FOR COURT USE ONLY (RESPONDING PARTIES MUST

2y ago
8 Views
2 Downloads
902.53 KB
10 Pages
Last View : 1m ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Aydin Oneil
Transcription

20 JUL 2009 12:28 amPHILADELPHIA COURT OF COMMON PLEASPETITION/MOTION COVERSHEETA. LEBRONCONTROL NUMBER:01-09062102FOR COURT USE ONLYANSWER/RESPONSE DATE:ASSIGNED TO JUDGE:(RESPONDING PARTIES MUST INCLUDE THISNUMBER ON ALL FILINGS)NovemberDo not send Judge courtesy copy of Petition/Motion/Answer/Response.Status may be obtained online at e of Filing Party:Nevyas, et alDominic J. Morgan, pro sevs.(Check one)(Check one)Morgan, et alINDICATE NATURE OF DOCUMENT FILED:Petition (Attach Rule to Show Cause)Motion Answer to PetitionResponse to MotionPlaintiffMovantHas another petition/motion been decided in this case?DefendantRespondent YesYesIs another petition/motion pending?If the answer to either question is yes, you must identify the judge(s):No NoMaier, RogersTYPE OF PETITION/MOTION (see list on reverse side)PETITION/MOTION CODE(see list on reverse side)Miscellaneous MotionMTMISANSWER/RESPONSE FILED TO (Please insert the title of the corresponding petition/motion to which you are responding):Reply to Plaintiffs Response to Miscellaneous MotionI. CASE PROGRAMIs this case in the (answer all questions):A. COMMERCE PROGRAMName of Judicial Team Leader:Applicable Petition/Motion Deadline:Has deadline been previously extended by the Court?YesNoB . DAY FORWARD/MAJOR JURY PROGRAM — YearII. PARTIES (required for proof of service)(Name, address and telephone number of all counsel of record andunrepresented parties. Attach a stamped addressed envelope for eachattorney of record and unrepresented party.)Leon Silverman, EsquireStein & Silverman, P.C.230 South Broad Street, 18TH FloorPhiladelphia, PA. 19102215-985-0255Name of Judicial Team Leader:Applicable Petition/Motion Deadline:Has deadline been previously extended by the Court?YesNoC . NON JURY PROGRAMDate Listed:D. ARBITRATION PROGRAMMaureen Fitzgerald, EsquireEckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC2 Liberty Place50 South 16th Street - 22nd FloorPhiladelphia, PA tration Date:E. ARBITRATION APPEAL PROGRAMDate Listed:F. OTHER PROGRAM:Date Listed:Dominic J. Morgan, pro se1038 E. 18th StreetChester, PA 19013610-364-3367III. OTHERBy filing this document and signing below, the moving party certifies that this motion, petition, answer or response along with all documents filed,will be served upon all counsel and unrepresented parties as required by rules of Court (see PA. R.C.P. 206.6, Note to 208.2(a), and 440). Furthermore,moving party verifies that the answers made herein are true and correct and understands that sanctions may be imposed for inaccurate or incompleteanswers.Dominic J. Morgan, pro se 07/20/09(Attorney Signature/Unrepresented Party)(Date)(Print Name)(Attorney I.D. No.)The Petition, Motion and Answer or Response, if any, will be forwarded to the Court after the Answer/Response Date.No extension of the Answer/Response Date will be granted even if the parties so stipulate.30-1061BCase ID: 031100946Control No.: 09062101

Instructions for Completing Petition/Motion Cover SheetA Petition/Motion Cover Sheet must be attached to all Petitions, Motions, Answers or Responses filed, except for Discovery Motions and Motionsfor Extraordinary Relief. Sanctions will be imposed if the Cover Sheet is inaccurately completed.Please Note the following:1.ANSWER or RESPONSE DATE. The Motion Clerk shall enter the “Answer” or “Response” Date on the Cover Sheet. All Responses to Motionsand Answers to Petitions must be filed with the Prothonotary and submitted to the Motion Clerk on or before the Response Date. Note:Summary Judgment Motions have a 30 day Response period. Except for those Motions identified in Phila.Civ.R. *208.3(a) and (b), all otherMotions have a 20 day Response period.2.ARGUMENT DATE. The Motion Clerk shall enter the Argument Date and location on the Cover Sheet, as appropriate.3.CONTROL NUMBER. The Motion Clerk shall assign a Control Number to all Petitions and Motions. The Responding parties must enter this ControlNumber on the Cover Sheet accompanying their Answer or Response.4.NATURE OF DOCUMENT FILED. The filing party must check whether the document being filed is a Petition (in which case a Rule to ShowCause Order must be attached), a Motion, an Answer to a Petition, or a Response to a Motion. The parties must indicate whether anotherPetition or Motion is outstanding or has been decided and, if so, must identify the Judge(s) to whom such prior Petitions or Motions had beenassigned.5.PETITION OR MOTION TYPES. The parties must utilize the following Petition or Motion Codes and Types (and the Motion Clerk is authorized tochange a filing party’s designation to reflect the correct Petition or Motion Code and Type):CODEMOTIONSCODEMOTIONSCODEMOTIONSMTSALMotion for Additional Distribution of SaleProceedsMotion for Admission Pro Hac ViceMotion for Alternative ServiceMotion to Amend JudgmentMotion to Amend PleadingMotion to Appoint Guardian Ad LitemMotion for Appointment of a ConservatorMotion for Approval and Distribution ofMinor’s CompromiseMotion for Approval & Distribution ofWrongful Death & Survival ActionMotion to Approve Transfer ofStructured SettlementMotion for Assessment of DamagesHearingsMotion to Auction Motor VehiclesMotion to BifurcateMotion to Certify Order for InterlocutoryAppealMotion to Change NameMotion for Class Action CertificationMotion to Compel DiscoveryMotion to Compel Payment ofSettlementMotion to Complete Terms of Sheriff’sSaleMotion to Confirm SettlementMotion to Consolidate ActionsMotion for ContinuanceMotion for Coordination of ActionsMotion to Correct RecordMotion for Counsel FeesMotion for Delay DamagesMotion to Demand Jury TrialMotion to Determine PreliminaryObjectionsMotion to Discontinue CaseMotion to Dismiss for Forum NonConveniensMotion to Disqualify CounselEmergency MotionMotion to Enforce SettlementMotion for Entry of Default JudgmentMTJNPMotion for Entry of Judgment of NonProsMotion for Entry of SupersedeasMotion for Expungement of RecordMotion for Extension of Time to fileCertificate of MeritMotion for Extension of Time to answer/respond)Motion for Extraordinary ReliefMotion to File Nunc Pro TuncMotion to File Under SealMotion to Fix Fair Market ValueMotion for InterpleaderMotion to InterveneMotion to Invalidate Opt-Outs (ClassAction cases)Motion to Join Additional DefendantMotion for Judgment on the PleadingsMotion for Jury Out of TimeMotion in LimineMotion to Mark Judgment SatisfiedMotion to Obtain Motor Vehicle RecordsMotion to Open/Strike ConfessedJudgmentMotion for PartitionMotion for Payment into CourtMotion to Pay Rent into Escrow AccountMotion to Postpone Sheriff’s SaleMotion for Post Trial ReliefMotion for Pre-Complaint DiscoveryMotion for Preliminary InjunctionMotion for Preliminary SettlementApproval (Class Action Cases)Motion to Preserve Documents andEvidenceMotion to Proceed In Forma PauperisMotion for Protective OrderMotion to QuashMotion for ReconsiderationMotion to Redeem PremisesMotion to Release Escrow FundsMotion to Remove Opt-Out of theProposed Settlement Agreement (ClassAction SMTWRSMTMISMotion to Return Writ of Possession orExecutionMotion for SanctionsMotion for Sanctions for Failure toDeliver Settlement FundsMotion to Set Aside Sheriff’s SaleMotion to Set Aside AwardMotion to Settle Incompetent/Incapacitated Person’s EstateMotion to Stay ProceedingsMotion to Stay Writ of ExecutionMotion to Strike PleadingMotion for Summary Judgment (30 dayhold)Motion for Supplementary Relief in Aidof ExecutionMotion to Reassess DamagesMotion for Reimbursement of FeesMotion to Release BondMotion to Remove Case from DeferredStatusMotion to Seal RecordMotion to Sever CasesMotion for Specific PerformanceMotion to TransferMotion to Transfer JudgmentMotion for Title to VehicleMotion to Withdraw AppearanceMotion for Writ of PossessionMotion for Writ of SeizureMiscellaneous TOJDPTSNPPTEMGPetition to Appoint Common Law ArbitratorPetition to Appoint a ReceiverPetition to Compel ArbitrationPetition to Confirm Arbitration AwardPetition to Confirm SettlementPetition for ContemptPetition to Open Default JudgmentPetition to Open Judgment of Non ProsEmergency REFMTRELMTRDS6. CASE PROGRAM. The party shall check the program to which the case is assigned and provide the requested program data.7. PARTIES. The filing parties shall set forth the name, address and telephone number of all counsel of record and unrepresented parties, andmust attach a stamped addressed envelope for each attorney of record and unrepresented party.8. OTHER. The parties shall enter other relevant important information in this box – such as request for stay, emergency designation etc. –placing the Motion Clerk on notice of special handling or request.9. SIGNATURE LINE. The Cover Sheet must be signed, dated and, if applicable, the attorney ID number must be provided.10. SERVICE. A copy of the file-stamped Petition, Motion, Answer, Response and attachments must be served on all parties of recordimmediately after filing as required by Pa.R.C.P. 206.6, and Pa.R.C.P. 440.The Current Version of the Petition/Motion Cover Sheet May Be Downloaded From The First Judicial District’s Website:http://courts.phila.gov.Case ID: 031100946Control No.: 09062101

20 JUL 2009 12:28 amA. LEBRONDominic J. Morgan1038 E. 18th St.Chester, PA 19013July 20, 2009Honorable Peter F. RogersCourt of Common Pleas of Philadelphia CountyCriminal Justice Center - Room 14081301 Filbert StreetPhiladelphia, PA 19107Dear Judge Rogers:I attach a courtesy “hard” copy of my Reply submitted electronically today, to “Plaintiffs’Response to Defendant’s Motion to Determine Whether Plaintiffs are Private Figures or LimitedPurpose Public Figures.”Respectfully yours,Dominic Morgan, pro secc:Leon Silverman, Esq.Maureen Fitzgerald, Esq.Case ID: 031100946Control No.: 09062101

Dominic J. Morgan, pro se1038 East 18th StreetChester, PA 19013(610) 364-3367HERBERT J. NEVYAS, M.D., andANITA NEVYAS-WALLACE, M.D., andNEVYAS EYE ASSOCIATES, P.C.,Plaintiffsvs.DOMINIC MORGAN, andSTEVEN A FRIEDMANDefendants::::::::COURT OF COMMON PLEASTRIAL DIVISIONPhiladelphia CountyNOVEMBER TERM, 2003NO. 946Control Number 01-09062101Jury Trial demanded on CounterclaimPRO SE DEFENDANT MORGAN’S REPLY TO “PLAINTIFFS’ RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’SMOTION TO DETERMINE WHETHER PLAINTIFFS ARE PRIVATE FIGURES OR LIMITED PURPOSEPUBLIC FIGURES”The Nevyas plaintiffs’ Response shows them again trying to have it both ways, sayingone thing to this court and a different thing outside this court. Examples include:1.At paragraph 4 plaintiffs tell this court: “Plaintiffs deny that the outcome of the surgerywas poor and further deny that Morgan is now legally blind.”Outside this court, plaintiff Herbert Nevyas states: “.he reported vision as low as20/200 in each eye when I last saw him. I know he has been judged legally blind.andthat he is presently receiving Social Security Disability payments because of his legalblindness.” Exhibit D.2.At paragraph 5 plaintiffs tell this court: “Plaintiffs, after reasonable investigation, haveinsufficient information to determine whether Defendant Friedman is a practicingphysician.”Outside this court, plaintiffs file a federal lawsuit against Morgan and Friedman,stating that Friedman is a practicing physician in competition with Nevyas and inviolation of the Lanham Act. Nevyas v. Morgan, 309 F. Supp.2d 673 (E.D. Pa. 2004).Case ID: 031100946Control No.: 09062101

3.At paragraph 12 plaintiffs tell this court: “Plaintiffs deny that any public dispute existsover LASIK surgery in general or over plaintiffs’ performance of LASIK surgery inparticular.”Outside this court, plaintiffs actively participate in the ongoing public controversyabout LASIK by listing their websites (including http://www.nevyas.com/) among theover 316,000 website listings that discuss “LASIK controversy.”11AtUnder the topic “LASIK controversy” the internet lists over 316,000 websites. The first ten are:1.2.3.4.5.6.7.LASIK: Advances, Controversies, and Custom fulfills all of your needs and .Section Two-LASIK Controversies. Chapter 26A The Pros of Pediatric LASIK .www.slackbooks.com/view.asp?SlackCode 66542 - CachedInformation about Lasik - LASIK ControversyLASIK Controversy A debate rages among opthalmologists the world over. .LASIK Controversy. LASIK Evaluating Your Opthamologist. LASIK EyeSurgery Afterwards .www.info-about-lasik.com/LASIK Controversy.html - CachedLasik controversy hits opthalmic practice - Cover Story - Healthcare .India's Only Business Fortnightly for the Healthcare Industry . Lasik controversyhits ophthalmic practice . recent controversy surrounding Laser In Situ ml - CachedLASIK - The Indian eye controversy Shah S - Indian J OphthalmolIndian J Ophthalmol, Official scientific journal of the All India OphthalmologicalSociety (AIOS) . Shah S. LASIK - The Indian eye controversy. .ijo.in/article.asp?issn 0301-4738;year 2002;volume 50;issue 4;spage. CachedOptimized vs. Wavefront-Guided LASIK: Today's Refractive Controversies .Optimized vs. Wavefront-Guided LASIK: Today's Refractive Controversies Ophthalmology Technology Spotlight - Medcompare. Medcompare - The Buyer'sGuide for Medical .www.medcompare.com/spotlight.asp?spotlightid 218 - CachedLASIK Eye Surgery Controversies: It Can Help You More Than Hurt You .Media reports saying LASIK harms people's eyes should be put incontext--especially with my own . LASIK Eye Surgery Controversies: It CanHelp You More .associatedcontent.com/./lasik eye surgery controversies it.html - 56k - CachedIs LASIK Elective Surgery Safe For The Long-Term?News Release Because there is still much controversy over whether or not LASIKis safe or imposes any long-term damages since its introduction into the USA in1997, .Case ID: 031100946Control No.: 09062101

http://www.nevyas.com/ the Nevyases advertise their services, purport having the besttype of LASIK device, purport having done LASIK longer than anyone else inPhiladelphia, purport having the best results, and purport being “doctor’s doctors.”Outside this court, among the over 316,000 website listings that discuss “LASIKcontroversy” are official minutes of the 110th meeting of the FDA’s Ophthalmic DevicesPanel/ Medical Devices Advisory Committee, where defendant Morgan addresses thecommittee as an invited guest, 008-4353m1.htm. Videotapedaddresses by all speakers including defendant Morgan (#6 of 32) are at http://www.lasikdecision.com/index.php?option com content&task view&id 629&Itemid 30,which also links to coverage by CBS, NBC, MSNBC, ABC, CNN, Associated Press,Morning Star, New York Times, and Wall Street Journal.Outside this court, if plaintiffs do not wish to acknowledge the over 316,000website listings that discuss “LASIK controversy,” there are literally dozens of “hard8.9.10.emediawire.com/releases/./7LASIK Moratorium/emw2612464.htm - CachedYouTube - LASIK Consumer AlertWith today's controversy over LASIK surgery, Dr. Mark Doubrava, MedicalDirector of Eye Care For Nevada discusses what consumers should look for in adoctor,www.youtube.com/watch?v gqLz3OzcMOw - 105k - CachedVideo.Play VideoEyesight Associates - Medical InfoThere has been a lot of controversy in the media concerning LASIK refractive eyesurgery. . The recent LASIK controversy has created a lot of confusion in .www.eyesightassociates.com/info-LasekVsLasik.html - CachedCan You Justify the Cost of San Francisco IntraLASIK (InterLASIK or all .Is There a Controversy Growing over IntraLASIK in San Francisco? What doesInterLASIK or all-laser LASIK cost vs wavefront LASIK? . SAN FRANCISCOLASIK shtml - CachedCase ID: 031100946Control No.: 09062101

copy” textbooks dealing with Lasik controversy. 2Outside this court, as plaintiffs surely know, there are also hundredsof magazine and journal articles that discuss “LASIK controversy.”4.At The Relationship Between the Parties section of their instant “Factual History,”plaintiffs tell this court: “When a new laser became available on the market whichNevyas found to be an improvement over the previously available lasers, he purchasedthis laser for his own use and discontinued his IDE with the FDA.”Outside this court, the FDA shut down Nevyas’ IDE “for reasons of publicsafety,” forcing Nevyas to purchase an FDA-approved LASIK device. Among the 3500pages of documents produced by Nevyas in the instant case, and the 900 pages producedin the earlier Morgan v. Nevyas et al, there is no document showing Nevyas voluntarilyended his IDE. Instead, after repeatedly citing problems with Nevyas and his IDE, andafter repeatedly warning Nevyas about violations of law, regulation, and protocol, theFDA shut down Nevyas' IDE. See section 12 of Defendant Morgan’s instantMemorandum of Law in Response.21.2.3.4.5.6.Textbooks published prior to December 2003 include:Lasik: Fundamentals, Surgical Techniques, and Complications by Akers, MJ.; Azar,DT.; Koch, DD.; published January 2003 by Informa Healthcare.Lasik: Advances, Controversies, and Customs by Probst, L.; published November 2003by Slack Inc.Lasik Complications: Trends and Techniques by Gimbel, HV; Anderson-Penno, EE;published November 1998 and October 2000 by Slack IncLasik Techniques: Pearls and Pitfalls by Belville, K; Smith, RJ; published November2003 by Slack Inc.Lasik: Principles and Techniques by Buratto, L; Brint, SF; published April 1998 bySlack Inc.Wavefront Customized Visual Corrections: The Quest for Super Vision II by Macrae,SM; Krueger, RR; Applegate, RA published November 2003 by Slack Inc.Case ID: 031100946Control No.: 09062101

Verification:I, Dominic J. Morgan, defendant pro se verify these statements to be true, andunderstand that these statements are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Sec. 4904relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.Certificate of Service:I certify that a true and correct copy of the attached document has been e-mailedor mailed first class prepaid to the persons listed below on the date listed below:Leon Silverman, EsquireStein & Silverman, P.C.230 South Broad Street, 18th FloorPhiladelphia, PA. 19102Maureen Fitzgerald, EsquireEckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC2 Liberty Place50 South 16th Street - 22nd FloorPhiladelphia, PA 19102mfitzgerald@eckertseamans.comRespectfully submitted,Dated July 20, 2009Dominic J. Morgan, pro seCase ID: 031100946Control No.: 09062101

Exhibit DCase ID: 031100946Control No.: 09062101

.Ifaqp*rsEyeLEBRONllerhert J. Ie5"*s. ll.D.tfuirdt I qa. {:-Ys'e1, {.1rJ{."orncrd "iurgurl.luly31.10 ?Josnn 1. Ncr-1an ll-D.n*i' 6i'*r'cosr1 Slxr,trBt'ar d.r:rrf .llie ropi'Ser'1'as -11' l*ce.*nitlir'*-t'ror:tlru,{ t zg ut *i{:a .d Sts.tr'r?l!.F.hledical Revierv{-lrdtNJh,llrCP- . tso:i17373Trcntorr,hrJ 0S666-01Itli'fflJdl L Siein. lql.il.,8*:rqrl J;rss {jidxc ts:a-l,ritrL:sJ c,qd -{*rgrs.:l t }t- dAdi*ol.rl:r'lipin[i. G*'.d. FlD,(-'*x.:cJ,lilrgen: (i3arr t*:J{r fac}}rr s&.*J.r'tsE; IL{r"I}orninich'{organDrir er's L"iccnsilfPcnrm-vh'aniaarilEdu'*rd -4. Ileglin" F{.D'I l{re*rsza*J iJ:iuan/ s}d .l'sry,:lt',l*rftua lt- Grcent. lkl'D.l j6lr g-#!ndi' r';,ttz{r: ord,riil gr1,llmirsn! haptm, 11.D., \t-S.i l;:Jrr *&rx Pi4r.*t ,\:,{J';l{.r{}.:uJcr .1far?r:1lI*D.Henneth 3l*rg*n*rtrn.i trlurfe aii#{f i'd-drc -*rv.t'fi:f. flrdJ sM: .P.*:rf#sr;rr!"fuidrr:lTtr Whornlt Mal'Coneern:I have serious concefns abr:ut the driling skills t1f h{r" [.]on"linictrdorg3ntn*F8/81i968)ttfIt is rn1,understanding thal h.{r. fulorgan n"raintainsa lalid Nerv Jerse3''driver'sn c-\:amincdlieensE,even though h.eis na lcnger licensed in F*nns3'trvi11lifl.&g,t},and he repfirredseveral\.earslr,{r.[{6rgan frr:,rnan ophthalm*logic sdandpcintvisicr-ras ir:rv as 20/200 in each eye it'hen tr last sarv him. I knou that tl* tras lbeenJr. in \rcorhe s.NJ"judged [egall3,"blind afier a rxaminafion b3' Dr. Joirn D. L]u-e,an,pa:'n:l*tltshecauseclf is*rLthut lielegal blinriness"I think that Mr. Morgan should b* re*eva]ui]tedb],your iillpadial examiner a,ndhis licerise revoked if he does not measurerry to the approFriate visual slandard' I\i*,fiuldnot want ta be responsibtrefr:r allou,ing a legall-vhlind driver tc he eintlaehighna.v-To Wh cn tt M ayr hcrcby certif!r iiil{.rE C0pyd T*r Rala Plaai3i Ctll'AvellucEalr C va*;-d.PA lr{t}l68{l-66*-}?Fat 610.66S-lJ{Hl52S Wslorrr SttcctSuite iSStFA 19t*:Fhita,rtrr:lphia.2l!-?90-Ofi61Fax f,t 5,?9{j465J3 L nrlal squate2-{6-{Utarn.&tessf'lriladelphtir.l'-{ !91l-l115-6?l-l{J?llFrq l{ s-t(tq-{ii?S* !#lt-E l-in.n{n Llrtte t\iesf Ttenlrtr. liYf,cotils C'*nryoshlsrlttr*. NJ {18*5}ss6-9s:-9?g?F'aK8i6-9S-5.Il9lCaseID: 0311009ControlNo.:090521

Jul 20, 2009 · Instructions for Completing Petition/Motion Cover Sheet A Petition/Motion Cover Sheet must be attached to all Petitions, Motions, Answers or Responses filed, except for Discovery Motions and Motions

Related Documents:

Bruksanvisning för bilstereo . Bruksanvisning for bilstereo . Instrukcja obsługi samochodowego odtwarzacza stereo . Operating Instructions for Car Stereo . 610-104 . SV . Bruksanvisning i original

10 tips och tricks för att lyckas med ert sap-projekt 20 SAPSANYTT 2/2015 De flesta projektledare känner säkert till Cobb’s paradox. Martin Cobb verkade som CIO för sekretariatet för Treasury Board of Canada 1995 då han ställde frågan

service i Norge och Finland drivs inom ramen för ett enskilt företag (NRK. 1 och Yleisradio), fin ns det i Sverige tre: Ett för tv (Sveriges Television , SVT ), ett för radio (Sveriges Radio , SR ) och ett för utbildnings program (Sveriges Utbildningsradio, UR, vilket till följd av sin begränsade storlek inte återfinns bland de 25 största

Hotell För hotell anges de tre klasserna A/B, C och D. Det betyder att den "normala" standarden C är acceptabel men att motiven för en högre standard är starka. Ljudklass C motsvarar de tidigare normkraven för hotell, ljudklass A/B motsvarar kraven för moderna hotell med hög standard och ljudklass D kan användas vid

LÄS NOGGRANT FÖLJANDE VILLKOR FÖR APPLE DEVELOPER PROGRAM LICENCE . Apple Developer Program License Agreement Syfte Du vill använda Apple-mjukvara (enligt definitionen nedan) för att utveckla en eller flera Applikationer (enligt definitionen nedan) för Apple-märkta produkter. . Applikationer som utvecklas för iOS-produkter, Apple .

och krav. Maskinerna skriver ut upp till fyra tum breda etiketter med direkt termoteknik och termotransferteknik och är lämpliga för en lång rad användningsområden på vertikala marknader. TD-seriens professionella etikettskrivare för . skrivbordet. Brothers nya avancerade 4-tums etikettskrivare för skrivbordet är effektiva och enkla att

Den kanadensiska språkvetaren Jim Cummins har visat i sin forskning från år 1979 att det kan ta 1 till 3 år för att lära sig ett vardagsspråk och mellan 5 till 7 år för att behärska ett akademiskt språk.4 Han införde två begrepp för att beskriva elevernas språkliga kompetens: BI

**Godkänd av MAN för upp till 120 000 km och Mercedes Benz, Volvo och Renault för upp till 100 000 km i enlighet med deras specifikationer. Faktiskt oljebyte beror på motortyp, körförhållanden, servicehistorik, OBD och bränslekvalitet. Se alltid tillverkarens instruktionsbok. Art.Nr. 159CAC Art.Nr. 159CAA Art.Nr. 159CAB Art.Nr. 217B1B