On Monday, May 7, 2012, the White House honored fourteen individuals as Champions of Change for their efforts to advance access to science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) for people with disabilities.

The ultimate goal of the COGNO 2.0 initiative is to develop technology that leverages patterns of human cognition to become smarter with every use and experience.

The City of Bolzano's Living Safe Project was one of the top five Laureates, or nominees, in the "Innovation" category at the ComputerWorld Honors program, and was recognized publicly at the Laureate Medal Ceremony and Gala Evening.

HTML5 is the fifth version of the World Wide Web Hypertext Markup Language (HTML). HTML5 accessibility is a work in progress with many details still under development.

The Conversational Internet is an inspiring project developed by a team of Extreme Blue interns throughout the summer at the IBM Hursley Lab in the UK. The Royal London Society for Blind People approached IBM with the aim of creating improvements in the way that people who are blind interact with information on the Internet and the team is working towards a smart solution.

By definition, social business is people business. As such, it can and should value every voice, which is why IBM set out to enable more inclusive social business.

The Daily Planet team from the Discovery Channel Canada is hip. They highlight cool new technologies and explore interesting people, places and things. So, when their FutureTech team wanted to get a first-hand look at the New Mobile Workplace, they came to IBM.

IBM advocacy partner, the Carl and Ruth Shapiro Family National Center for Accessible Media at WGBH (NCAM) received the FCC Chairman's Award for Advancement in Accessibility for Mobile Applications for their development of the Media Access Mobile (MAM) solution. MAM is designed to serve visitors to entertainment venues and cultural institutions who are deaf, hard-of-hearing, blind or visually impaired, or who speak languages other than English.

Dr. Steven Schwaitzberg is a man with a mission. He wants to teach surgeons around the world the Fundamentals of Laparoscopic Surgery (FLS) so that they can perform minimally invasive surgery and he wants to do it using sophisticated collaborative tools

An IBM Smarter Cities team led by the IBM Human Centric Solutions Center partnered with Bolzano city planners to answer the question "Can we use technology to guarantee a good quality of life for our aging population?" And the answer is a resounding "yes."

At the 28th Annual International Technology and Persons with Disabilities Conference California State University, Northridge (CSUN) conference, IBM brought together accessibility experts from government, major enterprise IT (information technology) providers, mobile OS (operating system) providers, mobile device providers, and industry standards efforts to bring focus and direction to addressing accessibility in one of the most liberating opportunities for people with disabilities in the last decade.

The AFB Leadership Conference was held in Chicago, IL on April 18-20, 2013. The conference had over 400 attendees and covered a wide range of topics over the 3 days. Chieko Asakawa, IBM Fellow, was a keynote speaker.

The desire to connect whenever we want, wherever we are has created a unique opportunity for the private sector to capture new markets as they work to fulfill our desire for ubiquitous connectivity. The growth in mobile ICT technology is profound and shows little signs of slowing down.

(KS Supreme Court) - No. 114,937

(United States Supreme Court) - This case involved the State of Washington's tax on fuel importers who travel by public highway. The Yakama Nation contended that its 1855 treaty with the United States forbids that tax from being imposed upon fuel importers who are tribal members. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with the tribe. Justice Breyer's plurality opinion was joined by only two other justices. Justices Gorsuch and Ginsburg concurred in the judgment.

(United States Supreme Court) - Revived a maritime tort lawsuit against manufacturers of turbines and other equipment for three Navy ships. Family members of two deceased Navy veterans claimed that the manufacturer violated a duty to warn sailors of the health risks faced from asbestos fibers released into the air. The U.S. Supreme Court found merit in the plaintiffs' contentions. Justice Kavanaugh delivered the opinion for a 6-3 majority, clarifying the circumstances in which a duty to warn exists in the maritime context.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that a business engaged in nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings was not a "debt collector" under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. A homeowner claimed that the business violated certain statutory requirements in carrying out a foreclosure on behalf of a lender. Rejecting this argument, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Act was inapplicable to this nonjudicial foreclosure proceeding. Justice Breyer delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court, clarifying the statute's definition of debt collector.

(United States Supreme Court) - Remanded a class action settlement case for the courts below to address the named plaintiffs' standing to sue, in light of Spokeo Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. __ (2016). Issued a per curiam opinion, in this consumer suit against an internet company.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that the National Park Service lacked authority to regulate boating on Alaska's Nation River. A moose hunter contended that the Park Service could not ban him from using a hovercraft on a portion of the river that crossed a national preserve. Ruling in his favor, the U.S. Supreme Court explained that while the Park Service normally may establish rules for boating on waters within national parks, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act creates an Alaska-specific exception. Justice Kagan delivered the unanimous opinion.

(United States Supreme Court) - Addressed a question concerning a method of serving civil process on a foreign state. The Republic of Sudan argued that a mailing must be sent directly to the foreign minister's office in the foreign state, not to the foreign state's U.S. embassy. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Sudan's argument in an 8-1 decision. Justice Alito delivered the Court's opinion, in this case arising out of the 2000 bombing of the Navy vessel USS Cole.

(United States Supreme Court) - In a securities law case, held that someone who is directed by a boss to make a misstatement may potentially be liable for it. A senior-level investment banker who allegedly made knowingly false statements in emails to prospective investors claimed that his boss had told him what to say, so he could not be held responsible. Disagreeing, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that his conduct could fall within the scope of federal securities laws, upholding a ruling of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of a 6-2 Court (Justice Kavanaugh not participating).

(United States Supreme Court) - In a Social Security disability benefits case, addressed the effect of a vocational expert's refusal to share privately collected data. The applicant's counsel wanted to see data about the labor market that the expert had relied upon in estimating the number of jobs available in the economy for someone with the applicant's characteristics. However, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that, despite the expert's refusal to turn over this private data, her testimony could still be considered "substantial evidence" in federal court. Justice Kagan delivered the opinion of the 6-3 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that a death row inmate's execution by lethal injection would not subject him to constitutionally impermissible suffering, even if his unusual health issues meant that he would experience particularly excruciating pain. The inmate contended that his medical condition meant Missouri's legal injection protocol was unconstitutional as applied to him. In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court held that he failed to satisfy the Baze-Glossip test. Justice Gorsuch delivered the majority opinion.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that parties do not consent to classwide arbitration if the agreement is ambiguous on that point. An employer sought to block an employee from proceeding with a proposed class action lawsuit and instead force his claims into individual arbitration. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed that the employer had the right to do this, because the arbitration agreement was ambiguous about the availability of classwide arbitration. Chief Justice Roberts delivered the opinion of the 5-4 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that the Tennessee Valley Authority is subject to suits challenging any of its commercial activities, just as if it were a private corporation supplying electricity. The TVA insisted that, as a government-owned corporation, it has sovereign immunity from all tort suits arising from its performance of so-called discretionary functions. However, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed in a unanimous opinion delivered by Justice Kagan.

(United States Supreme Court) - Clarified the statute of limitations in qui tam lawsuits. Justice Thomas delivered the Court's unanimous opinion in this case involving the False Claims Act.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that consumers could proceed with an antitrust lawsuit alleging that Apple Inc. used monopolistic power to overcharge for iPhone apps. Apple contended that the lawsuit was barred because the consumers were not "direct purchasers" within the meaning of the Illinois Brick case. However, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Apple's argument in a 5-4 decision, on review of a dismissal ruling. Justice Kavanaugh delivered the majority opinion, joined by the four liberal justices.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that a private citizen cannot sue one State in the courts of another. Overruled Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410 (1979), which had held that a State may grant or deny its sister States sovereign immunity as it chooses. The plaintiff here sought to bring a tort suit against a California state agency in Nevada state court. The U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the Constitution barred the suit. Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the 5-4 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that members of the Crow Tribe retain a broad right under an 1868 Treaty to hunt on land that is now part of the Bighorn National Forest in Wyoming. One issue was whether the treaty hunting rights expired when Wyoming became a state. The U.S. Supreme Court, divided 5-4, ruled favorably to the Tribe. Justice Sotomayor delivered the majority opinion.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that a bankrupt company's rejection of a trademark licensing agreement did not deprive its licensee of the rights to use the trademark. The U.S. Supreme Court interpreted Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code, which enables a debtor to reject any executory contract, meaning a contract that neither party has finished performing. Justice Kagan delivered the opinion of the 8-1 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Clarified when federal law will preempt a state law claim that a drug manufacturer failed to warn consumers of a drug's risks. Held that this preemption question is one for a judge to decide, not a jury. Also spelled out the "clear evidence" standard that applies in this context. Justice Breyer, joined by five justices, delivered the U.S. Supreme Court's majority opinion in this product liability lawsuit against a drugmaker.

(United States Supreme Court) - On a question of civil procedure, held that a third-party counterclaim defendant -- that is, a party brought into a lawsuit through a counterclaim filed by the original defendant -- may not remove a class-action counterclaim from state court to federal court. Justice Thomas, joined by the four liberal justices, delivered the opinion of a 5-4 Court in this debt collection lawsuit.

(United States Supreme Court) - On a question of administrative law, held that where the Social Security Administration Appeals Council has dismissed a request for review as untimely after a claimant has obtained a hearing from an ALJ on the merits, that dismissal qualifies as a final administrative decision so as to allow judicial review. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion for a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Upheld an Indiana law relating to the disposition of fetal remains by abortion providers. The Seventh Circuit had struck down the law, which altered the manner in which abortion providers may dispose of fetal remains; for instance, the law prevents incineration of fetal remains along with surgical byproducts. The U.S. Supreme Court concluded in a per curiam decision that the law passes rational basis review. Only two justices dissented.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that probable cause to make an arrest defeats a claim that the arrest was in retaliation for protected speech. A man arrested at a winter sports festival claimed that the reason was his speech. However, because there was probable cause to arrest him for disorderly conduct, his First Amendment retaliatory arrest claim failed as a matter of law. Chief Justice Roberts delivered the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion. There were several concurring and dissenting opinions.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that Title VII's charge-filing requirement is not jurisdictional and thus is subject to forfeiture if tardily asserted. The issue involved whether an employer waited too long to dispute that a discrimination plaintiff filed a proper complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission before initiating suit. Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Clarified the circumstances in which a court may hold a creditor in civil contempt for attempting to collect a debt that a bankruptcy discharge order has immunized from collection. Held that there should be "no fair ground of doubt" that the order barred the creditor's conduct. Justice Breyer delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services neglected its statutory notice-and-comment obligations when it revealed a new policy that dramatically -- and retroactively -- reduced Medicare payments to hospitals serving low-income patients. Concluded that the new policy must be vacated. Justice Gorsuch delivered the opinion of the 7-1 Court (Justice Kavanaugh did not participate).

(United States Supreme Court) - Addressed whether a convicted criminal's period of supervised release is tolled -- in effect, paused -- during pretrial detention for a new criminal offense. Held that tolling occurs if certain conditions are met. Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the 5-4 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that the U.S. Postal Service was barred here from challenging a private company's patent for a method for processing mail. Because federal agencies do not fall within the statutory definition of a person, they are ineligible to petition the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to institute patent review proceedings under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the 6-3 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Addressed the question of when burglary qualifies as a predicate offense for enhanced sentencing under the Armed Career Criminal Act. More specifically, the narrow issue concerned what it means to remain in a building or structure with intent to commit a crime. Ultimately, held that violation of Michigan's third-degree home-invasion statute qualified as a predicate offense. Justice Kavanaugh delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Addressed what law applies on the Outer Continental Shelf, holding that California wage-and-hour law was inapplicable to a worker on an offshore drilling platform. Under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, if federal law addresses the relevant issue, state law is not adopted as surrogate federal law. Justice Thomas delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that a private entity operating public access cable TV channels was not subject to First Amendment constraints on its editorial discretion. The producers of a controversial documentary film contended that the nonprofit corporation running the public access channels was a state actor because it was exercising a function traditionally exclusively reserved to the State, and therefore was subject to suit for violating their free speech rights. However, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed. Justice Kavanaugh delivered the opinion of the 5-4 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - In a case alleging racial gerrymandering, held that the Virginia House of Delegates lacked standing to appeal the invalidation of Virginia's 2010 redistricting plan. As a single chamber of a bicameral legislature, the House had no standing to appeal a three-judge federal district court's redistricting ruling separately from the State of which it is a part. Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the 5-4 Court, joined by Justices Thomas, Sotomayor, Kagan and Gorsuch.

(United States Supreme Court) - On an issue relating to the U.S. Constitution's Double Jeopardy Clause, upheld the dual-sovereignty doctrine. A man who was convicted by Alabama for possessing a firearm as a felon insisted that it would be double jeopardy to prosecute him for the same conduct under federal felon-in-possession law. However, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed, declining to overrule the longstanding dual-sovereignty doctrine. Justice Alito delivered the opinion of the 7-2 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that the federal Atomic Energy Act did not preempt a Virginia law prohibiting uranium mining. While six justices agreed that the state ban on uranium mining was not preempted, they divided on broader questions concerning statutory interpretation and preemption doctrine, and thus were unable to agree on the rationale for the decision. Justice Gorsuch delivered a plurality opinion, and several justices concurred in the judgment only.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that a Maryland public monument in the shape of a 32-foot tall Latin cross did not violate the Establishment Clause. A humanist group and others argued that the memorial to soldiers who died in World War I must be removed because of the crucifix shape. The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed. Justice Alito announced the judgment of the Court; however, only certain portions of his opinion received support from a majority of the justices.

(United States Supreme Court) - Clarified when the statute of limitations begins to run on a fabricated-evidence claim. Held that the clock started when the criminal proceedings terminated in the defendant's favor -- that is, when he was acquitted at the end of his second trial. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the 6-3 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that Congress may lawfully delegate to the Attorney General the authority to prescribe certain sex-offender registration rules. The dispute here involved the nondelegation doctrine, which bars Congress from transferring its legislative power to another branch of government. Justice Kagan announced the Court's judgment and delivered a plurality opinion.

(United States Supreme Court) - Addressed whether the Telephone Consumer Protection Act prohibits unsolicited fax advertisements that promote free goods, such as no-cost magazine subscriptions and catalogs. The specific issue here had to do with whether the district court was required to adopt the Federal Communications Commission's interpretation of the statute. The U.S. Supreme Court stated that it found the question difficult to answer, and remanded with directions for the lower courts to resolve two preliminary issues. Justice Breyer delivered the Court's opinion.