The judge hasn't dismissed any case. He denied Apple's motion for a preliminary injunction on the ground that an injunction would not serve the public interest. In order to establish entitlement to a preliminary injunction, the party making the motion (in this case Apple) must prove (1) that it is likely to succeed on the merits, (2) that it is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of the injunction, (3) that the balance of equities tips in its favor, and (4) that an injunction is in the public interest. Since the judge found that an injunction would not be in the public interest, and that Motorola was likely to suffer irreparable harm, the motion was denied.

You realize the mayor of New York City is Michael Bloomberg, right? From the wiki:

In March 2009, Forbes reported Bloomberg's wealth at $16 billion, a gain of $4.5 billion over the previous year, enjoying the world's biggest increase in wealth in 2009.[21] At that time, there were only four fortunes in the U.S. that were larger (although the Wal-Mart family fortune is split among four people). He moved from 142nd to 17th in the Forbes list of the world's billionaires in only two years (March 2007 – March 2009).[22][23] In March 2011, his total wealth had increased to $19.5 billion, ranking 12th in the Forbes 400 and 30th in the world.[3] As of 2012, Forbes ranks his fortune at $22 billion

This: http://www.diapers.com/p/robeez-on-the-trail-128110

That is only if you use the low estimate, which the UN is no longer advocating. They now advocate using a middle estimate which provides:

The medium-variant projection for 2050 is more certain than for 2100 because people who will be 40 years and older in 2050 are already born. According to the medium variant, it will take 13 years to add the eighth billion, 18 years to add the ninth billion and 40 years to reach the tenth billion. According to the high variant, an additional billion would be added every 10 or 11 years for the rest of this century.

Original source here: http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Other-Information/Press_Release_WPP2010.pdf More data here: http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/P-WPP/htm/PWPP_Total-Population.htm

Spoken like a true member of Congress. Except you confuse "bribe" with "campaign contribution."

I do the same thing, except I take a photo of the list(s) we post on the blackboard we have in our kitchen. The upside to paper is also that if my wife does the shopping instead of me (or vice versa), I can just email her the grocery list.

Thanks Arthur. Looking to pay it forward now.

Much appreciated at gregory -dot- a -dot- brown -at- gmail -dot- com

Yes, it's likely that the national paper with the third highest circulation* is of interest to no one.
*Data is admittedly out of date, thought I'm confident the premise still stands.

There's a some more background in this article from the New Yorker. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/05/31/100531fa_fact_groopman?currentPage=all

Exactly what I was thinking. I'd much rather have a few cents deducted from my Google Subscription account for each article I'd like to read in multiple publications than have to pay full price to subscribe to each of the publications when they put their content behind the inevitable pay wall. The alternative, which is never seeing the content, would be very satisfying. Google is becoming quite the content aggregator these days, isn't it...