jili 178 agent

jili 178 agent 31 Products For Homebodies Who Are Over The Moon When Their Plans Get CanceledMichigan, Ohio State fight broken up with police pepper spray after Wolverines stun Buckeyes 13-10

Bayern Munich jump to 3rd place in EuroLeague after defeating Barcelona 100-78

AI Stock Plummets! What Investors Need to Know NowMichigan, Ohio State fight broken up with police pepper spray after Wolverines stun Buckeyes 13-10Bitcoin's wild ride toward $100,000

Chicago Divorce Lawyer Russell D. Knight Discusses the Impact of New Spouse's Income on Illinois Divorce AgreementsTurkey urges caution to prevent terrorists from exploiting Syria’s situation

In two recent proposed consent orders by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC or Commission), the agency has emphasized critical data governance practices that all data controllers should carefully consider. These cases, Gravy Analytics/Venntel and Mobilewalla , primarily focus on issues related to the brokerage of consumer mobile device location data and other adtech and data broker practices. However, the settlements, and the learnings that can be gleaned from them, are relevant beyond location data and these specific industries. Indeed, the data governance measures required of the respondents by the FTC signal the FTC’s thinking around what it considers proper data governance and privacy compliance programs, and can be used as a guide as to how companies in all industries should be framing such programs to both avoid FTC scrutiny and address compliance with the patchwork of state consumer privacy laws. Most notably, the following general information governance practices will be required of Mobilewalla (with somewhat mostly similar terms applicable to Gravy/Venntel), regardless of the sensitivity of “Covered Information” (definition below): Covered Information is broadly defined as “information from or about an individual consumer including, but not limited to: (1) a first and last name; (2) Location Data; (3) an email address or other online contact information; (4) a telephone number; (5) a Social Security number; (6) a driver’s license or other government-issued identification number; (7) a financial institution account number; (8) credit or debit card information; (9) a persistent identifier, such as a customer number held in a “cookie,” a static Internet Protocol (“IP”) address, a mobile device ID, or processor serial number; or (10) socio-economic or demographic data. Deidentified information is not Covered Information.” Purpose Limitations and Data Minimization. The proposed Mobilewalla consent order imposes a requirement on the company “... not [to] collect, purchase, or otherwise acquire or retain Covered Information that [Mobilewalla] accesses while participating in online advertising auctions for any other purpose than participating in such auctions.” (Emphasis added.) While this proposed obligation is very specific to the advertising technology industry, it broadly aligns with the purpose limitation and data minimization requirements found in all state privacy laws. Put simply, regulators expect companies to collect only the data necessary to carry out specific and limited purposes, and not further process it in a manner that is incompatible with those purposes. Notice at Collection and Retention Notice/Limitations. Each of the proposed consent orders require the respondents to provide clear and conspicuous notice of data processing practices and data retention practices. Specifically, the Mobilewalla consent order imposes the requirement to “...document, adhere to, and make publicly available through a link on the home page of their website(s), in a manner that is Clear and Conspicuous, a retention schedule for Covered Information, setting forth: (1) the purpose or purposes for which each type of Covered Information is collected or used; (2) the specific business needs for retaining each type of Covered Information; and (3) an established timeframe for deletion of each type of Covered Information limited to the time reasonably necessary to fulfill the purpose for which the Covered Information was collected, and in no instance providing for the indefinite retention of any Covered Information (emphasis added) (there are similar requirements in Gravy Analytics/Venntel). These are similar to California’s notice at collection and retention notice and limitation obligations. Implementation and Detailed Documentation of Comprehensive Privacy Program. The consent order in Mobilewalla imposes that the company “... in connection with the collection, maintenance, use, or disclosure of, or provision of access to, Covered Information, must establish and implement, and thereafter maintain, a comprehensive privacy program (the “Program”) that protects the privacy of such Covered Information.... To satisfy this requirement, Respondent must at a minimum: A. [ Documentation. ] Document in writing the content, implementation, and maintenance of the Program; B. [ Board/Senior Management Involvement. ] Provide the written Program and any evaluations thereof or updates thereto to Respondent’s board of directors or, if no such board or equivalent governing body exists, to a senior officer of the Respondent responsible for the Program at least once every twelve months; C. [ Designation of Responsible Employee(s). ] Designate a qualified employee or employees to coordinate and be responsible for the Program; D. [ Risk Assessments. ] Assess and document, at least every 12 months, internal and external risks to the privacy of Covered Information that could result in the unauthorized collection, maintenance, use, disclosure, alteration, destruction of, or provision of access to Covered Information; E. [ Internal and External (e.g., vendor) Safeguards. ] Design, implement, maintain, and document safeguards that control for the material internal and external risks Respondent identifies to the privacy of Covered Information identified in response to Provision [D]. Each safeguard must be based on the volume and sensitivity of Covered Information that is at risk, and the likelihood that the risk could be realized and result in the unauthorized collection, maintenance, use, disclosure, alteration, or destruction of, or provision of access to Covered Information. F. [ Personnel Training. ] On at least an annual basis, provide privacy training programs for all employees and independent contractors responsible for handling or who have access to Covered Information, updated to address any identified material internal or external risks and safeguards implemented pursuant to this Order; G. [ Continuous Testing, Monitoring, and Improvement. ] Test and monitor the effectiveness of the safeguards at least once every twelve (12) months, and modify the Program based on the results; and H. [ Evaluating/Adjusting in response to operational change. ] Evaluate and adjust the Program in light of any changes to Respondent’s operations or business arrangements, new or more efficient technological or operational methods to control for the risks identified in Provision [D] of this Order, or any other circumstances that Respondent knows or has reason to believe may have an impact on the effectiveness of the Program or any of its individual safeguards. At a minimum, Respondent must evaluate the Program at least once every 12 months and modify the Program based on the results.” (Emphasis added.) This is akin to Minnesota’s requirement of a formal privacy compliance program, as well as states’ obligations to carry out vendor and data recipient diligence and data risk assessments. There are similar requirements in Gravy Analytics/Venntel. It is important to note that the failure to meet these requirements was not, for the most part, the basis of the unfairness allegations under Section 5 of the FTC Act against the respondents. Rather, they appear to be so-called “fencing in” provisions, where to settle claims the respondent agrees to do more going forward than might be clearly required to avoid Section 5 liability. These have historically been seen as “signposts” for industry, but which are not precedential. Further, while the two Republican Commissioners agreed as to the unfairness conclusions with respect to certain allegedly unlawful sensitive data practices, they did not agree that all of the allegations and claims were enough to establish Section 5 violations, and warned that the majority’s ongoing expansive use of unfairness was unjustified: Commissioner Ferguson opined: “My colleagues want the FTC Act to be a comprehensive privacy law. But it is not. Comprehensive privacy regulation involves difficult choices and expensive tradeoffs. Congress alone can make those choices and tradeoffs. It did not do so when it adopted the general prohibitions of Section 5 nearly nine decades ago. And it has not adopted comprehensive privacy legislation since then. We must respect that choice.” Commissioner Holyoak added: “[The majority] colors well outside of the lines of the Commission’s authority. Indeed, the Chair is seeking to effectuate legislative and policy goals that rest on novel legal theories well beyond what Congress has authorized.... [and] uses a settlement to effectuate policy objectives that political leadership at the Commissions has sought for years to achieve [unsuccessfully] through regulation.” Under the new administration, President Trump will be entitled to a Republican majority of Commissioners, which is likely to rein in the expansive use of unfairness that the current FTC Commission has undertaken. However, these information governance requirements can find support under some state privacy laws and, at minimum, can be seen as best practices that should help avoid the kind of media exposé that led to the Gravy/Venntel and Mobilwalla investigations in the first place. Further, even if federal privacy regulation and enforcement is reprioritized in the next administration (e.g., more of a national security than consumer protection focus), many of the twenty states with comprehensive consumer privacy laws have engaged in, and can be expected to continue, robust enforcement. In addition, several blue states have “Mini-FTC Acts” that provide broader authority to their AGs than do their respective state privacy laws (in states that have them) and, notably, broader authority than Section 5 provides to the Commission.. which are also utilized for privacy enforcement and could also be used to continue the expansion of unfairness jurisprudence that we have seen from the Commission in the last several years.Search for UnitedHealthcare CEO's killer yields evidence, but few answers

TUCSON, Ariz.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec 19, 2024-- Mister Car Wash, Inc. (the “Company”) (NYSE: MCW), the nation’s largest car wash brand, today announced that it will voluntarily transfer the listing of its common stock from the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) to the Nasdaq Global Select Market (“Nasdaq”) effective December 31, 2024, after market close. The Company expects its common stock to begin trading on Nasdaq upon market open on January 2, 2025, and continue to trade under the ticker symbol "MCW". About Mister Car Wash® | Inspiring People to Shine® Headquartered in Tucson, Arizona, Mister Car Wash, Inc. (NYSE: MCW) operates over 500 locations and has North America's largest car wash subscription program. With a passionate team of professionals, advanced technology, and a commitment to exceptional customer experiences, Mister Car Wash is dedicated to providing a clean, shiny, and dry vehicle every time. The Mister brand is deeply rooted in delivering quality service, fostering friendliness, and demonstrating a genuine commitment to the communities it serves while prioritizing responsible environmental practices and resource management. To learn more visit www.mistercarwash.com . Forward-Looking Statements This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We intend such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements contained in this press release other than statements of historical fact, including, without limitation, statements regarding Mister Car Wash’s expectations regarding the timing and benefits of the transfer of its common stock listing to Nasdaq are forward-looking statements. Words including “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “might,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “seek,” “should,” or “will” or the negative thereof or other variations thereon or comparable terminology are intended to identify forward-looking statements, though not all forward-looking statements use these words or expressions. In addition, any statements or information that refer to expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, performance or other characterizations of future events or circumstances, including any underlying assumptions, are forward-looking. These forward-looking statements are based on management’s current expectations and beliefs. These statements are neither promises nor guarantees, but involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause the Company’s actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to those factors discussed under the caption “Risk Factors” in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023, as such factors may be updated from time to time in its other filings with the SEC accessible on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and the Investors Relations section of the Company’s website at www.mistercarwash.com . Any forward-looking statement that the Company makes in this press release speaks only as of the date hereof. Except as required by law, the Company does not undertake any obligation to update or revise, or to publicly announce any update or revision to, any of the forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. View source version on businesswire.com : https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20241219198292/en/ CONTACT: Investors Edward Plank IR@mistercarwash.com Media media@mistercarwash.com KEYWORD: ARIZONA UNITED STATES NORTH AMERICA INDUSTRY KEYWORD: AFTERMARKET RETAIL AUTOMOTIVE OTHER AUTOMOTIVE OTHER RETAIL GENERAL AUTOMOTIVE FLEET MANAGEMENT SOURCE: Mister Car Wash, Inc. Copyright Business Wire 2024. PUB: 12/19/2024 04:05 PM/DISC: 12/19/2024 04:06 PM http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20241219198292/enThe story so far: The 29th edition of the Conference of Parties (COP), arguably the most important of the UN’s climate conferences, was scheduled to end on November 22, after 11 days of negotiations, and take a collective step forward in addressing rising carbon emissions. However, deliberations are expected to carry on beyond the deadline with several sticking points outstanding. What is the significance of COP29? Going into the talks, developing countries had stated that at least a trillion dollars per year from 2025-35 would be necessary to meet emission targets. This was seen to be the New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance which refers to money that will be given to developing countries by developed countries to help the former meet their goals to transition away from the continued use of fossil fuels and curb greenhouse gas emissions. Developing countries have been repeatedly saying that the figure should be “trillions of dollars.” To this end, developed countries have mobilised and transferred $115 billion in 2021-22 — a controversial clause that has yet to be resolved in the universal agreement — but per the Paris Agreement, a new target higher than $100 billion must be agreed upon by 2025. The talks in Baku were expected to conclusively agree upon a number but there continues to be a sharp split between developed and developing countries on the quantum and other basic aspects of what this NCQG should look like. What do developing countries want? This block of countries include China, India and the Group of 77 countries. There are also other coalitions such as the Like Minded Developing Countries (LMDC), Least Developing Countries (LDC), Small Island Developing Countries (SIDS) etc. Nearly all developing countries fall into one or multiple groupings and while they have differences, they are largely agreed on the point that it is the developed countries that should pay the bulk of climate finance. More importantly, they specified that this money had to be provided not only to help countries meet their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) but also buffer against existing threats of climate change, and make good for climate damage already wrought. The NDCs are targeted, voluntary plans by all countries to reduce carbon emissions by certain quantities until 2030. The NCQG, the developing countries say, should also reflect contributions by developed countries on the basis of their historical contribution to existing carbon concentrations in the atmosphere as well as their per capita GDP. To put this in perspective, it is important to note that even if all countries fulfilled their stated voluntary commitments, it would as of now only translate to a 2% cut, and this year — the latest scientific assessments suggest — carbon emissions will likely increase 0.8% over 2023. What does the developed world say? However developed countries, led by the European Union, say these demands are unreasonably high. They aver that “all actors” (read countries) should collectively work to hike up climate finance to $1.3 trillion per year by 2035. While agreeing that they must “take the lead” they have only a set a goal of $250-300 billion by 2035 per year. Moreover this would consist of a “variety of sources,” including “public and private, bilateral and multilateral, and alternative sources.” Related Stories Climate-threatened nations stage protest at COP29 over contentious deal Finance deadlock pushes COP29 to brink of failure U.N. rules for carbon trading between nations approved at COP29 climate talks This suggests that another major demand of the developing world, of ensuring most of the money is in the form of grants or low-cost loans, remains unmet. Have any concrete agreements been made? A week before the conference began, China had petitioned the Presidency of COP29 to discuss “climate-change related unilateral restrictive trade measures” at the conference. This is an unusual request as trade issues are discussed on forums such as the World Trade Organization. China proposed this as part of a grouping of countries called BASIC (Brazil, South Africa, India, China). The petition is primarily directed at a European Union proposal called the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which imposes a tax on products imported into the EU that don’t conform to carbon-emission norms required by the Union. The CBAM is currently operating in a “transitional phase” but will come into full effect from January 1, 2026. The first day of the conference saw an agreement on carbon markets to be supervised by the UN. Such a market would allow countries to trade carbon credits — certified reductions of carbon emissions — among themselves and whose prices are determined as a consequence of emission caps imposed by countries. The market itself follows from a section in the Paris Agreement, called Article 6. Sub- sections within the Article spell out how countries can bilaterally trade carbon among themselves (Art 6.2) and participate in a global carbon market (6.4). Though most of the necessary nuts and bolts to make operational such a carbon market, supervised by a United Nations body, were in place since 2022, there were several niggles, particularly on ensuring that the carbon credits generated are genuine and its antecedents are transparent. While there is criticism among environmentalist groups that enough discussions on this didn’t take place, this is supposed to be a mechanism to facilitate climate finance. India has been discussing bilateral deals to trade carbon with several countries. An agreement such as the one in Baku could be a catalyst, and activate India’s own carbon-trading market. Published - November 24, 2024 04:20 am IST Copy link Email Facebook Twitter Telegram LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit environmental politics / environmental cleanup / summit / The Hindu Explains

Romania’s far-right presidential candidate denounces canceled vote at closed polling stationAraghchi, while meeting with Yermekbayev on Saturday afternoon referred to the increasing importance of the SCO for advancing multilateralism and ensuring the security and political interests of member countries. The SCO, due to membership of significant and influential countries in regional and beyond, including two permanent members of the United Nations Security Council with large economies and several important regional players, can play an impactful and growing role in enhancing multilateralism and strengthening cooperation among member countries in various security, political, and economic fields, the top Iranian diplomat underscored. The SCO’s secretary general, for his part, expressed pleasure over Iran's full membership in the bloc since 2023. Yermekbayev described Iran's capacities for further strengthening the position and role of the SCO as very important and welcomed the initiatives proposed by Iran to expand activities within the grouping’s economic, banking, and commercial spheres. Iran, China, India, Russia, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Belarus are the 10 main members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Mongolia and Afghanistan are observer members, while Turkey, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Nepal, the Maldives, and Myanmar are dialogue partners of the organization. 4399

Five Below ( NASDAQ:FIVE – Free Report ) had its target price raised by Morgan Stanley from $100.00 to $120.00 in a report published on Thursday morning, Benzinga reports. Morgan Stanley currently has an equal weight rating on the specialty retailer’s stock. Several other equities research analysts also recently weighed in on the stock. JPMorgan Chase & Co. downgraded shares of Five Below from a “neutral” rating to an “underweight” rating and lifted their price target for the company from $89.00 to $95.00 in a research note on Thursday, September 19th. Craig Hallum upped their price target on Five Below from $102.00 to $125.00 and gave the stock a “buy” rating in a research note on Wednesday, October 2nd. KeyCorp cut Five Below from an “overweight” rating to a “sector weight” rating in a research note on Thursday, November 7th. Gordon Haskett raised Five Below from a “hold” rating to a “buy” rating and set a $120.00 target price on the stock in a research report on Thursday, November 7th. Finally, Citigroup lifted their price target on shares of Five Below from $85.00 to $96.00 and gave the company a “neutral” rating in a research report on Monday, December 2nd. Two equities research analysts have rated the stock with a sell rating, fourteen have issued a hold rating and six have given a buy rating to the stock. According to MarketBeat, the company presently has a consensus rating of “Hold” and a consensus price target of $116.15. Check Out Our Latest Stock Analysis on FIVE Five Below Price Performance Five Below ( NASDAQ:FIVE – Get Free Report ) last posted its quarterly earnings results on Wednesday, December 4th. The specialty retailer reported $0.42 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, topping analysts’ consensus estimates of $0.16 by $0.26. The firm had revenue of $843.71 million for the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $801.48 million. Five Below had a return on equity of 18.10% and a net margin of 7.02%. The company’s revenue for the quarter was up 14.6% compared to the same quarter last year. During the same period in the prior year, the business earned $0.26 EPS. On average, sell-side analysts expect that Five Below will post 4.93 EPS for the current fiscal year. Hedge Funds Weigh In On Five Below Hedge funds and other institutional investors have recently modified their holdings of the business. Charles Schwab Investment Management Inc. lifted its holdings in Five Below by 41.7% during the third quarter. Charles Schwab Investment Management Inc. now owns 614,288 shares of the specialty retailer’s stock worth $54,272,000 after acquiring an additional 180,902 shares during the period. Dynamic Technology Lab Private Ltd purchased a new stake in shares of Five Below during the 3rd quarter valued at $3,282,000. Janney Montgomery Scott LLC increased its position in shares of Five Below by 72.8% during the 3rd quarter. Janney Montgomery Scott LLC now owns 21,815 shares of the specialty retailer’s stock valued at $1,927,000 after purchasing an additional 9,188 shares during the last quarter. Algert Global LLC increased its position in shares of Five Below by 364.2% during the 3rd quarter. Algert Global LLC now owns 25,830 shares of the specialty retailer’s stock valued at $2,282,000 after purchasing an additional 20,266 shares during the last quarter. Finally, Cetera Investment Advisers increased its position in shares of Five Below by 1,842.1% during the 1st quarter. Cetera Investment Advisers now owns 22,528 shares of the specialty retailer’s stock valued at $4,086,000 after purchasing an additional 21,368 shares during the last quarter. About Five Below ( Get Free Report ) Five Below, Inc operates as a specialty value retailer in the United States. The company offers range of accessories, which includes novelty socks, sunglasses, jewelry, scarves, gloves, hair accessories, athletic tops and bottoms, and t-shirts, as well as nail polish, lip gloss, fragrance, and branded cosmetics; and personalized living space products, such as lamps, posters, frames, fleece blankets, plush items, pillows, candles, incense, lighting, novelty décor, accent furniture, and related items, as well as provides storage options. Featured Articles Receive News & Ratings for Five Below Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Five Below and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .