text:
In the following, we will refer to the persons concerned collectively as "users".
We take appropriate technical and organizational measures in accordance with Art. 32 GDPR, taking into account the state of the art, the costs of implementation and the nature, scope, context and purposes of the processing as well as the varying likelihood and severity for the rights and freedoms of natural persons, to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk; these measures include in particular ensuring the confidentiality, integrity and availability of data by controlling the physical access to the data as well as the access to, inputting, passing on, ensuring the availability and separation of the data concerning them. In addition, we have established procedures to ensure that data subjects' rights are exercised, that data is deleted and that we react to data threats. Furthermore, we take the protection of personal data into account as early as the development or selection of hardware, software and processes, in accordance with the principle of data protection through technology design and through data protection-friendly default settings (Art. 25 GDPR).
Insofar as we disclose data to other persons and companies (processors or third parties) within the scope of our processing, transfer them to them or otherwise grant them access to the data, this shall only take place on the basis of legal permission (e.g. if a transfer of the data to third parties, such as payment service providers, pursuant to Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. b GDPR is necessary for the performance of the contract), if you have consented to this, if a legal obligation provides for this or on the basis of our legitimate interests (e.g. when using agents, web hosts, etc.).
If we process data in a third country (i.e. outside the European Union (EU) or the European Economic Area (EEA)) or if this is done in the context of the use of third-party services or disclosure or transfer of data to third parties, this will only occur if it is done to fulfil our (pre)contractual obligations, on the basis of your consent, a legal obligation or on the basis of our legitimate interests. Subject to legal or contractual permissions, we process or allow the data to be processed in a third country only if the special requirements of Art. 44 et seqq. GDPR are met. This means that the processing takes place, for example, on the basis of special guarantees, such as the officially recognized determination of a data protection level corresponding to the EU (e.g. for the USA through the "Privacy Shield") or the observance of officially recognized special contractual obligations (so-called "standard contractual clauses").
You have the right to request confirmation as to whether the data in question will be processed and to be informed of this data and to receive further information and a copy of the data in accordance with Art. 15 GDPR.
According to Art. 16 GDPR, you have the right to request the completion of data concerning you or the correction of incorrect data concerning you.
Pursuant to Art. 17 GDPR, you have the right to demand that the relevant data be deleted immediately or, alternatively, to demand a restriction on the processing of the data pursuant to Art. 18 GDPR.
Pursuant to Art. 77 GDPR, you also have the right to file a complaint with the competent supervisory authority.
You have the right to withdraw consents granted pursuant to Art. 7 para. 3 GDPR with effect for the future.
You may object at any time to the future processing of the data concerning you in accordance with Art. 21 GDPR. The objection may in particular be lodged against processing for the purposes of direct marketing.
According to legal requirements, the documents are stored in particular for 6 years in accordance with § 257 para. 1 of the German Commercial Code (HGB) (commercial books, inventories, opening balance sheets, annual financial statements, commercial letters, accounting records, etc.) and for 10 years in accordance with § 147 para. 1 of the German Tax Code (AO) (books, records, management reports, accounting records, commercial and business letters, documents relevant for taxation, etc.).
We process inventory data (e.g., names and addresses as well as contact data of users), contract data (e.g., services used, names of contact persons, payment information) for the purpose of fulfilling our contractual obligations and services pursuant to Art. 6 Para. 1 lit b. GDPR. The entries marked as mandatory in online forms are required for the conclusion of the contract.
Users can create a user account, in particular by viewing their submissions to competitions. Within the framework of registration, the required mandatory information will be communicated to the users. The user accounts are not public and cannot be indexed by search engines, but can be set by the user. If users have terminated their user account, their data will be deleted with regard to the user account, subject to its retention for commercial or tax reasons pursuant to Art. 6 para. 1 lit. c GDPR. It is the responsibility of the users to secure their data before the end of the contract in the event of termination. We are entitled to irretrievably delete all user data stored during the term of the contract.
Within the scope of registration and renewed registrations as well as use of our online services, we store the IP address and the time of the respective user action. The storage is based on our legitimate interests, as well as the user's protection against misuse and other unauthorized use. This data will not be passed on to third parties unless it is necessary to pursue our claims or there is a legal obligation to do so pursuant to Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. c GDPR.
We process usage data (e.g., participation in competitions) and content data (e.g., entries in the contact form or user profile) for advertising purposes in a user profile in order to inform the user, for example, of participation in new competitions based on their previous participation.
When contacting us (via contact form or e-mail), the user's details will be processed in order to settle the contact request and its processing in accordance with Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. b GDPR.
The user data can be stored in our Customer Relationship Management System ("CRM System") or comparable inquiry organization.
We use the CRM system "Freshdesk" and the chat tool "Freshchat" from Freshworks, Inc. (1250 Bayhill Drive, Suite 315, San Bruno, CA 94066, USA) on the basis of our legitimate interests (efficient and fast processing of user enquiries). For this purpose we have concluded a contract with Freshworks with so-called standard contract clauses in which Freshworks undertakes to process the user data only in accordance with our instructions and to comply with the EU data protection level. Freshworks is also certified under the Privacy Shield Agreement, providing an additional guarantee of compliance with European data protection legislation (https://www.privacyshield.gov/participant?id=a2zt0000000GnbQAAS&status=Active).
We will delete the requests if they are no longer necessary. We check the necessity every two years; inquiries from customers who have a customer account are stored permanently and refer to the customer account details for deletion. In the case of statutory archiving obligations, deletion takes place after their expiration (end of commercial (6 years) and tax (10 years) retention obligation).
If users leave comments or other contributions, their IP addresses will be stored for 7 days on the basis of our legitimate interests within the meaning of Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. f GDPR.
This is done for our safety, if someone leaves illegal contents (insults, forbidden political propaganda, etc.) in comments and contributions. In this case, we ourselves can be prosecuted for the comment or contribution and are therefore interested in the author's identity.
On the basis of our legitimate interests within the meaning of Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. f GDPR, we collect data about each access to the server on which this service is located (so-called server log files). The access data includes the name of the website accessed, file, date and time of access, amount of data transferred, notification of successful access, browser type and version, the user's operating system, referrer URL (the previously visited page), IP address and the requesting provider.
Log file information is stored for a maximum of seven days for security reasons (e.g. to clarify abuse or fraud) and then deleted. Data, the further storage of which is necessary for evidence purposes, are excluded from deletion until the respective incident has been finally clarified.
Contact data of third-party companies should only be forwarded to Octorank if they do not identify a natural person or if you have the consent of the person concerned to be forwarded to Octorank.
On the basis of our legitimate interests (i.e. interest in the optimization and economic operation of our online offer in the sense of Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. f GDPR), we use the Cloud Computing Platform of the company DigitalOcean LLC ("DigitalOcean"). This means that DigitalOcean provides us with services such as infrastructure services, computing capacity, storage space, security and technical maintenance. An order processing contract exists.
DigitalOcean is certified under the Privacy Shield Agreement and thus offers a guarantee of compliance with European data protection legislation (https://www.privacyshield.gov/participant?id=a2zt0000000TQNgAAO&status=Active).
Data processing and storage takes place on servers in computer centers in Germany.
On the basis of our legitimate interests (i.e. interest in the optimization and economic operation of our online offer in the sense of Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. f GDPR) we use the services S3 and CloudFront of the company Amazon Web Services, Inc. ("Amazon Web Services"). This means that Amazon Web Services provides file storage and caching of these for us. An order processing contract exists.
Amazon Web Services is certified under the Privacy Shield Agreement and thus provides a guarantee of compliance with European data protection legislation (https://www.privacyshield.gov/participant?id=a2zt0000000TOWQAA4&status=Active).
On the basis of our legitimate interests (i.e. interest in the economic operation of our online service as defined in Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. f GDPR) we use Sparkpost, the Email Delivery Service of Message Systems, Inc. ("Sparkpost"). This means that Sparkpost is used for email communication with our users. An order processing contract exists.
Sparkpost is certified under the Privacy Shield Agreement and thus offers a guarantee of compliance with European data protection law (https://www.privacyshield.gov/participant?id=a2zt0000000KzTTAA0&status=Active).
On the basis of our legitimate interests (i.e. interest in the economic operation of our online service as defined in Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. f GDPR) we use the Error Reporting Tool from Rollbar, Inc. ("Rollbar"). That means Rollbar notifies us about errors on the website. An order processing contract exists.
Rollbar is certified under the Privacy Shield Agreement and thus offers a guarantee of compliance with European data protection law (https://www.privacyshield.gov/participant?id=a2zt0000000TNcNAAW&status=Active).
In the event of an error, personal data such as IP address, name of the website accessed, date and time of access, browser type and version, the user's operating system are transmitted to Rollbar for efficient error detection and correction. The data will be stored for a maximum period of 14 days or until the completion of the error correction and then deleted.
On the basis of our legitimate interests within the meaning of Art. 6 para. 1 lit. f GDPR, we maintain online presences within social networks and platforms in order to communicate with customers, interested parties and users active there and to inform them about our services. When calling up the respective networks and platforms, the terms and conditions and the data processing guidelines of their respective operators apply.
We use "session cookies", which are only stored for the duration of the current visit to our online presence (e.g. to enable the storage of your login status or the submission preview function and thus the use of our online offer at all). A randomly generated unique identification number, a so-called session ID, is stored in a session cookie. In addition, a cookie contains information about its origin and the storage period. These cookies cannot store any other data. Session cookies are deleted when you have finished using our online service and log out or close your browser, for example.
For more information about Google's use of data and about setting and objection options, please visit the following Google webpages: https://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners ("Use of data by Google when using the websites or apps of our partners"), https://policies.google.com/technologies/ads ("Use of data for advertising purposes"), https://adssettings.google.com/authenticated ("Manage information Google uses to display advertising").
Otherwise, personal data will be anonymized or deleted after 14 months.
On the basis of our legitimate interests (i.e. interest in the analysis, optimization and economic operation of our online offer in the sense of Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. f GDPR) we use Google Tag Manager, with which we can manage so-called website tags via a Google Ireland Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Irland ("Google") interface.
On the basis of our legitimate interests (i.e. interest in the analysis, optimisation and economic operation of our online offer in the sense of Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. f GDPR) we use the marketing and remarketing services ('Google Marketing Services') of Google Ireland Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Irland (“Google”).
Google's marketing services allow us to display advertisements for and on our website in a more targeted manner to show users only ads that potentially match their interests. If, for example, a user is shown ads for products in which he is interested on other websites, this is referred to as "remarketing". For these purposes, when you visit our and other websites on which Google marketing services are active, Google directly executes a code from Google and incorporates so-called (re)marketing tags (invisible graphics or code, also known as "web beacons") into the website. With their help, an individual cookie, i.e. a small file, is stored on the user's device (comparable technologies can also be used instead of cookies). The cookies can be set by various domains, including google.com, doubleclick.net, invitemedia.com, admeld.com, googlesyndication.com or googleadservices.com. In this file it is noted which websites the user visits, which contents he is interested in and which offers he has clicked, furthermore technical information about the browser and operating system, referring websites, visiting time as well as further information about the use of the online offer. The IP address of the user is also recorded, whereby we inform within the scope of Google Analytics that the IP address within member states of the European Union or in other contracting states of the Agreement on the European Economic Area is shortened and only in exceptional cases completely transmitted to a Google server in the USA and shortened there. The IP address is not merged with user data within other Google offers. Google may also link the above information to such information from other sources. If the user subsequently visits other websites, the ads tailored to the user's interests can be displayed.
User data is processed pseudonymously within the framework of Google marketing services. I.e. Google does not store and process the name or e-mail address of the user, but processes the relevant data cookie-related within pseudonymous user profiles. This means that, from Google's point of view, the ads are not administered and displayed for a specifically identified person, but for the cookie holder, regardless of who this cookie holder is. This does not apply if a user has expressly permitted Google to process the data without this pseudonymization. The information about users collected by Google marketing services is transmitted to Google and stored on Google's servers in the United States.
One of the Google marketing services we use is the online advertising program "Google AdWords". In the case of Google AdWords, each AdWords customer receives a different "conversion cookie”. Cookies can therefore not be tracked via the websites of AdWords customers. The information collected through the cookie is used to generate conversion statistics for AdWords customers who have opted for conversion tracking. AdWords customers see the total number of users who clicked on their ad and were redirected to a page with a conversion tracking tag. However, you will not receive any information that personally identifies users.
Due to our legitimate interests in the analysis, optimization and economic operation of our online service, the so-called "Facebook Pixel" of the social network Facebook, which is operated by Facebook Inc., 1 Hacker Way, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA, or if you are resident in the EU, Facebook Ireland Ltd., 4 Grand Canal Square, Grand Canal Harbour, Dublin 2, Ireland ("Facebook"), is used within our online service.
With the help of the Facebook pixel, Facebook is on the one hand able to determine the visitors of our online offer as a target group for the presentation of ads (so-called "Facebook ads"). Accordingly, we use Facebook pixels to display Facebook ads placed by us only to Facebook users who have shown an interest in our online offering or who have certain features (e.g., interests in certain topics or products that are determined on the basis of the websites visited) that we transmit to Facebook (so-called "custom audiences"). With the help of Facebook pixels, we also want to ensure that our Facebook ads correspond to the potential interest of users and do not appear annoying. The Facebook pixel also enables us to track the effectiveness of Facebook ads for statistical and market research purposes by showing whether users were referred to our website after clicking on a Facebook ad (known as "conversion").
Facebook processes the data in accordance with the Facebook Data Usage Policy. Accordingly, general information about the presentation of Facebook ads in the Facebook Data Usage Policy: https://www.facebook.com/policy.php. Special information and details about Facebook pixels and how they work can be found in the help section of Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/business/help/651294705016616.
To prevent the collection of your information using the Facebook pixel on our website, please click the following link: Facebook-Opt-Out Note: When you click the link, an "Opt-Out" cookie is stored on your device. If you delete the cookies in this browser, you must click the link again. Furthermore, the opt-out only applies within the browser used by you and only within our web domain on which the link was clicked.
Content of the newsletter: We send newsletters, e-mails and other electronic notifications containing advertising information (hereinafter "newsletter") only with the consent of the recipient or a legal permission. Insofar as the contents of the newsletter are specifically described within the framework of registration, they are decisive for the consent of the user. In addition, our newsletters contain information about our products, offers, promotions and our company.
Furthermore, according to its own information, the shipping service provider may use this data in pseudonymous form, i.e. without allocation to a user, to optimize or improve its own services, e.g. for technical optimization of shipping and the presentation of the newsletter or for statistical purposes, in order to determine from which countries the recipients come. However, the shipping service provider does not use the data of our newsletter recipients to write to them itself or pass them on to third parties.
Success measurement - The newsletters contain a so-called "web beacon", i.e. a file the size of a pixel, which is retrieved from the server of the dispatch service provider when the newsletter is opened. Within the scope of this retrieval, technical information such as information about the browser and your system, as well as your IP address and time of retrieval are first collected. This information is used for the technical improvement of the services on the basis of technical data or target groups and their reading behavior on the basis of their retrieval points (which can be determined with the help of the IP address) or access times. Statistical surveys also include determining whether newsletters are opened, when they are opened and which links are clicked. For technical reasons, this information can be assigned to the individual newsletter recipients. However, it is neither our nor the shipping service provider's intention to observe individual users. The evaluations serve us much more to recognize the reading habits of our users and to adapt our content to them or to send different content according to the interests of our users.
The dispatch of the newsletter and the performance measurement are based on the consent of the recipients according to Art. 6 para. 1 lit. a, Art. 7 GDPR in conjunction with § 7 para. 2 no. 3 of the German Law against Unfair Competition (UWG) or on the legal permission according to § 7 para. 3 of the German Law against Unfair Competition.
The registration procedure is recorded on the basis of our legitimate interests pursuant to Art. 6 para. 1 lit. f GDPR and serves as proof of consent to receive the newsletter.
Cancellation/withdrawal - Newsletter recipients can cancel the receipt of our newsletter at any time, i.e. withdraw their consent. You will find a link to cancel the newsletter at the end of each newsletter. At the same time, their consent to the success measurement expires. A separate withdrawal of the success measurement is unfortunately not possible, in this case the entire newsletter subscription must be cancelled. With the cancellation of the newsletter, the personal data are deleted, unless their retention is legally required or justified, in which case their processing is limited only to these exceptional purposes. In particular, we may store the deleted e-mail addresses for up to three years on the basis of our legitimate interests before we delete them for the purpose of sending the newsletter in order to be able to prove that you have previously given your consent. The processing of these data is limited to the purpose of a possible defense against claims. An individual deletion request is possible at any time, provided that the former existence of a consent is confirmed at the same time.
Within the scope of our online offer and on the basis of our legitimate interests (i.e. interest in the analysis, optimization and economic operation of our online offer within the meaning of Art. 6 Para. 1 lit. f GDPR) we apply content or service offers from third parties in order to integrate their content and services, such as videos or fonts (hereinafter uniformly referred to as "content"). This always presupposes that the third-party providers of this content perceive the IP address of the user, since they would not be able to send the content to their browser without the IP address. The IP address is therefore required for the presentation of these contents. We strive to use only those contents, whose respective offerors use the IP address only for the distribution of the contents. Third parties may also use so-called pixel tags (invisible graphics, also known as "web beacons") for statistical or marketing purposes. The "pixel tags" can be used to evaluate information such as visitor traffic on the pages of this website. The pseudonymous information may also be stored in cookies on the user's device and may include technical information about the browser and operating system, referring websites, visit times and other information about the use of our website, as well as may be linked to such information from other sources.

matches:
Art. 32
Art. 6
Art. 44
Art. 15
Art. 16
Art. 17
Art. 18
Art. 77
Art. 7
Art. 21
§ 257
§ 147
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 7
§ 7
§ 7
Art. 6
Art. 6


text:
2. Аржанов А.И., Каримуллин К.Р., Наумов А.В. Некогерентное фотонное эхо в неоднородном ансамбле полупроводниковых коллоидных квантовых точек при низких температурах // Краткие сообщения по физике Физического института им. П.Н. Лебедева Российской академии наук. 2018. Т. 45. № 3. С. 39-44.
3. Arzhanov A.I., Karimullin K.R., Naumov A.V. Incoherent Photon Echo in an Inhomogeneous Ensemble of Semiconductor Colloidal Quantum Dots at Low Temperatures // Bulletin of the Lebedev Physics Institute. 2018. V. 45. № 3. P. 91-94.
4. Савостьянов А.О., Еремчев И.Ю., Горшелев А.А., Наумов А.В., Старухин А.C. Широкодиапазонная спектральная диффузия одиночных молекул Mg-тетраазопорфирина в полимерной матрице при криогенных температурах // Письма в ЖЭТФ. 2018. Т. 107. № 7. С. 426–433.
5. Еремчев И.Ю., Лозинг Н.А., Баев А.А., Тарасевич А.О., Гладуш М.Г. , Роженцов А.А., Наумов А.В. Люминесцентная микроскопия одиночных пар квантовых точек с нанометровым пространственным разрешением // Письма в ЖЭТФ. 2018. в печати.
6. Осадько И.С. Нахождение эффективности и скорости передачи энергии в флуоресценции одиночной донор-акцепторной пары, прикрепленной к биомолекуле // Письма в ЖЭТФ. 2018. T. 107. № 11. C. 755–758.
7. I.S. Osad’koa, M.A. Mikhailov, Entanglement in electron-nuclear spin system as immediate cause of the dependence of dephasing rate 1/T2 on intensity in the optical Bloch equations // Journal of Luminescence. 2018. V. 198. P. 502-507.
8. I.S.Osad'ko, Influence of Triplet States on FRET That Is Used as a Nanoruler in Biomolecules// J.Phys.Chem.С. 2018. V. 122. PP. 24394–24399.
1.M.V. Knyazev, K.R. Karimullin, A.V. Naumov, Revisiting the combined photon echo and single-molecule studies of low-temperature dynamics in a dye-doped polymer, Physica Status Solidi (RRL) 11, 3 , 1600414 (2017).
2.Задков В.Н., Колачевский Н.Н. , Наумов А.В. Российско-Британский симпозиум по квантовым технологиям // Квантовая электроника. 2017. Т. 47. № 9. С. 777.
1.Golovanova A.V., Anikushina T.A., Gladush M.G., Gorshelev A.A., Eremchev I.Y., Naumov A.V., Kador L., Köhler J. Statistical processing of single-molecule sensing of local fields in dye-doped solid films // Журнал прикладной спектроскопии. 2016. Т. 83. № 6-16. С. 332.
2.K.A. Magaryan, M.A. Mikhailov, K.R. Karimullin, M.V. Knyazev, I.Y. Eremchev, A.V. Naumov, I.A. Vasilieva, G.V. Klimusheva, Spatially-resolved luminescence spectroscopy of CdSe quantum dots synthesized in ionic liquid crystal matrices, Journal of Luminescence. – 2016. V. 169. Part B. P. 799-803.
3.I.Yu Eremchev, I.S. Osad’ko, A.V. Naumov, Auger Ionization and Tunneling Neutralization of Single CdSe/ZnS Nanocrystals Revealed by Excitation Intensity Variation // Journal of Physical Chemistry C. 2016. V. 120. №. 38. P. 22004–22011.
3.M.Yu. Gubin, A.V. Pishenko, S.M. Arakelian, M.G. Gladush, A.V. Prokhorov, Dissipative Laser Bullets in a Dielectric Metamaterial with Quantum Dots // Physics procedia.2015. V. 73. № 7.
4.Yuri G. Vainer, Yaroslav I. Sobolev, Андрей Наумов, Igor S. Osad’ko, and Lothar Kador, Fluorescence microscopy and spectroscopy of subsurface layer dynamics of polymers with nanometer resolution in the axial direction // Faraday Discussions. 2015. V. 184. P. 237–249.
5.A.L. Shchukina, I.Y. Eremchev, A.V. Naumov, Looking at a blinking quantum emitter through time slots: The effect of blind times // Physical Review E. 2015. V. 92. 032102.
6.I.S. Osad’ko, I.Y. Eremchev, A.V. Naumov, Two Mechanisms of Fluorescence Intermittency in Single Core/Shell Quantum Dot //The Journal of Physical Chemistry C. 2015. 119.
7.T.A. Anikushina, M.G. Gladush, A.A. Gorshelev, A.V. Naumov, Single-molecule spectromicroscopy: a route towards sub-wavelength refractometry //Faraday Discussions. 2015. 184.
8.M. Orrit, G. Evans, T. Cordes, I. Kratochvilova, W. Moerner, L.-M. Needham, S. Sekatskii, Y. Vainer, S. Faez, V. Vedral, H. Prabal Goswami, A. Clark, A.J. Meixner, L. Piatkowski, V. Birkedal, V. Sandoghdar, G.M. Skinner, W. Langbein, J. Du, F. Koberling, J. Michaelis, F. Shi, R. Taylor, A. Chowdhury, B. Lounis, N. van Hulst, P. El-Khoury, L. Novotny, J. Wrachtrup, T. Farrow, A. Naumov, M. Gladush, R. Hanson, Quantum optics, molecular spectroscopy and low-temperature spectroscopy: general discussion //Faraday Discussions. 2015. 184.
5.T.A. Anikushina, A.V. Naumov, Nonergodicity in long-term spectral dynamics of single dye molecules in the low-temperature polymer and organic glass // Laser Physics. 2014. V. 24. iss. 9. art. № 094001.
6.I.Y. Eremchev, Y.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, L. Kador, "Observation of Structural Relaxations in Disordered Solid Media via Spectral Histories of Single Impurity Molecules" // Physics of the Solid State, 55 (4), 710-719 (2013).
7.K.R. Karimullin, M.V. Knyazev, Y.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, "A luminescence visualizer for exact convergence of laser beams in photon-echo spectroscopy, four-wave mixing, and related techniques" // Optics and Spectroscopy, 114 (6), 859-862 (2013).
9.R.A. Vlasov, A.M. Lemeza, M.G. Gladush, "Resonance Fluorescence of Optically Dense Ensembles of Three-Level Resonant Centers Under Conditions of Energy-Level Population Auto-Oscillations(*)" // Journal of Applied Spectroscopy, 80 (5), 698-706 (2013). [http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10812-013-9829-x].
10.M.Y. Gubin, A.V. Prokhorov, M.G. Gladush, A.Y. Leksin, S.M. Arakelian, "The optical control of spatial dissipative solitons in optical fibers filled with a cold atomic gas",Nonlinear Optics and Applications Vii, Vol. 8772 (M. Bertolotti, J. Haus, A. M. Zheltikov, eds.), Spie-Int Soc Optical Engineering, Bellingham, 2013.
5.A.A. Gorshelev, A.V. Naumov, I.Y. Eremchev, Y.G. Vainer, L. Kador, J. Kohler, "Ortho-Dichlorobenzene Doped with Terrylene-a Highly Photo-Stable Single-Molecule System Promising for Photonics Applications" // ChemPhysChem, 11 (1), 182-187.
8.A.V. Naumov, Y.G. Vainer, "Single molecules as spectral nanoprobes for the diagnostics of dynamic processes in solid media" // Physics Uspekhi, v.52, iss.3, pp. 298-304 (2009) [Russian version: Uspekhi Physicheskih Nauk, v. 179, iss. 3, pp. 322-328 (2009)].
1.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, L. Kador, Local vibrations in disordered solids via single-molecule spectroscopy: Comparison with neutron, nuclear, Raman scattering, and photon echo data, Phys. Rev. B, v.77, N 22, art.no. 224202 (2008).
2.K.R. Karimullin, Yu.G. Vainer, I.Yu. Eremchev, A.V. Naumov, V.V. Samartsev, Ultrafast optical dephasing in doped polymetilmetacrylate: study by incoherent photon echo with femtosecond temporal resolution, Scientific Proceedings of the Kazan State University, v.150, N 2, pp.148-159 (2008).
3.A.V. Naumov, Yu.G. Vainer, Density of vibrational states in solid amorphous media: measurements by single-molecule spectroscopy method, Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Physics, v. 72, No. 5, pp. 708–711 (2008).
2.A.V. Naumov, Yu.G. Vainer, L. Kador, Does the standard model of low-temperature glass dynamics describe a real glass? Phys. Rev. Lett., v.98, N 14, art. no. 145501 (2007).
3.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, M. Bauer, L. Kador, Isotope effect in the linewidth distribution of single-molecule spectra in doped toluene at 2 K, J. Lumin., v.127, N 1, pp. 213-217 (2007).
3.A.V. Naumov, Yu.G. Vainer, Parameters of quasi-localized low-frequency vibrational modes in glasses: measurements via photon echo and single molecule spectroscopy, Izvestiya Akademii Nauk Seriya Fizicheskaya , v.70, N 4, pp.470-473 (2006).
1.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, M. Bauer, L. Kador, Dispersion of the local parameters of quasi-localized low-frequency vibrational modes in a low-temperature glass: direct observation via single-molecule spectroscopy, J. Chem. Phys., v.122, N 4, art. no. 244705 (2005).
2.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, M. Bauer, L. Kador, E. Barkai, Statistical analysis of spectra of single impurity molecules and dynamics of disordered solids: I. Distributions of linewidths, moments and cumulants, Optics and Spectroscopy, v.98, N 5, pp.740-746 (2005). [pp.806-813 in Rus.].
3.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, Statistical analysis of spectra of single impurity molecules and dynamics of disordered solids: II. Manifestation of interaction of two-level systems and impurity molecules depending on the distance between them, Optics and Spectroscopy, v.98, N 5, pp.747-752 (2005). [pp.814-819 in Rus.].
4.A.V. Naumov, Yu.G. Vainer, M. Bauer, L. Kador, Study of Low-Temperature Dynamics of Amorphous Solids with High Spatial and Spectral Resolution: Single Molecule Spectroscopy, OSA Trends in Optics and Photonics Series (TOPS), v.98 (2005), art. no. WB11.
5.N.L. Naumova, I.A. Vasil’eva, I.S. Osad’ko, A.V. Naumov, Investigations of vibronic interaction in impurity centers on the conjugated fluorescence and absorption spectra with poor resolved vibrational structure, Optics and Spectroscopy, v.98, N 4, pp.535-542 (2005). [pp.585-593 in Rus.].
6.N.L. Naumova, I.A. Vasil’eva, I.S. Osad’ko, A.V. Naumov, Evaluation of parameters of intramolecular interaction from absorption and fluorescence spectra of substituted arylpolyene with poor resolved vibrational structure, J. Lumin., v.111, pp.37-45 (2005).
1.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, M. Kol'chenko, R.I. Personov, The quasi-localized low-frequency vibrational modes of disordered solids: I. Study by photon echo, Phys. Stat. Sol. B, v.241, N 15, pp.3480-3486 (2004).
2.A.V. Naumov, Yu.G. Vainer, M. Bauer, L.Kador, Quasi-localized low-frequency vibrational modes of disordered solids II. Study by single-molecule spectroscopy, Phys. Stat. Sol. B, v.241, N 15, pp.3487-3492 (2004).
3.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, M. Bauer, L.Kador, Dynamics of amorphous polymers in the temperature region 2 - 7 K where the standard model of low-temperature glasses begin to fail: studies by single molecule spectroscopy and comparison with photon echo data, J. Lumin., v.107, N 1-4, pp.287-297 (2004).
4.E.Barkai, Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, M. Bauer, L.Kador, Experimental evidence for Levy statistics in single-molecule spectroscopy in a low temperature glass – manifestation of long-range interactions, J. Lumin., v.107, N 1-4, pp.21-31 (2004).
1.E.Barkai, A.V. Naumov, Yu.G. Vainer, M. Bauer, L.Kador, Levy Statistics for Random Single-Molecule Line Shapes in a Glass, Phys. Rev. Lett., v.91, N 7, art. no. 075502 (2003).
2.A.V. Naumov, Yu.G. Vainer, Modified model of photon echoes in low-temperature glasses: Effect of minimal distance between two-level systems and chromophore, J. Phys. Chem. B, v.107, N 9, pp.2054-2060 (2003).
3.M. Bauer, L.Kador, Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, Thermal activation of two-level systems in a polymer glass as studied with single-molecule spectroscopy, J. Chem. Phys., v.119, N 7, pp.3836-3839 (2003).
4.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, M. Bauer, L.Kador, Dynamics of a doped polymer at temperatures where the two-level system model of glasses fails: study by single-molecule spectroscopy, J. Chem. Phys., v.119, N 12, pp.6296-6301 (2003).
5.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, M. Bauer, L.Kador, Dynamics of amorphous polymers at low temperatures and temporal evolution of spectra of single impurity molecules: I. Experiment, Optics and Spectroscopy, v.94, N 6, pp.864-872 (2003). [pp.926-936 in Rus.].
6.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, M. Bauer, L.Kador, Dynamics of amorphous polymers at low temperatures and temporal evolution of spectra of single impurity molecules: II. Model calculations and analysis of results, Optics and Spectroscopy, v.94, N 6, pp.873-884 (2003). [pp.937-948 in Rus.].
7.Yu.G. Vainer, M.A. Kol'chenko, A.V. Naumov, R.I. Personov, S.J. Zilker, Optical dephasing in solid toluene activated by zink-octaethylporphine, Fizika Tverdogo Tela [Sold State Physics], v.45, N2, pp. 215-221 (2003).
1.A.V. Naumov, Yu.G. Vainer, M.Bauer, L. Kador, Moments of single molecule spectral lines in low temperature glasses: measurements and model calculations, J. Chem. Phys., v.116, N 18, pp.8132-8138 (2002).
2.Yu.G. Vainer, M.A. Kol'chenko, A.V. Naumov, R.I. Personov, S.J. Zilker, D. Haarer, Optical dephasing in doped organic glasses over a wide (0.35-100 K) temperature range: solid toluene doped with Zn-octaethylporphine, J. Chem. Phys., v.116, N 20, pp.8959-8965 (2002).
3.A.V. Naumov, Yu.G. Vainer, Minimal distance between chromophore and two-level systems in amorphous solids: effect on photon echo and single molecule spectroscopy data, J. Lumin., v.98, N 1-4, pp. 63-74, (2002).
4.N.L. Naumova, A.V. Naumov, A.N. Nikitina, I.A. Vasil'eva, Zh.A. Krasnaya, Yu.V. Smirnova, Fluorescence spectra of some cross-conjugate ketones: Experiment and calculations based on the model of two-well adiabatic potentials, Optics and Spectroscopy, v.92, No 3, pp.383-388 (2002) in Russian // v.92, No 3, pp.426-431 (2002) in English.
1.A.V. Naumov, Yu.G. Vainer, M. Bauer, S.J. Zilker, L. Kador, Distributions of moments of single-molecule spectral lines and the dynamics of amorphous solids, Phys. Rev. B, v.63, art. no. 212302 (2001).
2.A.V. Naumov, N.L. Naumova, I.S. Osad'ko, Luminescence and absorption spectra of polyatomic molecules subjected to conformational transition, Optics and Spectroscopy, v.91, No 5, pp.704-710 (2001) in Russian // v.91, No 5, pp.750-757 (2001) in English.
1.Yu.G. Vainer, M.A. Kol'chenko, A.V. Naumov, R.I. Personov, S.J. Zilker, Photon echoes in doped organic amorthous systems over a wide (0.35-50K) temperature range, J. Lumin., v. 86, pp.265-272 (2000).
2.Yu.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, S.J. Zilker, Nonexponential two-pulse photon echo decay in amorphous solids at low temperatures, J. Lumin., v.86, pp.273-278 (2000).
1.Yu.G. Vainer, M.A. Kol'chenko, A.V. Naumov, Incoherent photon echo in the solid toluene doped by Zn-octaethilporphine, Physics education, No 13, pp. 47-51 (1998) in Russian.
1. К.Р. Каримуллин, А.И. Аржанов, А.В. Наумов, Двухимпульсное некогерентное фотонное эхо в тонком слое квантовых точек CdSe/CdS/ZnS при криогенной температуре, Известия РАН. Серия физическая. 2018. T. 82. № 8. в печати.
3. А.А. Баев, И.Ю. Еремчев, А.А. Роженцов, А.В. Наумов, Преобразование Хоха как основа метода распознавания изображений и трекинга флуоресцирующих наночастиц, Известия РАН. Серия физическая. 2018. T. 82. № 8. в печати.
5. И.Ю. Еремчев, Н.А. Лозинг, М.Г. Гладуш, А.А. Баев, А.А. Роженцов, А.В. Наумов, К вопросу об измеряемых флуктуациях интенсивности люминесценции одиночных точечных излучателей: артефакты обработки микроскопических изображений. Известия РАН. Серия физическая. 2018. T. 82. № 8. в печати.
7. Karimullin K.R. , Mikhailov M.A., Georgieva M.G., Magaryan K.A., Vasilieva I.A., Analysis of the temperature dependence of the luminescence spectra of liquid-crystal nanocomposites with a cadmium selenide quantum dots. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2018. V. 951. № 012011.
5.K.A. Magaryan, I.Y. Eremchev, K.R. Karimullin and I.A. Vasilieva, Luminescent microscopy of the small ensembles of the CdSe nanocrystalls synthesized in the liquid crystal matrix of the cadmium octanoate, EPJ Web of Conferences 132, 03030 (2017).
1.Golovanova A.V., Gubin M.Yu., Gladush M.G., Prokhorov A.V., “Cooperative Effects in Quartz Media with Quantum Dots”; Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences: Physics. 2016. Т. 80. № 7. С. 808-813.
2.К.А. Магарян, И. Ю. Еремчев, К.Р.Каримуллин, И.А. Васильева, А.В. Наумов. Люминесцентная микроскопия малых ансамблей квантовых точек CdSe, выращенных в жидкокристаллической матрице октаноата кадмия // Ученые записки физического факультета МГУ. ‒ 2016. ‒ T. 5. ‒ C. 165408.
1.A.V. Pishenko, M.G. Gladush, A.V. Prokhorov, “Cooperative Effects in Quartz Media with Quantum Dots”; EPJ Web of Conferences, 103, 07003 (2015).
2.I.Yu. Eremchev, A.A. Gorshelev, K.R. Karimullin, A.V. Naumov, Temperature dependences of single dye-molecules zero-phonon line widths in a broad range of low temperatures, EPJ Web of Conferences, 103 , 05002 (2015).
3.K.A. Magaryan, I.Y. Eremchev, K.R. Karimullin, M.V. Knyazev, M.A. Mikhailov, I.A. Vasilieva, G.V. Klimusheva, Study of the spectral properties of nanocomposites with CdSe quantum dots in a wide range of low temperatures , EPJ Web of Conferences, 103 , 09003 (2015).
3.M.V. Knyazev, K.R. Karimullin, A.V. Naumov, "Using of 2D-detectors in the photon-echo experiments" // In Russian: Bulletin of the Samara scientific center of the Russian Academy of Sciences. - 2014. - V. 16. - Iss. 4. - P. 13-16.
2.К.Р. Каримуллин, Ю.Г. Вайнер, И.Ю. Еремчев, А.В. Наумов, В.В. Самарцев, "Оптическая дефазировка в примесном полиизобутилене: исследования методом некогерентного фотонного эха в условиях высокого давления" // Ученые записки Казанского Государственного Университета, 152 (2), 98-110.
1. A.V. Naumov, A.A. Gorshelev, M.G. Gladush, J. Koehler, L. Kador, Probing of local fields in solids by fluorescence nanoscopy with single probe molecules, 4th Russian-German-French Laser Symposium, April 23–27, 2018, Kazan, Russia, Program and Abstracts, Kazan:, 2018 – p.28.
2. I.Yu. Eremchev, I.S. Osadko, A.V. Naumov, Fluorescence intermittency of single core/shell quantum dots depending on laser excitation intensity, 4th Russian-German-French Laser Symposium, April 23–27, 2018, Kazan, Russia, Program and Abstracts, Kazan: FiztekhPress, 2018 – p. 29.
3. Artem Arzhanov, Kamil Karimullin, Andrei Naumov, Ultrafast relaxation processes in nanocomposites with colloidal semiconductor quantum dots as revealed by incoherent photon echo, 4th Russian-German-French Laser Symposium, April 23–27, 2018, Kazan, Russia, Program and Abstracts, Kazan: FiztekhPress, 2018 – p. 33.
4. A.O. Savostianov, I.Yu. Eremchev, A.A. Gorshelev, A.V. Naumov, A.S. Starukhin, Single molecule spectroscopy of Mg tetra-azoporphyrins in polymer matrix at low temperatures, 4th Russian-German-French Laser Symposium, April 23–27, 2018, Kazan, Russia, Program and Abstracts, Kazan: FiztekhPress, 2018 – p. 35.
5. А.В. Наумов, И.Ю. Еремчев, А.А. Горшелев, Флуоресцентная наноскопия с детектированием одиночных органических молекул и полупроводниковых коллоидных квантовых точек, Российская конференция и школа молодых ученых по актуальным проблемам спектроскопии комбинационного рассеяния света, 28 мая - 1 июня 2018, Тезисы докладов, Новосибирск, 2018 – c. 53.
8.Т.А. Аникушина, А.В. Наумов, L. Kador, Квазилокализованные низкочастотные колебательные Моды в полимерах: визуализация при помощи Спектроскопии одиночных молекул (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 149-150.
9.К.Р. Каримуллин, А.И. Аржанов, А.В. Наумов, Низкотемпературная оптическая дефазировка в ансамбле полупроводниковых коллоидных квантовых точек CdSe/CdS/ZnS: исследование методом некогерентного фотонного эха, XI международный симпозиум по фотонному эхо и когерентной спектроскопии (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 151-152.
10.А.А. Баев, И.Ю. Еремчев, А.А. Роженцов, А.В. Наумов, Решение задачи обнаружения изображений одиночных наноразмерных излучателей во флуоресцентной микроскопии (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 126-127.
11.М.Г. Гладуш, Флуоресценция одиночных квантовых излучателей в замороженной диэлектрической среде (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 156.
12.М.Г. Гладуш, Флуоресценция ансамблей квантовых излучателей в диэлектрической среде (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 88.
13.А.В. Голованова, М.Г. Гладуш, А.В. Наумов, Статистический анализ параметров спектров одиночных квантовых излучателей для картирования материальных характеристик твердых сред (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 157-158.
14.А.А. Горшелев, А.В. Наумов, L. Kador, J. Köhler , Влияние дефектов в диэлектрических молекулярных кристаллах на параметры бесфононных спектральных линий примесных хромофорных молекул (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 159.
15.И.Ю. Еремчев, М.Ю. Еремчев, А.В. Наумов, Флуоресцентная микроскопия одиночных коллоидных квантовых точек с суб-нанометровым пространственным разрешением (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 45-46.
16.М.Ю. Еремчев, А.В. Наумов, А.А. Баев, А.А. Роженцов, И.Ю. Еремчев, Определение расстояний между близкорасположенными одиночными флуоресцирующими квантовыми точками с нанометровой точностью (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 160.
17.К.Р. Каримуллин, А.В. Наумов, К вопросу о соответствии данных о временах оптической дефазировки в примесном полимере и однородных ширинах бесфононных спектральных линий одиночных примесных молекул, XI международный симпозиум по фотонному эхо и когерентной спектроскопии (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 165-166.
18.Н.А. Лозинг, М.Г. Гладуш, Влияние коллективных эффектов на динамику интенсивности флуоресценции квантовых излучателей в диэлектрической среде (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 173-174.
19.К.А. Магарян, К.Р. Каримуллин, И.Ю. Еремчев, И.А. Васильева, А.В. Наумов, Микроскопия малых ансамблей нанокристаллов CdSe, выращенных в жидкокристаллической матрице, XI международный симпозиум по фотонному эхо и когерентной спектроскопии (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 175-176.
20.М.А. Михайлов, М.Г. Георгиева, К.А. Магарян, К.Р. Каримуллин, И.А. Васильева, Анализ спектрально-люминесцентных свойств нанокомпозитов с квантовыми точками селенида кадмия в жидкокристаллических матрицах каприлата кадмия, XI международный симпозиум по фотонному эхо и когерентной спектроскопии (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 155.
21.М.А. Михайлов, И.С. Осадько, Зависимость скорости оптической дефазировки от интенсивности лазерного излучения (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 110-111.
22.А.В. Наумов, К.Р. Каримуллин, А.И. Аржанов, И.Ю. Еремчев, М.В. Князев, Оптическая эхо-спектроскопия как метод исследования низкотемпературной динамики неупорядоченных твердых сред и композитов с квантовыми точками, XI международный симпозиум по фотонному эхо и когерентной спектроскопии (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 59-60.
23.А.В. Шестериков, М.Ю. Губин, М.Г. Гладуш, А.В. Прохоров, Формирование плазмон-поляритонных импульсов в процессе кооперативного распада экситонов квантовых точек вблизи металлической поверхности (ФЭКС – 2017): Сборник тезисов. г. Светлогорск Калининградской обл. 16 – 21 cентября 2017 г. [Электронное издание] (ISBN: 978-5-89513-421-4) – Москва: Тровант, 2017. – C. 201-202.
24.T.A. Anikushina, M.G. Gladush, A.A. Gorshelev, A.V. Naumov, Local-field effects in the zero-phonon spectral lines of single impurity molecules: probing the refractive index of the medium, Современные нанотехнологии и нанофотоника для науки и производства : материалы 5-й Междунар. конф. 12 – 15 ноября 2016 г., г. Владимир – г. Суздаль [Электронный ресурс] (ISBN: 978-5-9984-0750-5) / Владим. гос. ун-т им. А. Г. и Н. Г. Столетовых. – Владимир : Изд-во ВлГУ, 2017. – 133-132 c.
25.T.A. Anikushina, A.V. Naumov, L. Kador, Quasi-Localized Low-Frequency Vibrational Modes in Disordered Solids: Imaging With Single Dye Molecules, Современные нанотехнологии и нанофотоника для науки и производства : материалы 5-й Междунар. конф. 12 – 15 ноября 2016 г., г. Владимир – г. Суздаль [Электронный ресурс] (ISBN: 978-5-9984-0750-5) / Владим. гос. ун-т им. А. Г. и Н. Г. Столетовых. – Владимир : Изд-во ВлГУ, 2017. – 129-131 c.
26.A.V. Shesterikova, M.Yu. Gubina, M. G. Gladushb,A. V. Prokhorova, Formation of sub-picosecond plasmon pulses via cooperative effects in dense ensemble of chromophores near the metal-dielectric interface, Современные нанотехнологии и нанофотоника для науки и производства : материалы 5-й Междунар. конф. 12 – 15 ноября 2016 г., г. Владимир – г. Суздаль [Электронный ресурс] (ISBN: 978-5-9984-0750-5) / Владим. гос. ун-т им. А. Г. и Н. Г. Столетовых. – Владимир : Изд-во ВлГУ, 2017. – 196-197 c.
27.M.G. Gladush, A quantum-kinetic formalism for describing properties of single light emitters and light emitting ensembles in dielectrics, Современные нанотехнологии и нанофотоника для науки и производства : материалы 5-й Междунар. конф. 12 – 15 ноября 2016 г., г. Владимир – г. Суздаль [Электронный ресурс] (ISBN: 978-5-9984-0750-5) / Владим. гос. ун-т им. А. Г. и Н. Г. Столетовых. – Владимир : Изд-во ВлГУ, 2017. – 127-128 c.
28.A.V. Golovanova, T.A. Anikushina, M.G. Gladush, A.A. Gorshelev, I.Y. Eremchev, A.V. Naumov, L. Kador, J. Köhler, Spatio-spectral analysis of fluorescence from probe organic molecules to measure effective values of the refractive index in frozen films, Современные нанотехнологии и нанофотоника для науки и производства : материалы 5-й Междунар. конф. 12 – 15 ноября 2016 г., г. Владимир – г. Суздаль [Электронный ресурс] (ISBN: 978-5-9984-0750-5) / Владим. гос. ун-т им. А. Г. и Н. Г. Столетовых. – Владимир : Изд-во ВлГУ, 2017. – 125-126 с.
29.Kamil Karimullin, Mikhail Knyazev, Andrei Leontiev, Andrei Naumov, Vitaly Samartsev , Study of impurity solids and optical information processing by means of the photon echo spectroscopy, Современные нанотехнологии и нанофотоника для науки и производства : материалы 5-й Междунар. конф. 12 – 15 ноября 2016 г., г. Владимир – г. Суздаль [Электронный ресурс] (ISBN: 978-5-9984-0750-5) / Владим. гос. ун-т им. А. Г. и Н. Г. Столетовых. – Владимир : Изд-во ВлГУ, 2017. – 116-117 с.
30.N.A. Lozing, M.G. Gladush, Cooperative effects and slow dynamics of fluorescence intensity from quantum emitters in a dielectric, Современные нанотехнологии и нанофотоника для науки и производства : материалы 5-й Междунар. конф. 12 – 15 ноября 2016 г., г. Владимир – г. Суздаль [Электронный ресурс] (ISBN: 978-5-9984-0750-5) / Владим. гос. ун-т им. А. Г. и Н. Г. Столетовых. – Владимир : Изд-во ВлГУ, 2017. – 124-123 с.
32.К.Р. Каримуллин, М.А. Михайлов, М.Г. Георгиева, К.А. Магарян, И.А. Васильева, Анализ температурной зависимости спектров люминесценции жидкокристаллических нанокомпозитов с квантовыми точками селенида кадмия, 6-ая международная конференция «Современные нанотехнологии и нанофотоника для науки и производства», Программа и тезисы докладов. 9 – 13 ноября 2017 г., Владимир: ВлГУ, 2017. – С. 108-111.
33. К.Р. Каримуллин, А.И. Аржанов, К.А. Магарян, А.В. Наумов, Люминесцентная микроспектроскопия как метод характеризации оптических свойств нанокомпозитов с коллоидными полупроводниковыми квантовыми точками, Когерентная оптика и оптическая спектроскопия: XXI международная молодежная научная школа 17-19 октября 2017 г.: сборник статей (ред.: М.Х. Салахов), Казань: Изд-во Казан. ун-та, 2017. – С. 56-60. (ISBN: 978-5-9690-0397-2).
A.V.Naumov, "Single molecules and diffraction limit breaking in optical microscopy" // In Russian: Troitsky Variant. Nauka - 2014. - 165. - P. 2.
Y.G. Vainer, A.V. Naumov, "Molecular spectra", Great Russian Encyclopedia, 20, - Moscow, (2012) ISSN: 978-5-85270-354-5.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. v. v. v. V. V. V.


text:
Prosecutors and police have a duty to seek out and voluntarily disclose every bit of evidence that helps a person accused of a crime defend themselves from prosecution. This kind of “exculpatory” evidence can come in the form of improper evidence handling, insufficient officer training, negative officer performance reviews, and even dishonesty or wrongdoing by a police officer.
Unfortunately, not all police officers or prosecutors understand the full extent of this obligation. In fact, some police officers in Washington have even actively attempted to keep information about their past misconduct secret from those they have accused of a crime.
The duty to disclose derives from (1) the Constitutional Due Process requirement for disclosure set out in Brady v. Maryland, (2) the Criminal Rules on discovery, and (3) the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Here we provide an overview designed to give a basic understanding of the duties and obligations of the government as they relate to disclosure obligations. We end with a brief discussion of the new model policy on Potential Impeachment Disclosure (PID), and new areas of future disclosure obligations.
There are over 30,000 cases in the United States that discuss the government's obligation to provide exculpatory information to the defense. Every prosecutor and defense attorney should be familiar with the following cases.
Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (Prosecution violates a defendant’s due process rights by failing to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence).
United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985) (Brady rule applies to impeachment evidence).
Silva v. Brown, 416 F.3d 980 (9th Cir. 2005) (Impeachment evidence is especially likely to be "material" under Brady; thus, the government must reveal promises of leniency or immunity for its witnesses).
Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995) (The prosecutor bears the primary responsibility of identifying and turning over Brady evidence. The prosecutor’s obligation to turn over all exculpatory evidence extends to evidence that is in the possession of the police, including information that the police have not disclosed to the prosecutor. “This means, naturally, that a prosecutor anxious about tacking too close to the wind will disclose a favorable piece of evidence”).
United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97, 108, 96 S. Ct. 2392, 49 L. Ed. 2d 342 (1976) (“The prudent prosecutor will resolve doubtful questions in favor of disclosure.”).
In re Personal Restraint Petition of Gentry, 137 Wn.2d 378, 397 n. 9 (1999) (Even after conviction, the prosecutor is required by the ethics of the office “to inform the appropriate authority of . . . information that casts doubt upon the correctness of the conviction.”).
State v. Copeland, 89 Wn. App. 492, 497-98, 949 P.2d 458 (1998) (A prosecutor must disclose prior criminal convictions of witnesses intended to be called for trial if that information is in the knowledge, control or possession of any member of the prosecution office, even where the deputy prosecutor on the case is not actually aware of the prior conviction of the witness).
State v. Garcia, 45 Wn. App. 132, 724 P.2d 412 (1986) (A prosecutor must disclose the substance of an eyewitness’ oral recantation and any prosecutor notes for an in camera review of the conversation even though the prosecutor did not believe the recantation). This rule also applies to non-lawyer support staff at a prosecutor’s office, such as victim/witness advocates and secretaries.
State v. Blackwell, 120 Wn.2d 822, 828 (1993) (If the defense can first show materiality, the burden shifts to the prosecution to attempt to obtain evidence held in an officer’s file). If the prosecution will not comply with a request for any information in a police officer’s file, a motion can be brought under Blackwell. However, filling public records request is often a quicker solution.
Discovery in Criminal cases is controlled by CrR 4.7 in Superior Court, and CrRLJ 4.7 in District Court. Although these rules differ somewhat, there is not meaningful difference as it relates to Brady obligations.
CrR 4.7(a)(1): Except as otherwise provided by protective orders or as to matters not subject to disclosure, the prosecuting attorney shall disclose to the defendant the following material and information within the prosecuting attorney's possession or control no later than the omnibus hearing.
CrR 4.7(a)(1)(vi): Any record of prior criminal convictions known to the prosecuting attorney of the defendant and of persons whom the prosecuting attorney intends to call as witnesses at the hearing or trial.
CrR 4.7(3): Except as is otherwise provided as to protective orders, the prosecuting attorney shall disclose to defendant's counsel any material or information within the prosecuting attorney's knowledge which tends to negate defendant's guilt as to the offense charged.
CrR 4.7(4): The prosecuting attorney's obligation under this section is limited to material and information within the knowledge, possession, or control of members of the prosecuting attorney's staff.
CrR 4.7(d): Upon defendant's request and designation of material or information in the knowledge, possession or control of other persons which would be discoverable if in the knowledge, possession or control of the prosecuting attorney, the prosecuting attorney shall attempt to cause such material or information to be made available to the defendant. If the prosecuting attorney's efforts are unsuccessful and if such material or persons are subject to the jurisdiction of the court, the court shall issue suitable subpoenas or orders to cause such material to be made available to the defendant.
The Rules of Professional Conduct contain two rules exclusively for prosecutors that relate to the prosecutor’s obligations under Brady.
RPC 3.8(d) compels prosecutor to make timely disclosure to the defense of all evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tends to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigates the offense and, in connection with sentencing, disclose to the defense and to the tribunal all mitigating information known to the prosecutor, except when the prosecutor is relieved of this responsibility by a protective order of the tribunal.
A prosecutor’s obligations under RPC 3.8(d) are very similar to the disclosure obligations imposed by Constitutional Due Process. As such, failure to comply with the Brady obligations can result in negative licensing ramifications for a criminal prosecutor. The more knowing and willful a violation of this rule, the more negative the ramifications have been.
RPC 3.8(g) is a newer rule, coming into effect in December 2011. Under RPC 3.8(g), when a prosecutor knows of new, credible, and material evidence creating a reasonable likelihood that a convicted, defendant is innocent of the offense of which the defendant was convicted the prosecutor shall promptly disclose that evidence to an appropriate court or authority, and if the conviction was obtained in the prosecutor’s jurisdiction, promptly disclose that evidence to the defendant unless a court authorizes delay, and make reasonable efforts to inquire into the matter, or make reasonable efforts to cause the appropriate law enforcement agency to undertake an investigation into the matter.
Two recent Washington cases show how prosecutors have dealt with their Brady obligations, and how some police officers have greatly resisted prosecutorial efforts to disclose findings of their misconduct.
The Lewis County Sheriff’s Office conducted an internal investigation on Deputy Lackey. The investigation made findings that Lackey had committed job related acts of dishonesty and other violations.
The Sheriff sent Lackey a letter sustaining the findings and indicating that Lackey was to be separated from employment for the other violations. The letter also stated that the investigative report was being forwarded to the Lewis County Prosecutor for an analysis under Brady and that a determination of lack of veracity would constitute an additional and independent basis for termination.
Lackey was separated from employment but appealed through Civil Service. A settlement was reached between Lackey and the Sheriff’s Office. The parties to the agreement were the Lewis County Sheriff’s Office, the Deputies Guild, and Lackey. The Prosecutor was not a party to the agreement.
The Sheriff’s Office “agreed to remove any reference to findings of dishonesty in the plaintiff's termination letter; however, the findings were to remain in the plaintiff's permanent investigation file.” The agreement also stated that the letter from the Prosecutor would be sealed by the Sheriff.
The settlement agreement further stated that the Brady memo from Mr. Golden to Mr. Walton would remain sealed by the Sheriff unless directed to be disclosed by a court order, public records request, or other applicable and controlling laws.
NOTE: Police union contracts and settlement agreements cannot prevent the disclosure of Brady material as a defendant’s constitutional right is paramount. An officer’s privacy interest cannot prevent disclosure of disciplinary records as such records are considered to be of legitimate concern to the public. See, e.g. Dawson v. Daly, 120 Wn.2d 782, 795-96, 845 P.2d 995 (1993); Cowles Pub'g Co. v. State Patrol, 44 Wn. App. 882, 724 P.2d 379 (1986), rev'd on other grounds, 109 Wn.2d 712, 748 P.2d 597 (1988).
Lackey then obtained provisional employment in Mason County, pending a background investigation. The Lewis County Prosecutor became aware of this and sent Lackey a letter stating he would be sending his analysis letter to the Mason County Prosecutor, but gave Lackey 10 days to object. The letter was subsequently sent.
Lackey was separated from his new job. He then filed claims against Lewis County and the Lewis County Prosecutor for sharing Brady information, Due Process violation and deprivation of property interest, defamation, invasion of privacy, and an injunction.
All federal claims were dismissed by the federal court.
Doyle left his employment with the Sierra County Sheriff's Office after a settlement agreement dismissing a disciplinary action in exchange for his resignation. The agreement precluded Doyle from applying for or accepting employment with Sierra County for five years. Before this agreement was reached, Doyle had first been subject to termination, and later was placed on unpaid, one-year probation.
Later in 2007, Doyle became employed by the Quincy Police Department (who presumably did not know about the Sierra County issue when they hired him).
In 2009, Doyle called the police Moses Lake Police Department (MLPD) reporting documents related to his Sierra County employment had been stolen. MLPD recovered and reviewed the documents. Believing the documents showed that an investigation resulted in a finding that Doyle was dishonest, MLPD passed this information to then Grant County Prosecutor Angus Lee. Lee preliminarily determined the dishonesty finding and the supporting information were potential impeachment materials that his office was required to disclose to criminal defendants in compliance with Brady.
Mr. Lee notified Doyle of his determination and invited him to provide any information he wished to assist in making the final determination.
Doyle responded by suing for declaratory relief, and seeking an Ex Parte order to prohibit Mr. Lee from using, or disseminating any of the documents.
The trial court entered a preliminary injunction, but allowed the prosecution to comply with Brady mandate by submitting the materials to the criminal trial courts for in camera review on cases where Doyle was a potential witness. Each criminal trial judge that ruled on the in camera review ordered disclosure of the materials under Brady and Bagley.
Mr. Lee moved for summary judgment to dissolve the preliminary injunction and to dismiss the case. Finding that the Sierra County outcome was adverse to Doyle and that such information would be of public concern, the trial court ordered the immediate termination of the preliminary injunction and granted Mr. Lee's motion for summary dismissal.
The court also awarded Mr. Lee tens of thousands in attorneys fees for having to defend against the action.
In 2013, after the Lackey and Doyle cases, prosecutors in Washington State, through the Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorney’s, published a model policy for the handling of Brady/Doyle material for officers. Although some prosecutor’s offices still use the term “Brady Cop”, many have adopted the model policy and the term "Potential Impeachment Disclosure" (PID) when referring to disclosure obligations involving a police officer.
Under the model policy, the PID standard is likely to be satisfied by reliable information that an officer was dishonest in connection with the performance of official duties. It is less likely to be satisfied by dishonesty in connection with an officer’s private affairs. Under unusual circumstances, information about private acts might be subject to the PID policy if the acts could be admissible under Evidence Rule 608(b) as evidence of untruthfulness.
Below you can download the "Brady Policy" and list maintained by the Clark County Prosecutor's Office and the Vancouver City Attorney's Office.
The PID Standard depends on what a reasonable person could believe, not on what the prosecutor’s office or a law enforcement agency does believe.
Consequently, disclosure may be required in cases where the prosecutor’s office and/or the law enforcement agency believe that no misconduct occurred, if a reasonable person could draw a different conclusion.
If the prosecutor’s office concludes that an officer is subject to PID, that conclusion does not necessarily reflect a conclusion that the officer committed misconduct, or that the officer is not credible as a witness.
PID is about meeting the government’s obligation to disclose. It is NOT about making a determination on admissibility, or on an officer’s credibility, or employability.
A determination that disclosure is required is not a stipulation by the prosecution as to admissibility. In fact, it is not uncommon for the prosecution to make a disclosure of material to the defense, but then later argue for suppression or exclusion of that material at trial.
When the determination is questionable, the prosecution should submit the material to the court in camera for a determination on the disclosure obligation . If the defense believes there is material that is not being disclosed pursuant to Brady and its progeny, the defense should move the court for an in camera review of the material it believes exists and is not being disclosed.
If material is submitted for in camera review, it may or may not be disclosed by the court. As a result, the defense either obtains the requested material, or builds a record for any future appeal regarding what was not disclosed.
A review of the case law regarding Brady material reveals that the law is expanding and will continue to expand the scope of discovery beyond simple acts of dishonesty by an officer. Brady disclosure obligations at their heart deal with ANY information that may tend to negate or call into question the testimony of a witness, thereby making the information material for impeachment purposes.
Mental and Physical Health: depression and other mental health disorders are increasingly common across America. Police officers and jail guards are no exception. In fact, it has been reported that jail guards suffer from PTSD at higher rates than combat veterans. The drugs some take to treat these issues may be very relevant to a particular officer’s ability to observe and recall a particular incident. Likewise, if an officer has been diagnosed and in need of medication, the absence of appropriate medication may also be relevant.
Evidence of prejudice towards a protected class: Prejudice and bias against a group of people can be very relevant to impeachment of an officer’s testimony. This kind of information can often be found in comments that officers make publicly on social media.
Performance Reports: Most government witnesses (especially at the State Crime Laboratory) are subject to regular performance testing and evaluations. Adverse or substandard performance reviews or evaluations are potentially very relevant to impeaching the testimony of a government witness.
Substance Abuse: If an officer was on drugs or alcohol, or dealing with a bad hangover, at the time of arrest, this information is very relevant to the officer’s ability to observe and recall an incident many months later at trial. As such, use/abuse of drugs or can be relevant information.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


In this section the U.S. Office of Government Ethics provides links to judicial opinions, opinions from the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice, and other guidance interpreting the conflict of interest laws.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held in Part II of its opinion that a complainant in litigation against the United States does not violate either 18 U.S.C. § 203 or § 205 as a result of accepting attorney’s fees for the services of an attorney who is now a current Federal employee if the authority for paying such fees requires that they be paid to the complainant, not the attorney.
The defendant was charged with receipt of illegal supplementation of salary from a non-governmental source in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 209(a). Denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss, the District Court of Maryland rejected the defendant’s argument that services, such as spa and salon services, could never constitute supplementation of salary. In its opinion, the court discusses the legislative history of 18 U.S.C. § 209(a) and case law interpreting the statute. For more information about the case, see the 2013 Conflict of Interest Prosecution Survey.
A procedure under which prospective viewers are required to provide basic identifying information similar to that described in section 105(b)(2) of the Ethics in Government Act in order to access financial disclosure reports made available under section 11(a) of the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act is consistent with both these statutes. This procedure may be implemented by Executive Branch agencies at the direction of the Office of Government Ethics, pursuant to its authority under section 402 of the Ethics in Government Act to prescribe procedures governing the public availability of financial disclosure reports.
Chief of Staff for the General Services Administration (GSA), David Safavian went on a golf trip to Scotland with lobbyist Jack Abramoff. He sought ethical advice from GSA’s General Counsel, but represented that Abramoff had “no business before GSA.” Safavian did not disclose that Abramoff had previously asked him about leasing two GSA-owned properties. D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld four counts related to falsifying or concealing a material fact and obstruction of justice.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that an interim Associate Administrator of NASA violated 18 U.S.C. § 208 where he persuaded a NASA official to allocate funds to a client of a consulting firm in which he maintained sole proprietorship and he knew he held a financial interest in the matter.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that 18 U.S.C. § 209(a) required that (1) the payor intend its payment to compensate for the employee's government work, and (2) the work at issue had to actually be the employee’s government work.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a government employee who actively participates in procuring sales that result in increased commissions for her husband violated 18 U.S.C. §208, especially where the employee knew of the likely financial outcome and acted willfully.
A foreign corporation is a “foreign entity” under 18 U.S.C. § 207(f) if it exercises sovereign authority or functions de jure or de facto. A former official’s proposed activities are not prohibited by section 207(f)(1) if the former official does not provide those services on behalf of a “foreign entity,” regardless of whether the former official’s services incidentally benefit the foreign entity’s interests.
The prohibition in 18 U.S.C. § 207(c), under which a former high level official, in the year after his departure, may not make “any communication to or appearance before any officer or employee” of his former agency, would apply if former CIA officials make communications to or appearances before CIA employees who are on detail to other agencies.
A member of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Director's Advisory Board does not hold an "Office of Profit or Trust" under the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution.
A former senior employee of the Securities and Exchange Commission communicating with the Commission on behalf of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board during the year after his service as a senior employee at the Commission ends would not be communicating on behalf of the United States and therefore 18 U.S.C. § 207(c) would apply to bar such a communication.
The longstanding interpretation of the Executive Branch that service by a special government employee during any part of a day counts as a full day under 18 U.S.C. §§ 203 and 205, which impose greater conflict of interest restrictions after a special government employee works 60 days, is reaffirmed.
The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld 5 C.F.R. § 2635.807(a) against a First Amendment challenge and upheld OGE's interpretation that the rule prohibited an administrative law judge (ALJ) from receiving royalties for a book he co-authored about the Social Security Administration (SSA) disability adjudication process, despite the ALJ having acquired some expertise on the subject prior to working for the SSA.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 208, a nonprofit organization does not have a “financial interest” in a particular matter solely by virtue of the fact that the organization spends money to advocate a position on the policy at issue in the matter.
This report summarized the provisions and history of 18 U.S.C. §§ 203, 205, 207, 208, and 209, and discusses what OGE considered to be the limitations and anomalies of their application to executive branch employees, as well as the important core provisions that needed to be retained.
It appears that 18 U.S.C. § 207(c) would forbid at least some of the proposed communications between a retired Navy flag officer and Marine Corps commanders regarding the security situation in Iraq.
Although flight privileges generally do not require disqualification under 18 U.S.C. § 208 from all matters involving the relevant air carrier, a Federal Aviation Administration employee who holds such flight privileges must disqualify him or herself from particular matters where FAA action may have a direct and predictable effect on the relevant air carrier's ability to honor the employee's flight privileges.
18 U.S.C. § 207(f) prohibits a former senior employee of an Executive Branch department from representing a foreign entity before Members of Congress within one year of the termination of his employment.
In this memorandum the Office of Legal Counsel discusses whether the principal conflict-of-interest rules of the executive branch apply to a person who has been appointed to an office by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate but has not yet begun the duties of that office.
18 U.S.C. § 203 would not bar a former federal employee from sharing in attorney's fees in a qui tam action, provided that those fees, calculated under the lodestar formula, are prorated such that the former employee does not receive any fees attributable to his time in the government.
Although a trustee of a private trust, solely by virtue of his capacity as a trustee, should not be deemed to have a personal financial interest in the property of the trust, a trustee of a private trust may have such an interest under certain circumstances. Further, a trustee of a private trust also should be considered to be serving in the capacity of a "trustee" of an "organization" for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 208(a).
18 U.S.C. § 207 would not prohibit a former government official from representing a former President or former Vice President in connection with his role under the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. §§ 2201-2207 (1994).
A former high-ranking government official proposed establishing a consulting firm as a sole proprietorship, a partnership, or a corporation, in which he would be one of a very few employees, or perhaps even the sole employee. If, as hypothesized, the consulting firm prepares a report on behalf of certain clients, which is submitted directly to his former agency by the consulting firm, or with the former officials knowledge, by his client with the report bearing the consulting firms name, and it is expected by the former official that his identity as the author of the report may be commonly known throughout the industry and at his former agency, he would be making a communication prohibited by 18 U.S.C. § 207(c).
Individuals who otherwise meet the specifications and limitations of § 207(j)(7)(A) and (B) should be deemed to be communicating on behalf of a "candidate" through the point at which that "candidate" assumes the office to which he has been elected.
The post-employment restrictions of 18 U.S.C. § 207(d), which cover officials paid "at" the rate for level I of the Executive Schedule, do not apply to officials paid at a higher rate. Those officials are instead subject to the restrictions of 18 U.S.C. § 207(c).
A federal government employee who obtains patent rights to an invention made in the course of federal employment ordinarily does not violate 18 U.S.C. § 209 by licensing the patent rights to a private entity and receiving royalty payments in exchange, because the payments are not "compensation for [the employee's] services" in the government.
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals interpreted 18 U.S.C. § 205 as barring an employee from acting as agent or attorney before any government agency in any particular matter in which the U. S. is a party or has a direct and substantial interest. The Court determined that an employee does not act as "agent" for another person unless the employee has actual or apparent authority to act on behalf of that person in dealings with the government.
The post-employment restrictions of 18 U.S.C. § 207(c) apply to persons who are assigned from a university or a state or local government to the Department of Energy under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act and are compensated at or above the ES-5 level, except for those who occupy positions ordinarily below the ES-5 level and who receive salaries only from the detailing employers, with the federal agency reimbursing those employers for an amount less than an ES-5 salary.
The District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals held that 18 U.S.C. § 205(a)(2) does not prohibit uncompensated communications by a government employee, on behalf of a public interest group, to an agency at which he is not employed. Congress did not intend to bar federal employees from representing outside interests in every matter in which the U.S. has an interest.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that 18 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1) applied insofar as the attorneys' services were those of expert witnesses, but the District Court did not err in issuing an order permitting the testimony under 18 U.S.C. § 207(j)(6). Ethical rules did not bar the testimony, which was limited to publicly-known information.
18 U.S.C. § 205(a)(2), which bars a Federal employee from acting as an agent or attorney before any "agency . . . in connection with any covered matter in which the U.S. is a party or has a direct and substantial interest," applies only to Federal agencies and does not apply to state agencies or agencies of the District of Columbia.
The U.S. Supreme Court held that "in order to establish a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(1)(A), the government must prove a link between a thing of value conferred upon a public official and a specific 'official act' for or because of which it was given."
18 U.S.C. § 205 prohibits a Civil Division attorney from receiving attorney's fees for work in a case against the United States performed prior to federal employment when the right to payment depends on a finding of liability and award against the United States that takes place after the attorney's entry into federal employment.
The National Gambling Impact Study Commission is not an "independent" agency for purposes of a criminal conflict of interest statute, 18 U.S.C. § 208.
A federal employee assigned to a state or local government or other non-federal entity under the Intergovernmental Personnel Act is not prohibited by 18 U.S.C. § 205 from representing the interest of the non-federal entity before the federal government, including the employee's agency, if such representational activity is affirmatively included with the scope of the employee's assignment as determined by the federal agency head.
Official service by State Department employees on the boards of American-sponsored schools overseas is authorized by statute and does not violate 18 U.S.C. § 208.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 208, a federal employee may serve as a member of the board of a private voluntary standards organization to the extent necessary to permit participation in his or her official capacity in the organization's standard-setting activities.
18 U.S.C. § 203 does not prohibit a prospective government officer from maintaining upon his entry into government service a contingent interest in expenses recoverable in litigation involving the United States.
18 U.S.C. § 208(a) does not prohibit the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board and the President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York from serving in their official capacities on the Board of Directors of the Bank for International Settlements.
Section 208 of title 18 prohibits a government employee from serving on the board of directors of an outside organization in his or her official capacity, unless the service is authorized by statute or the employee obtains either a release of fiduciary obligations by the organization or a waiver of the requirements of section 208.
18 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1) prohibits a former Department of the Navy employee from representing the Government of Guam before the Federal Maritime Commission in a litigation in which he participated personally and substantially while employed by the Navy.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals sustained a First Amendment challenge to a portion of 5 C.F.R. § 2635.807 entitled "Teaching, speaking, and writing."
The U.S. Supreme Court held that the honoraria ban in 5 U.S.C. app. § 501 prohibiting federal employees from accepting compensation for making speeches or writing articles, even when the speech had no connection with the employee’s officials duties, was unconstitutional and violated the first amendment.
The restrictions of 18 U.S.C. § 205 preclude current federal employees from representing the National Association of Assistant United States Attorneys ("NAAUSA") before the Department of Justice regarding compensation, workplace issues, and other issues that focus on the interests of Assistant United States Attorneys ("AUSAs") or another discrete and identifiable class of persons or entities.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held that a Reserve officer serving on active duty beyond the 130-day cap in 18 U.S.C. § 202 was a regular officer subject to 18 U.S.C. § 203 unless he fell within one of the section 202 exceptions rendering him a special employee. Section 203 does not require the government to prove specific intent and it provides fair notice of the offending conduct.
An executive branch officer or employee appointed to the Board of Directors of Connie Lee would be a "director" within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 208(a) and therefore would be disqualified from participating "personnally [sic] and substantially" in any "particular matter" implicating the financial interests of Connie Lee unless the conditions of subsection 208(b) are satisfied.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that 18 U.S.C. § 208 was not unconstitutionally vague.
A government employee-inventor who assigns his rights in an invention to the United States and accepts the government's payment of amounts tied to the resulting royalties, as provided in the Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1501-1534, may continue to work on the invention without violating the statute against taking part in matters in which he has a financial interest, 18 U.S.C. § 208, or the statute forbidding supplementation of federal salaries, 18 U.S.C. § 209.
Section 207(c) of title 18 forbids a former senior employee of the Department of Justice, for one year after his or her service ends, from signing a brief or making an oral argument in a case where the Department represents one of the parties.
Application of 18 U.S.C. § 205 to Proposed "Master Amici"
18 U.S.C. § 205 precludes attorneys in the executive branch from serving as "master amici" in the Court of Veterans Appeals.
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that 18 U.S.C. § 208(a) was a strict liability offense and that a government official only needed to have knowledge of a conflicting financial interest when negotiating for employment.
The U.S. Supreme Court held that a pre-government service severance payment was not covered by 18 U.S.C. § 209(a). Specifically, § 209(a) requires employment status at the time of payment.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the term "knowingly" applied to each element of former 18 U.S.C. § 207(c).
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a Government official violated 18 U.S.C § 208 for defrauding the U.S. of money and property and 18 U.S.C. § 209 for knowingly receiving supplementation of his salary where the official was involved in a scheme that benefited him financially due to his position in the government.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held that 18 U.S.C. § 208(a) applied to a federal employee's participation, on behalf of the government, in any application or contract in which he has a conflict of interest, not just those that involved outside suppliers of goods and services to the government.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held that severance payments made prior to government service with the intention to supplement lower federal salaries did not violate 18 U.S.C. § 209. The court also held that section 209 did not require an injury in the form of corruption or actual conflict of interest and that an appearance of conflict was sufficient to violate section 209.
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an Assistant Attorney General (AG) violated 18 U.S.C. § 208 where the AG was the lead prosecutor in a check-kiting case and demanded money and employment from the bank’s representative in return for writing his report in a manner that discouraged prosecution of the creditors that hired that specific representative.
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that under 18 U.S.C. § 207(a), a contract obtained by a corporation with the help of a former contracting officer (CO) was essentially the same contract that was previously awarded to the corporation with the assistance of the CO while he was still employed by the government and that section 207 prohibited such actions.
The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals held that an unsuccessful bidder had standing to initiate an action for an injunction against a contract awarded to another bidder where the bidder was denied the contract despite attaining the top numerical score for its proposal. However, the Court held that the bidder did not present sufficient evidence of an improper motive among the bid evaluation committee members.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that FBI agents violated 18 U.S.C. § 201(c) bribery provisions, even where FBI agents made false promises while playacting in an undercover sting operation, because the statute focused on the state of mind of the bribe-player.
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the language of 18 U.S.C. § 208(a) included acts that carried a contract to completion and not just pre-contract activities.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals held that that the trial court erred in narrowly construing 18 U.S.C. § 208(a) to save it from being unconstitutionally vague where neither the statutory terms or legislative history mandated that interpretation. The statute must be construed to show legislative intent and even interpreted with the correct legislative intent, section 208(a) was not unconstitutionally vague.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the public financial disclosure requirements of Ethics in Government Act did not unconstitutionally invade the privacy of Federal judges.
The U.S. Supreme Court held that an agency employee properly refused to produce certain records requested under subpoena by the Attorney General (AG). The subpoena was valid, however, as it was issued in accordance with a regulation issued by the AG and such order was appropriate as authorized by statute and not inconsistent with the law.