, witnesses, or the police themselves. (c) The number of Law Enforcement Officers. Upon the FBI receiving all the required data, the data is then compiles the information and it is then presented in two important ways: 1a. I have read that in according to our learning material, class book. (â€Å"Criminal Justice in Action†). By, Larry K. Gaines, Roger Le roy Miller if you look back at the year 2010, it was composed of people totaling 100,000 individual, the Crime rate was reported to be 3,346 reports over all in the United States. These reports were considered Part I class offences, as these types of criminal activity are the more serious type crimes one can commit, as they range from Murder, Bank Robbery, Forcible Rape, Aggravated Battery, Robbery, BE, Larceny / Theft, Auto Theft, and even Arson (Fire) not naturally caused, caused by mankind. 1b. Now there is also Part II Offenses which consist of all other criminal activity from Loitering all the way to Vagrancy and any other laws that go against one State, County, or Municipal City level. These types of crimes happen often and because of their commonality with every day Society the percentage usually will usually out way Part I Criminal Offenses. 1C. I truly believe that this system was a great way to pinpoint criminal activity for this period of time, when first placed into effect this was an exceptional system for the Law Enforcement Agencies to be able to apply common sense criminal activity, whereas a prediction of what type of crime may occur. Now one must realize that this tool was only effective as the Officers who filed reports willingly and timely, as crime rate would rise reporting would dwindle. This could be due to pride, as each agency and the officer that belonged to its organization. The many Local Law Enforcement Agencies frowned upon the interference of the FBI creating errors in the actual percentage of active crime in any given period of time. This was not an error in the Tool reporting, but Human error over jealousy between Local, State, and County Law Officials against Federal direction involvement 2. Discuss and define the National Incident-Based Reporting System. The (NIBRS) has come into play because the (UCR) was with flaw. The FBI and several State Law Enforcement agencies are currently operating under the National Incident Based Reporting System as it was introduced since the 1980’s. The (NIBRS) was found to be a more productive way in pinpointing Criminal Activity. It was required that each Local Law Enforcement Agency were to call in all Criminal Activity within twenty-two different offences categories. The (NIBRS) is made up of forty-six specific crimes classified as Group Offenses, all these offenses are recorded on a computerized record system on a daily basis which is provided though not fully financed by the Federal Government. The (NIBS) was introduced to the local agencies in 1989 and has take twenty-two years to reach 36 States, allowing on average of up to 40% of all agencies within those States to utilize the new system. Thought the system is limited, criminologists have acted out enthusiastically because how the new system can provide information. The system provides about for data sets that include Offenses, Victims, Offenders, and daily arrestees. This newer system has truly outweighed the Uniformed Crime Report, aka; (UCR). 3. The NIBRS is a new methodology for the Uniform Crime Report. It is stronger than the UCR because it collects more detailed information about the crimes. One of the strength is the recording of relationships between the victim and offender, another is the use of 22 categories of crime, and another is the fact that multiple crimes can be reported in one incident. http://wiki. answers. om/Q/Strengths_of_NIBRS: (Bing. com Search Web – Link). 4. Discuss and define the victim surveys. The victim survey is just what it says. The survey was performed by our own government in order to find out who and how many individuals suffered by becoming a victim of a crime. These victims who responded were innocent of crime, as the criminal act was against them by the hand of another. The actual definition of Vict im Survey is: A method in which gathering information which requires a participant that is anyone willing to open up to Government Law Enforcement whether it be Local or Federal. Participants; participants must be willing to reveal in detail any incidents of a criminal activity brought against them or any criminal act they may have committed. I truly believe that if given the opportunity to feel safe, many individuals would come through in order to clean up their community and keep the rest of society thankful. It is truly sad, however; I believe that less if not any would want to either testify against another anymore. Since 1989, many have come to fear repercussion for opening up to the Law unless they truly feel safe guarded by the chances of being reduced to ash. 5. Discuss and define the self-reported survey. The principles are nearly the same, however; it only focuses on offenders. Offenders are individuals who have committed crimes and never were arrested, nor even cited for the crime they have committed in the past. I truly find this to be an informative way to create better laws within a society it is like we use to say in the Marine Corps, â€Å"It’s to keep an honest person honest. † I believe that if in the right situation and at the right time a survey should conducted again just to see what crimes even though they me be petty ones are being conducted by the populous. I also believe that there unintentional crime that every person may be guilty of a good example of a small petty crime that many never catch onto is the taken of a Government ink pen that was purchased with government funds. I was guilty of this numerous times as I would remove the pen from my desk off the base without any knowledge until I was already off the base in route to home. 6. Well, I want to state that there are many positive factors when you come right down to it. I believe that both the (UCR), as well as the (NIBRS) re very useful because it truly provides a better means to track crime and one can use this information to create a better means in reducing crime, All it takes is for each officer to make sure that their reports are finished and that everyone that has been detained is placed into the report process. Crime is always going to exist and if tracking each Part one Offense is quickly placed into the system an accurate report can be generated. Now, nothing is ever f lawless and there are many factors that bring out the negative perspective in the failure of these two systems. One each agency needs to share and at time sharing information between each agency is like telling a deaf dog to fetch. What I am stating is that if an agency is not willing to open up and share information then there will be definite negative accountability in the accuracy in the percentages of these tools they use to generate the percentage of crime. I also believe that News agencies also report thing wrong more often than none, only because of inaccurate reporting due to human error. All Law Enforcement Agencies no matter if they are State or Federal, as each agency needs to operate as a team. Each Division when compiling data and criminal trends. Need to reflect and show exactly whether they are Part I, or Part II Offenses. I also believe that as a society we should be given surveys to be answered every eight to ten years like that of the Population Census Report. I honestly believe that if this were a tool used often we could narrow down crime and fight back to win over a Nation at odds with issues of Law. As I have mentioned earlier, many will willingly open up to self surveys as long as no repercussion is given to the ones who answer honestly. Many feel fear when it comes to reporting crime and this is another factor in misrepresentation of percentage of actual crime committed. 7. Let’s take a look at what has been recently placed on world news by Good Morning America about the FBI investigation that has been taking place here in Albuquerque, NM for the first two weeks in March, 2013 an Officer is on trial for the wrongful Shooting Death of a Marine Corps Veteran. Now if the individual’s mental health status had been placed into a shared system I honestly believe the Officer would not have shot this Marine who had suffered with PTSD and had done Crack Cocaine and was apprehended several months ago. I bet this was a Part I level offense, however along the line this was never reported properly and when these two had their confrontation well a sadden event had already occurred. This is the flaw that I mentioned and lately well after 911 all the agencies have started to revert back to their old habits and that keeping one another in the Dark. I honestly find situations like this when listening on a police scanner. It is as if one hand is not aware of the other. Uniform Crime Reports and Index of Crime in Albuquerque in the State of New Mexico enforced by Albuquerque from 1985 to 2005 Number of Violent Crimes Reported by Albuquerque by Year and Total| Year|   Population| Murder/ Man- slaughter| Rape| Robbery| Aggravated Assault| Total Violent Crime| 2005| 490,631| 53| 285| 1,150| 3,182| 4,670| 2004| 479,074| 44| 235| 1,238| 3,206| 4,723| 2003| 468,764| 52| 263| 1,080| 3,045| 4,440| 2002| 457,488| 54| 293| 1,295| 3,250| 4,892| 2001| 451,098| 36| 219| 1,610| 3,396| 5,261| 000| 448,607| 38| 239| 1,547| 3,317| 5,141| 1995| 419,714| 56| 296| 1,623| 2,763| 4,738| 1990| 384,736| 35| 222| 1,030| 3,835| 5,122| 1985| 357,051| 43| 238| 1,247| 2,578| 4,106| 1980| 328,837| 52| 217| 914| 1,630| 2,813| | New Mexico Counties| In 1930, the FBI assumed responsibility for managing the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program, collecting data from 400 cities. By 2006, over 15,000 law enforcement agencies submitted crime reports to the FBI, but since not all jurisdictions provide reports there is a possibility that you won’t find complete data on some of our agency crime report pages. In every case where the FBI has assigned a population to a jurisdiction, we are providing a page even though it may be blank. When a city located in a county starts submitting its own reports, the population assigned to the county is reduced to reflect that fact. Number of Property Crimes  Reported by Albuquerque by Year and Total. UCR Crime Statistics prepared by the: The Disaster Center in association with the: Index of the State of New Mexico Uniform Crime Reports Index of United State’s  Crime Reports Year|   Population| Burglary| Larceny Theft| Vehicle Theft| Total Property Crime| 2005| 490,631| 5,744| 20,703| 3,796| 30,243| 004| 479,074| 5,243| 20,469| 3,845| 29,557| 2003| 468,764| 5,543| 19,663| 4,088| 29,294| 2002| 457,488| 5,452| 21,371| 4,050| 30,873| 2001| 451,098| 6,585| 23,535| 4,162| 34,282| 2000| 448,607| 7,120| 22,842| 4,349| 34,311| 1995| 419,714| 8,362| 23,461| 4,995| 36,818| 1990| 384,736| 9,497| 22,130| 1,973| 33,600| 1985| 357,051| 9,186| 17,935| 1,9 32| 29,053| 1980| 328,837| 7,469| 15,805| 1,338| 24,612| | The UCR can be presented here because of the hard work of law enforcement statisticians who must classify and score each crime according to the strict criteria developed for the UCR. Some agency’s crime reports do not have a population associated with them, these may include: the highway patrol, state police, a drug enforcement agency, an environmental enforcement agency, transportation utility, colleges, and others. Areas may have many agencies performing the same or different law enforcement functions, and a population can only be assigned once, so it is not possible to formulate a crime rate for every agency. The UCR does not include a record of every crime reported to law enforcement, and every agency does not submit data in the form that the FBI requests. The most accurate number of crimes reported are those involving death. The least  accurate is  the number of rapes that are reported. The number of case of rape reported does not include attempted rapes. Aggravated Assault does not include cases of simple assault, (which are the largest number of assaults reported to police) and so constitutes only a portion of the total number of reported assaults. The number of Aggravated Assaults used here was arrived at by subtracting the number of Simple Assaults from  the Total Assaults reported by each agency. For a few agencies, this process resulted in the generation of a negative number (their UCR report wrongly indicates that there were more simple assaults  than the total number of reported assaults). The magnitude of a threat/risk is measured by its frequency and effect. By this definition crime may well constitute the  single greatest risk/threat we face today. If you have questions, comments, or suggestions, please see our  FAQ page  first at:  http://www. disastercenter. com/UCR. html  and feel free to post a message to  host@disastercenter. com. National Criminal Victimization Survey, 1996 estimate that only   37% of rapes are reported to police The Disaster Center  provides online coverage of disasters in the United States, compiling and providing links to disaster related statistics and studies:  US Crimes  Data from 1960  Ã‚  Tornado,  Illnesses, Fatal  Motor Vehicle Traffic Injury and Fatality Data,  Ã‚  Child Nursery Equipment and Toys: Accident Rates by Age,  Sports ; Recreational Equipment: Injuries by Age and Sex,  Home, Heating, Plumbing, and Appliance: Injuries by Cause, Age, and Rate,  Furniture, furnishings, household, and personal use items: Accident injury rates by Age,  Home, Work Tools and Misc. Items: Accident Injury rates by Age. US Cause of Death Data  ,  US Anti–terrorism Threat/Risk Policy prior to September 11, 2001,  Ã‚  US Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Terrorism Policy prior to 9–11  Ã‚  Atlantic Hurricane pages and index. Total student, Number of school–associated Violent Deaths and Number of Homicides and Suicides of Youth Ages 5–19, by Location: 1992–2002  Ã‚  Crimes and Indexes for USA Metropolitan Statistical Areas   Violent Crime Index base upon 100,000 People. Year|   Population| Murder/ Man- slaughter| Rape| Robbery| Aggravated Assault| Total Violent Crime| 2005| 490,631| 10. | 58. 1| 234. 4| 648. 6| 951. 8| 2004| 479,074| 9. 2| 49. 1| 258. 4| 669. 2| 985. 9| 2003| 468,764| 11. 1| 56. 1| 230. 4| 649. 6| 947. 2| 2002| 457,488| 11. 8| 64. 0| 283. 1| 710. 4| 1,069. 3| 2001| 451,098| 8. 0| 48. 5| 356. 9| 752. 8| 1,166. 3| 2000| 448,607| 8. 5| 53. 3| 344. 8| 739. 4| 1,146. 0| 1995| 419,714| 13. 3| 70. 5| 386. 7| 658. 3| 1,128. 9| 1990| 384,736| 9. 1| 57. 7| 267. 7| 996. 8| 1,331. 3| 1985| 357,051| 12. 0| 66. 7| 349. 2| 722. 0| 1,150. 0| 1980| 328,837| 15. 8| 66. 0| 277. 9| 495. 7| 855. 4| Property Crime Index per 100,000 People. | | | | | Year|   Population| Burglary| Larceny Theft| Vehicle Theft| Total Property Crime| 2005| 490,631| 1,170. 7| 4,219. 7| 773. 7| 6,164. 1| 2004| 479,074| 1,094. 4| 4,272. 6| 802. 6| 6,169. 6| 2003| 468,764| 1,182. 5| 4,194. 6| 872. 1| 6,249. 2| 2002| 457,488| 1,191. 7| 4,671. 4| 885. 3| 6,748. 4| 2001| 451,098| 1,459. 8| 5,217. 3| 922. 6| 7,599. 7| 2000| 448,607| 1,587. 1| 5,091. 8| 969. 4| 7,648. 3| 1995| 419,714| 1,992. 3| 5,589. 8| 1,190. 1| 8,772. 2| 1990| 384,736| 2,468. 4| 5,752. 0| 512. 8| 8,733. 3| 1985| 357,051| 2,572. 7| 5,023. | 541. 1| 8,136. 9| 1980| 328,837| 2,271. 3| 4,806. 3| 406. 9| 7,484. | This report was provided by: (Google Search – (URL); Http://www. disastercenter. com/newmexic/crime/8543. htm). This link will take one to view a n actual published (UCR); provided by Albuquerque, New Mexico City Law Enforcement. Now, currently have a much broader reason why this report even though more accurate still is with Flaws as Rape Victims especially Female are more likely to not report their encounter after suffering from unwanted sexual activity that was consensual. Now, as we are aware natural disasters occur around the United States. I find it true that it is actually impossible to provide a true accurate account of class type of crime whether it be Offense I, or Offense II type. This is why during a Disaster it is up to each and every person Moral obligation of duty to report any and all crime, however; just because it is the ethical approach, not all in Society would report such crimes. Then there are the crimes that gone not unseen just unreported by the many in Society that believe, â€Å"See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil! means safety from the criminal elements as they Reported no wrong against themselves and others. We, as a notion of laws that are governed by both Federal and State need to put the word out in a manner that truly allows one to be safe of retaliation of others. Then there is the elderly who have and are today being abused as they are an easy target every walk of life. The elderly fear retaliation like any other pe rson who fears the fact that they are unprotected because there are more people committing crime than preventing crime How to cite Tracking Measuring Crime, Papers

Ck Claridge inc free essay sample

Purcell hoped that by the end of the afternoon, aided by Schilling’s insights, he would be able to establish a course of action that might hasten the final settlement of a patent suit brought against CKC three years earlier by the Tolemite Corporation and its licensee, Barton Research and Development (BARD). The Contenders CKC was founded in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 1948 as a commercial outlet for the inventive genius of Dr. Charles K. Claridge, an astute organic chemist. Dr. Claridge owned and managed the company until 1996, when, desiring to retire, he sold it along with all of its patents and products to Arnoux Industries, a small Chicago-based conglomerate. CKC continued to prosper as an Arnoux subsidiary and by 2009 had projected annual sales of about $105 million, 14% of the Arnoux total. About 10% of CKC’s sales in 2009 were derived from a chemical component called Varacil, whose manufacturing process was the subject of the patent suit. We will write a custom essay sample on Ck Claridge inc or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The remainder of its sales included a wide range of specialty organic chemical products, sold in relatively small volume, primarily to the pharmaceutical industry. Tolemite, also headquartered in Chicago, was a chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturer with estimated 2009 sales in excess of $3. 0 billion. In 2000 Tolemite had been awarded a 17-year patent covering various aspects of a new, low-cost process for synthesizing Varacil. The techniques covered by the patent had been discovered at Tolemite’s research facility in 1994 as an offshoot of another project. (Tolemite had filed a patent application in early 1995. ) Since Tolemite was neither a user nor a producer of Varacil, it had decided to offer the use of the patent, under license, to BARD, the principal Varacil producer in the United States. As drugs requiring Varacil had been phased out, new ones requiring the compound had typically appeared. Furthermore, industry leaders had no reason to believe that this stability would be lost over the next several years; they projected industry unit sales to be quite flat as far as five to ten years out. On the dollar value side, however, the story was quite different. Prices for Varacil had been in decline for several years. When converting to the synthetic process, each competitor in the industry had tooled up to supply an optimistic share of the market. Then, when market share objectives were not met, prices were slashed in an attempt to keep manufacturing facilities operating at efficient levels and to bring in as much contribution as possible toward fixed costs. This situation was expected to continue for at least five years. Exhibit 1 shows industry unit and dollar sales of synthetic Varacil for the period 2000-2009, as well as management’s projections for 2010-2020. In 2009 there were seven principal competitors in the synthetic Varacil market. BARD, with $60 million in sales, took roughly 66% of the market. CKC, with about $10 million in sales, was the Upon filing of the suit, CKC’s process engineers had tried hard to develop a process modification that avoided infringing the patent in the manner that the CKC-discovered process allegedly did, but after a year of trying determined that this was not feasible. 2 C. K. Claridge, Inc. 910-045 second largest and held an 11% share. The remaining five competitors, none of whose Varacil sales exceeded $6 million, then constituted the remaining 23% of the market. By 2006 all seven of the principal competitors were manufacturing synthetic Varacil by nearly identical processes. Only BARD, however, was paying royalties to Tolemite. Based on the logic of the lawsuit, the other producers were technically infringing the patent. Background on the Litigation On June 12, 2006, Tolemite (as the patent owner) and BARD (with sublicensing rights) had jointly filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin charging CKC with having infringed on Tolemite’s patent. To remedy the infringement, Tolemite and BARD were seeking an injunction against future infringement over the ten years remaining on the 17-year life of the patent, as well as damages equivalent to license royalty payments of 20% on Claridge’s past and future sales of synthetic Varacil. When confronted with the suit, Purcell had immediately discussed the matter with Aaron Mantiris, general counsel for Arnoux Industries. Both had felt there was considerable evidence indicating that Tolemite’s process might not be patentable. At Mantiris’ suggestion, CKC had retained the services of Evans and Blaylock, a well-known and highly reputable firm of intellectual property attorneys in New York. These attorneys quickly agreed with Mantiris on the potential weakness of the Tolemite suit. Thus, in 2006, Evans and Blaylock had begun to intensively prepare the case for CKC’s defense. Tolemite’s patent contained 12 claims of originality. Like all successful patent applicants, Tolemite had had to demonstrate to the patent examiners that there was no â€Å"prior art,† e. g. previous patents, applied-for patents, or processes in the public domain—unpatentable, but generally known—that were similar. In fact, there were many instances of patents being successfully challenged. However, once a patent was issued, the burden lay with a potential infringer to prove that the claimed invention was unpatentable. And, unless there was a serious irregularity such as fraud associated with its issuance, a patent was treated as valid unless and until it was legally invalidated. In the matter of synthetic Varacil, Mantiris argued that Tolemite had not, in fact, introduced any novelty, but had merely observed and harnessed a naturally occurring process that, in itself, was not patentable. A patent holder whose patent was infringed was entitled to sue the infringer for damages to compensate for sales and profit wrongfully obtained. In awarding damages in a case like that brought jointly by BARD and Tolemite against CKC, a court would almost certainly consider a reasonable royalty and the plaintiff’s lost profits—with the award potentially trebled in the case of egregious circumstances, which seemed unlikely in this suit. In determining the amount to be demanded in a lawsuit, the plaintiff usually calculated these damages in a way most favorable to itself. However, if the plaintiff prevailed in court, the actual damages awarded were often considerably less. In the Varacil matter it was the strongly held opinion of both Mantiris and the Evans and Blaylock lawyers—based on considerable comparable experience, relevant legal precedents, and other datathat although the suit specified a 20% royalty payment, the amount awarded if CKC lost the suit would be equivalent to approximately 10% royalties on past and future sales through the life of the patent. Purcell was persuaded of the accuracy of this assessment; as was common, in the view of CKC and its attorneys, the plaintiffs had claimed an amount roughly double their likely awardif they ended up prevailing in court.