FOXBOROUGH, Mass. (AP) — The NFL removed New England Patriots safety Jabrill Peppers from the commissioner exempt list on Monday, making him eligible to participate in practice and play in the team’s games. Peppers missed seven games since being placed on the list on Oct. 9 after he was arrested and charged with shoving his girlfriend’s head into a wall and choking her. The league said its review is ongoing and is not affected by the change in Peppers’ roster status. Braintree, Massachusetts, police said they were called to a home for an altercation between two people on Oct. 7, and a woman told them Peppers choked her. Police said they found at the home a clear plastic bag containing a white powder, which later tested positive for cocaine. Peppers, 29, pleaded not guilty in Quincy District Court to charges of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and possession of a Class “B” substance believed to be cocaine. At a court appearance last week a trial date was set for Jan. 22. “Any act of domestic violence is unacceptable for us,” Patriots coach Jerod Mayo said after the arrest. “With that being said, I do think that Jabrill has to go through the system, has to continue to go through due process. We’ll see how that works out.” A 2017 first-round draft choice by Cleveland, Peppers spent two seasons with the Browns and three with the New York Giants before coming to New England in 2022. He was signed to an extension this summer. He played in the first four games of the season and missed one with a shoulder injury before going on the exempt list, which allows NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to place a player on paid leave while reviewing his case. AP NFL: https://apnews.com/hub/nflHow an Ontario Amish community became saddled with COVID fines
Ministers warned of cuts as ‘every pound’ of spending to face reviewDelaware judge reaffirms ruling that invalidated massive Tesla pay package for Elon Musk
Participants can register here for the virtual event airing 9:00am ET / 3:00pm CET PARIS and CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Dec. 17, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- NANOBIOTIX (Euronext: NANO –– NASDAQ: NBTX – the ‘‘ Company ’’), a late-clinical stage biotechnology company pioneering nanoparticle-based therapeutic approaches to expand treatment possibilities for patients with cancer and other major diseases, today announced a virtual event titled "Accelerating the Future of Nanotherapeutics," scheduled to take place at 9:00 AM ET / 3:00 PM CET on Thursday, December 19, 2024. Nanobiotix remains focused on advancing its lead program which is proceeding as planned. To enable further growth, Nanobiotix will leverage new nanotherapeutic technologies with the potential to improve treatment outcomes for millions of patients. The event will feature a presentation by Laurent Lévy, PhD , Chief Executive Officer of Nanobiotix, and Matthieu Germain, PhD , Head of Curadigm at Nanobiotix. Together, they will outline the future potential of the Curadigm Nanoprimer Platform, an innovative nanotherapeutic technology designed to transform the development of intravenously-administered therapeutics. Following the presentation, a panel discussion will bring together leading experts to explore the transformative potential of Curadigm. Participants include: Laurent Lévy, PhD , Chief Executive Officer, Nanobiotix Matthieu Germain, PhD , Head of Curadigm, Nanobiotix Margaret A. Liu, MD , Supervisory Board Observer, Nanobiotix, and globally recognized authority in gene therapy, vaccines, and immunotherapy Jeffrey Bockman, PhD , Expert Advisory and Executive Vice President, Oncology at Lumanity, who will serve as the panel moderator Event Details: Title: Accelerating the Future of Nanotherapeutics Date: Thursday, December 19, 2024 Time: 9:00 AM ET / 3:00 PM CET Format: Virtual Registration: Click here Viewers can watch the event online or the replay archived on the Company’s website at www.nanobiotix.com. About CURADIGM Curadigm is an early-stage nanotherapeutic platform designed to disrupt the design and development IV-administered therapeutics and improve outcomes for patients. Curadigm’s Nanoprimer platform increases drug bioavailability while decreasing unintended off-target effects, specifically liver toxicity. The platform can be used with most intravenous (IV) therapeutics across multiple drug classes. Curadigm is dedicated to advancing therapeutic development based on our deep understanding of how drugs interact with the body, to impact both known and novel drugs across multiple clinical indications. About NANOBIOTIX Nanobiotix is a late-stage clinical biotechnology company pioneering disruptive, physics-based therapeutic approaches to revolutionize treatment outcomes for millions of patients; supported by people committed to making a difference for humanity. The Company’s philosophy is rooted in the concept of pushing past the boundaries of what is known to expand possibilities for human life. Incorporated in 2003, Nanobiotix is headquartered in Paris, France and is listed on Euronext Paris since 2012 and on the Nasdaq Global Select Market in New York City since December 2020. The Company has subsidiaries in Cambridge, Massachusetts (United States) amongst other locations. Nanobiotix is the owner of more than 25 umbrella patents associated with three (3) nanotechnology platforms with applications in 1) oncology; 2) bioavailability and biodistribution; and 3) disorders of the central nervous system. For more information about Nanobiotix, visit us at www.nanobiotix.com or follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter Disclaimer This press release contains “forward-looking” statements within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including, but not limited to, statements regarding the use of proceed therefrom, and the period of time through which the Company’s anticipates its financial resources will be adequate to support operations. Words such as “expects”, “intends”, “can”, “could”, “may”, “might”, “plan”, “potential”, “should” and “will” or the negative of these and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements which are based on the Company’ management’s current expectations and assumptions and on information currently available to management. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those implied by the forward-looking statements, including risks related to Nanobiotix’s business and financial performance, which include the risk that assumptions underlying the Company’s cash runway projections are not realized. Further information on the risk factors that may affect company business and financial performance is included in Nanobiotix’s Annual Report on Form 20-F filed with the SEC on April 24, 2024 under “Item 3.D. Risk Factors”, in Nanobiotix’s 2023 universal registration document filed with the AMF on April 24, 2024, in Nanobiotix’ 2024 semi-annual report under the caption “Supplemental Risk Factor” filed with the SEC on Form 6-K and with AMF on September 18 2024, and subsequent filings Nanobiotix makes with the SEC from time to time which are available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. The forward-looking statements included in this press release speak only as of the date of this press release, and except as required by law, Nanobiotix assumes no obligation to update these forward-looking statements publicly. Contacts Attachments 2024-12-17 -- NBTX -- Hosting Virtual Event -- FINAL.pdfALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) — Google, already facing a possible breakup of the company over its ubiquitous search engine , is fighting to beat back another attack by the U.S. Department of Justice alleging monopolistic conduct, this time over technology that puts online advertising in front of consumers. The Justice Department and Google made closing arguments Monday in a trial alleging Google's advertising technology constitutes an illegal monopoly. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia, will decide the case and is expected to issue a written ruling by the end of the year. If Brinkema finds Google has engaged in illegal, monopolistic conduct, she will then hold further hearings to explore what remedies should be imposed. The Justice Department, along with a coalition of states, has already said it believes Google should be forced to sell off parts of its ad tech business, which generates tens of billions of dollars annually for the Mountain View, California-based company. After roughly a month of trial testimony earlier this year, the arguments in the case remain the same. During three hours of arguments Monday, Brinkema, who sometimes tips her hand during legal arguments, did little to indicate how she might rule. She did, though, question the applicability of a key antitrust case Google cites in its defense. The Justice Department contends Google built and maintained a monopoly in “open-web display advertising,” essentially the rectangular ads that appear on the top and right-hand side of the page when one browses websites. Google dominates all facets of the market. A technology called DoubleClick is used pervasively by news sites and other online publishers, while Google Ads maintains a cache of advertisers large and small looking to place their ads on the right webpage in front of the right consumer. In between is another Google product, AdExchange, that conducts nearly instantaneous auctions matching advertisers to publishers. In court papers, Justice Department lawyers say Google “is more concerned with acquiring and preserving its trifecta of monopolies than serving its own publisher and advertiser customers or winning on the merits.” As a result, content providers and news organizations have never been able to generate the online revenue they should due to Google’s excessive fees for brokering transactions between advertisers and publishers, the government says. Google argues the government's case improperly focuses on a narrow niche of online advertising. If one looks more broadly at online advertising to include social media, streaming TV services, and app-based advertising, Google says it controls as little as 10% of the market, a share that is dwindling as it faces increased and evolving competition. Google alleges in court papers that the government’s lawsuit “boil(s) down to the persistent complaints of a handful of Google’s rivals and several mammoth publishers.” Google also says it has invested billions in technology that facilitates the efficient match of advertisers to interested consumers and it should not be forced to share its technology and success with competitors. “Requiring a company to do further engineering work to make its technology and customers accessible by all of its competitors on their preferred terms has never been compelled by U.S. antitrust law,” the company wrote. Brinkema, during Monday's arguments, also sought clarity on Google’s market share, a number the two sides dispute, depending on how broadly the market is defined. Historically, courts have been unwilling to declare an illegal monopoly in markets in which a company holds less than a 70% market share. Google says that when online display advertising is viewed as a whole, it holds only a 10% market share, and dwindling. The Justice Department contends, though, that when focusing on open-web display advertising, Google controls 91% of the market for publisher ad servers and 87% of the market for advertiser ad networks. Google says that the “open web display advertising” market is gerrymandered by the Justice Department to make Google look bad, and that nobody in the industry looks at that category of ads without considering the ability of advertisers to switch to other forms of advertising, like in mobile apps. The Justice Department also contends that the public is harmed by the excessive rates Google charges to facilitate ad purchases, saying the company takes 36 cents on the dollar when it facilitates the transaction end to end. Google says its “take rate” has dropped to 31% and continues to decrease, and it says that rate is lower than that of its competitors. “When you have an integrated system, one of the benefits is lower prices," Google lawyer Karen Dunn said Monday. The Virginia case is separate from an ongoing lawsuit brought against Google in the District of Columbia over its namesake search engine. In that case, the judge determined it constitutes an illegal monopoly but has not decided what remedy to impose. The Justice Department said last week it will seek to force Google to sell its Chrome web browser , among a host of other penalties. Google has said the department's request is overkill and unhinged from legitimate regulation. In Monday's arguments, Justice Department lawyer Aaron Teitelbaum cited the search engine case when he highlighted an email from a Google executive, David Rosenblatt, who said in a 2009 email that Google’s goal was to “do to display what Google did to search," which Teitelbaum said showed the company's intent to achieve market dominance. “Google did not achieve its trifecta of monopolies by accident,” Teitelbaum said.