Its triple point temperature of 83.8058 K is a defining fixed point in the International Temperature Scale of 1990.Īrgon is extracted industrially by the fractional distillation of liquid air. The complete octet (eight electrons) in the outer atomic shell makes argon stable and resistant to bonding with other elements. The name "argon" is derived from the Greek word ἀργόν, neuter singular form of ἀργός meaning 'lazy' or 'inactive', as a reference to the fact that the element undergoes almost no chemical reactions. In the universe, argon-36 is by far the most common argon isotope, as it is the most easily produced by stellar nucleosynthesis in supernovas. Nearly all of the argon in Earth's atmosphere is radiogenic argon-40, derived from the decay of potassium-40 in Earth's crust. Argon is the most abundant noble gas in Earth's crust, comprising 0.00015% of the crust. It is more than twice as abundant as water vapor (which averages about 4000 ppmv, but varies greatly), 23 times as abundant as carbon dioxide (400 ppmv), and more than 500 times as abundant as neon (18 ppmv). Argon is the third-most abundant gas in Earth's atmosphere, at 0.934% (9340 ppmv). It is in group 18 of the periodic table and is a noble gas. Additionally, the court agreed that Barton did not plead fraud with sufficient specificity because she did not allege that Argen (which had no communications with Barton prior to placement of the crowns) made any representations on which she relied.Argon is a chemical element with the symbol Ar and atomic number 18. Therefore, the complaint filed more than two years later, in August 2014, was untimely. ![]() The Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that by May 2012, plaintiff was on inquiry notice of any potential claims she may have had arising from her dental crowns and had the opportunity to obtain further information from sources open to investigation. Plaintiff appealed and Horvitz & Levy represented Argen on appeal. The trial court also dismissed plaintiff’s fraud claims on the basis that Barton did not plead the alleged fraud with sufficient specificity, and likewise dismissed her unfair competition claims based on the statute of limitations. The trial court granted summary judgment on plaintiff’s products liability claims on ground that they were barred by the two-year statute of statute of limitations for personal injury actions. Over two years after having the crowns removed, plaintiff filed a complaint against her dentist, the lab, and Argen. ![]() A subsequent skin test revealed an allergy to palladium. Eventually, she discovered that they contained about 3% palladium, which is somewhat higher than normally associated with crowns made from a high noble alloy. Several years after having the crowns placed, she had them removed, but then delayed further before having the crowns tested in order to determine their content. After having the crowns placed, plaintiff complained to her dentist about pain and other symptoms she attributed to the crowns. The Argen Corporation supplied the metal alloys that a dental lab used to make the crowns. Plaintiff, herself a dental hygienist, told the dentist she wanted to have crowns made from a “high noble” alloy. ![]() Plaintiff was informed by her dentist in 2010 that she needed dental crowns. ![]() Horvitz & Levy persuaded the Court of Appeal to affirm a judgment of dismissal in a products liability lawsuit involving dental crowns.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |