It seems to me that the nearest analogue here is that a damaged ship, or in this case an airplane, that makes it into the nearest safe harbor is supposed to be accorded, at least as a matter of custom and general international practice that kind of safety. Medical attention should be provided to anyone who needs it and the ship and the crew should be left unmolested.

They make fairly grandiose, extravagant claims to the entire South China Sea as Chinese territory. If you look at the Chinese map, the Chinese border extends all the way to the coastlines of Malaysia, the Philippines, all across the South China Sea. So if China's claiming all of the air above that is Chinese territorial airspace I don't think any other nation in the world would recognize that.

Their view of the child's welfare is such -- and it's so distorted -- that there's no way they can conceive of a child ever being better off in any country outside of Germany.

We want to be the nearest team to Chelsea, just in case they collapse. You never know what might happen.

I think any company that can make a case that it has been damaged by the exclusionary acts affirmed in the Court of Appeals opinion would be able to use the facts from this case once the case becomes final.

The way this seems to be working, it's not explosive, it's smoldering. A case here, a case there. It's not a cause for alarm. It's something we're certainly worried about, something we're tracking and following. We're hopeful that the additional cases that will show up eventually will be minimal.