What are the opening hours?

Monday 9am - 6pm Tuesday 9am - 6pm Wednesday 9am - 6pm Thursday 9am - 6pm Friday 9am - 6pm

AEI Law, P.C., is The Hero's Law Firm, 7755 Center Avenue, 11th Floor, Suite 1100, Huntington Beach, CA (2026)

05/28/2026

California Trademark Infringement: Business Owner Guide

A trademark is often one of a company’s most valuable assets. A business’s name, logo, slogan, or other identifying mark can carry reputation, customer loyalty, and market recognition. In California, one important source of protection is the state’s Model State Trademark Law, found in California Business and Professions Code sections 14200 and following.

For business owners, the key point is this: California statutory trademark infringement is not just about someone copying a logo exactly. It can also involve the unauthorized use of a mark, or a confusingly similar imitation, in a way that is likely to make consumers believe the goods or services come from the trademark owner or are connected with that owner.

What California’s Trademark Statute Covers
California’s trademark chapter provides a civil cause of action to the owner of a mark registered under the chapter. That matters. A California statutory claim is tied to a registered California mark, not merely an unregistered business name or general marketplace use. Businesses may have other rights under common law or federal law, but the state statutory claim itself depends on registration under the California system.

The core infringement provision generally reaches unauthorized use of a reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of a registered mark in connection with the sale, distribution, offering for sale, or advertising of goods or services when that use is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or deception as to source or origin.

In practical terms, the question is whether ordinary consumers are likely to be misled. The law is not limited to exact duplicates. A mark that looks, sounds, or means something close enough to create marketplace confusion can create legal exposure even if it is not identical.

How Courts Evaluate Confusion
California courts have explained that trademark infringement and unfair competition turn on whether an appreciable number of reasonable buyers are likely to be confused. In analyzing that issue, courts often consider familiar trademark factors such as:

▪️the strength of the plaintiff’s mark,
▪️the similarity of the marks,
▪️the relatedness or proximity of the goods or services,
▪️evidence of actual confusion,
▪️overlap in marketing channels,
▪️the likely degree of purchaser care,
▪️the defendant’s intent, and
▪️the likelihood of expansion into related markets.

Because of that approach, California statutory infringement often looks very similar to federal trademark litigation. Even though the claim arises under state law, the analysis frequently tracks the same confusion-based principles seen in federal cases.

California Law Reaches More Than the Direct Seller
One feature of California’s statute that business owners sometimes overlook is that it can extend beyond the person directly selling the allegedly infringing product.

The statute also reaches a person who knowingly facilitates, enables, or otherwise assists another person’s use or sale of goods or services bearing a counterfeit or colorable imitation of a registered mark. California law even provides a mechanism under which knowledge may be presumed after a properly supported written cease-and-desist demand is delivered.

The statute also specifically addresses landlords and property owners in some circumstances. If a landlord or property owner controls the premises and knew, or had reason to know, of infringing activity occurring there, the statute may apply to that party as well.

That makes California’s law particularly important in disputes involving swap meets, marketplaces, shared commercial spaces, and other locations where counterfeit or confusingly branded goods are sold by multiple vendors.

Remedies Available Under California Law
California law provides meaningful remedies for owners of registered marks. A prevailing plaintiff may seek:

▪️injunctive relief to stop the infringing conduct,
▪️recovery of the defendant’s profits,
▪️recovery of the plaintiff’s damages,
▪️enhancement of those amounts up to three times in appropriate cases, and
▪️destruction of counterfeit goods, labels, packaging, and related production tools.

In counterfeit cases, the court may also order seizure of goods and instrumentalities used to produce counterfeit items, including through ex parte procedures where the statutory requirements are met.

At the same time, the statute contains limits. For example, an innocent infringer or innocent violator is a person who acted without knowledge that the mark was intended to be used to cause confusion, mistake, or deception. California law also limits relief against certain printers acting solely for others if they qualify as innocent infringers.

Why Registration and Early Action Matter
A California statutory infringement claim is strongest when a business has taken formal steps to protect its brand. Registration can make enforcement more direct under the state statute and can strengthen a business’s position when dealing with imitators, counterfeiters, facilitators, or property owners hosting infringing activity.

Early enforcement also matters. A confusingly similar brand can erode goodwill, divert sales, and create customer uncertainty quickly. Sending a prompt, well-supported demand and documenting the scope of the confusion can make a substantial difference in later litigation.

Final Takeaway
California statutory trademark infringement law gives registered trademark owners a direct cause of action against unauthorized uses likely to confuse consumers. It also provides broader tools than many business owners expect, including remedies against knowing facilitators and, in some cases, landlords or property owners connected to infringing sales.

This post is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.

05/25/2026

California Right of Publicity: Civil Code 3344 Guide

California’s statutory right of publicity, Civil Code section 3344, is one of the state’s best-known commercial identity protections. It applies when a person’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness is knowingly used without consent on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for advertising or selling goods or services.

This statute often appears in cases involving advertising campaigns, social media promotions, product packaging, online marketing, and unauthorized endorsements.

What Must Be Proven?

A plaintiff suing under section 3344 generally must prove:

1 The defendant knowingly used the plaintiff’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness.

2 The use was on or in products, merchandise, or goods, or for purposes of advertising, selling, or soliciting purchases of goods or services.

3 The plaintiff did not consent.

4 The plaintiff suffered injury.

5 There was a direct connection between the use and the commercial purpose.

The statute is focused on commercial exploitation. Not every reference to a person in a publication triggers liability. Context matters, especially where expressive works or editorial uses are involved.

“Readily Identifiable” Matters for Photographs

If the claim is based on a photograph, the plaintiff must be readily identifiable. The statute explains that a person is readily identifiable when someone viewing the image with the naked eye can reasonably determine that the person depicted is the one complaining of the unauthorized use.

That means a vague crowd shot or an unrecognizable background appearance may not be enough. But a recognizable image used to help sell a product or service can squarely implicate the statute.

The Statute’s Damages Scheme Is One of Its Biggest Features

Section 3344 is often pleaded because it supplies a concrete remedial framework.

1. The Greater of $750 or Actual Damages

A prevailing plaintiff may recover the greater of $750 or actual damages. That minimum statutory amount is important in smaller cases where the unauthorized use is obvious but the economic loss is hard to quantify. In larger cases, actual damages may far exceed the statutory floor.

2. Defendant’s Profits Attributable to the Unauthorized Use

The statute also allows recovery of profits from the unauthorized use that are not already taken into account in computing actual damages. This can substantially increase exposure where the use appeared in a successful campaign or sales-driven promotion.

The burden structure matters. The plaintiff generally needs to prove gross revenue attributable to the unauthorized use, and the defendant then has the burden to prove deductible expenses.

3. Punitive Damages

Punitive damages may also be awarded. That makes section 3344 significantly more potent than many business tort statutes. A willful, exploitative, or knowingly deceptive use of identity can therefore carry meaningful risk beyond compensatory relief.

4. Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Another major feature of section 3344 is fee shifting. The prevailing party is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs. That can materially affect case value and settlement posture on both sides.

5. Injunctive Relief and Temporary Restraining Orders

The statute expressly permits injunctive relief. A plaintiff can seek an order requiring the defendant to remove, recall, or cease publication or distribution of the unauthorized use. In the right case, that allows the plaintiff to address ongoing misuse quickly rather than waiting only for a damages award at the end of the case.

Limits and Defenses

Section 3344 is not limitless. Consent remains a full defense. The statute also includes protections for media entities in certain circumstances unless knowledge is shown, and it recognizes that not every use in a commercially sponsored medium automatically counts as a use requiring consent. Courts look closely at whether the identity was directly connected to the advertising or sales purpose.

Why This Claim Is So Common

Plaintiffs often plead section 3344 alongside false endorsement and common law publicity claims because the statute provides a clear elements framework and unusually strong remedies: a damages floor, profits, punitive damages, fees, costs, and injunctions. In many identity-misuse cases, it is one of the most practical and consequential California claims available.

This post is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.

05/20/2026

California Unfair Competition Law: Proof and Relief Guide

California’s Unfair Competition Law, often called the UCL, is broader than many people expect. It prohibits “unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent” business acts or practices, which means a UCL claim can borrow from many different kinds of underlying misconduct. But although the statute is broad in scope, its remedies are narrower than many litigants assume.

That makes the UCL an important claim to understand, especially in lawsuits involving intellectual property, advertising, online conduct, or business practices.

What Must Be Proven?

A UCL claim can proceed under one or more of three theories:

1. Unlawful Conduct

An “unlawful” practice under the UCL is often described as a borrowed violation. In other words, the UCL can incorporate violations of other laws and treat them as independently actionable unfair competition. If another statute, regulation, or common law doctrine was violated, that conduct may support a UCL claim.

2. Unfair Conduct

The meaning of “unfair” can vary depending on the context and the type of case. In competitor actions, California courts often apply a more structured test tied to antitrust or legislatively declared policy. In consumer-facing cases, courts have used somewhat different formulations. Because the doctrine is still context-sensitive, lawyers often plead unfairness alongside unlawful or fraudulent conduct rather than relying on unfairness alone.

3. Fraudulent Conduct

A “fraudulent” business practice under the UCL does not always require all elements of common law fraud. The focus is whether members of the public are likely to be deceived. Even so, when the theory sounds in fraud, courts often expect the allegations to be pleaded with particularity.

Standing Matters

Not everyone can bring a UCL claim. A private plaintiff generally must show that it lost money or property as a result of the challenged conduct. That standing requirement is important. A plaintiff who cannot identify economic injury caused by the unfair practice may have difficulty proceeding, even if the conduct itself was questionable.

The Most Important Point: The UCL Usually Does Not Provide Damages

This is where many people get surprised. The UCL is powerful, but it is primarily an equitable statute. A private plaintiff generally may seek injunctive relief and restitution, not traditional compensatory damages.

That means no recovery for pain and suffering, no general damages for reputational harm, and usually no punitive damages under the UCL itself. If a plaintiff wants those kinds of remedies, it usually needs to pair the UCL with other causes of action, such as defamation, right of publicity, fraud, or trademark-based tort theories.

What Relief Is Available?
1. Injunctive Relief

An injunction can order a business to stop a challenged practice. In many UCL cases, this is the main practical remedy. It can require changes to advertising, sales practices, disclosures, website content, or other business conduct going forward.

2. Restitution

Restitution is designed to restore money or property that the defendant wrongfully acquired from the plaintiff. It is not the same thing as tort damages or a broad disgorgement remedy. The focus is returning money or property in which the plaintiff had a vested interest.

For example, if money was taken from consumers or counterparties through an unlawful business practice, restitution may be available. But a plaintiff generally cannot use the UCL to obtain nonrestitutionary disgorgement of profits merely because the defendant benefited from the conduct.

3. Public Remedies in Government Actions

Civil penalties are available under the UCL in enforcement actions brought by public prosecutors, not in ordinary private suits. That distinction matters when reading headlines about large UCL recoveries. Private plaintiffs and public agencies do not have the same remedial toolbox.

4. Attorney’s Fees

Attorney’s fees are not ordinarily available under the UCL itself. A party may still seek fees under some other independent basis, but the UCL alone is not a general fee-shifting statute.

Why the UCL Is Still Worth Pleading

Even with limited remedies, the UCL can be a valuable cause of action. It can support injunctive relief, capture business practices that do not fit neatly into a traditional tort, and provide a broad equitable framework where other claims are still being developed.

The key is understanding what the claim can and cannot do. The UCL is often excellent for stopping conduct and obtaining restitution. It is not a substitute for a damages claim.

This post is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.

05/18/2026

What a Strong Art Purchase Agreement Should Include Under California Law

A strong art purchase agreement in California should do much more than state a price and identify the painting. It should clearly define what is being sold, what rights are being kept by the artist, how delivery and risk are handled, and what happens if there is damage, a dispute, or a later resale. In the art world, misunderstandings often arise not because the parties disagree about the artwork itself, but because the contract does not clearly separate the physical object from the legal rights connected to it.

First, a strong agreement should identify the artwork with precision. That means more than listing a title. The contract should describe the work by title, medium, dimensions, year, signature status, and framing, and ideally attach a photograph and condition report. If authenticity documents or provenance records will be delivered, the agreement should say so. These details matter because they reduce later disputes over whether the buyer received the correct piece, whether the work was altered, and whether damage occurred before or after delivery.

Second, the agreement should clearly address price, payment, and when title transfers. A good California art purchase agreement should state the full purchase price, whether any deposit is due, accepted payment methods, when payment is deemed complete, and when title passes. If the artist does not want title to pass until funds clear, the agreement should say that expressly. Delivery terms should also be specific, including who arranges shipping, who pays for it, what insurance is required in transit, and when the risk of loss shifts from artist to buyer.

Third, the contract should sharply distinguish ownership of the original artwork from copyright and reproduction rights. Buying an original painting does not automatically mean the buyer can reproduce it on posters, merchandise, websites, or advertising. A strong agreement should say whether the buyer is purchasing only the original object or also receiving any license to photograph, publish, reproduce, or commercially exploit the work. If the artist is keeping all copyright rights, that should be stated clearly. If the buyer is receiving a limited license, that license should be narrow, written, and specific.

Fourth, a strong agreement should address future uses of the work. Many artists want to preserve the right to make prints, use images of the work in portfolios, books, social media, exhibition catalogs, or promotional materials, and be credited as the creator. If the parties expect any of those uses, the contract should spell them out. If prints or editions are important to the deal, the agreement should also describe whether those reproductions may be limited edition or open edition and who controls the edition terms.

Fifth, the agreement should cover damage, conservation, and restoration. Art is fragile, and disputes often arise after delivery. A strong contract should say what happens if the work is damaged in transit, whether the buyer must notify the artist before restoration, and whether the artist gets the first opportunity to perform or approve repairs. If the artist cares about attribution or the integrity of the piece, the contract should also restrict mutilation, destructive alterations, or improper display conditions.

Sixth, resale provisions should be drafted carefully. Some artists want a contractual right to notice of resale or a percentage of a later profitable sale. If that is part of the deal, the agreement should say exactly when the obligation is triggered, how the resale price is calculated, when payment is due, and whether the obligation binds successors. These provisions should be drafted as express contract terms, not assumed to arise automatically.

Finally, every strong California art purchase agreement should include practical dispute terms: notice procedures, attorneys’ fees language if desired, integration and amendment clauses, California choice-of-law provisions where appropriate, and clear venue language. These provisions do not make a contract exciting, but they often determine whether the agreement is enforceable and efficient when a dispute arises.

At AEI Law PC, we help artists, collectors, galleries, and creative businesses put these issues in writing before they become expensive problems. If you need a solid art purchase agreement tailored to your transaction, contact AEI Law PC.

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.

05/14/2026

Commingling Personal and Business Finances in a California LLC: Fiduciary Duty, Alter Ego, and Limited Liability Risks

One of the fastest ways to create problems in a California LLC is to blur the line between personal money and company money. A member or manager may think it is harmless to use a personal credit card to cover business expenses, pay vendors informally, or reimburse themselves later. Sometimes those things happen in early-stage companies or closely held businesses. But when those transactions are not disclosed, not documented, or not properly entered into the company’s books, the legal and practical risks can become significant.

In a California LLC, the issue is not just bookkeeping. It can become a fiduciary duty problem, a business records problem, a reimbursement dispute, and in some cases even an alter ego problem.

Why Financial Separation Matters in a California LLC

An LLC is supposed to be a separate legal entity. That separateness is part of what gives owners the benefit of limited liability. If the people running the company treat LLC funds like personal funds, or treat personal funds like a substitute for company accounts without transparency, they undermine that separateness.

To be clear, using personal funds to pay a legitimate company expense is not automatically wrongful. A manager may occasionally advance money for the business. But the transaction should be handled openly and correctly: the expense should be disclosed, approved if required, entered into the accounting system, and characterized properly as a reimbursement, member loan, or capital contribution. Trouble starts when the transactions happen off the books, through relatives’ credit cards, or through informal side arrangements that other decision-makers never see.

Fiduciary Duties in a California LLC

California’s LLC statute imposes fiduciary duties of loyalty and care. In a member-managed LLC, those duties are owed by the members who manage the business. In a manager-managed LLC, those duties are generally owed by the manager or managers, not by members solely because they hold an ownership interest. Even so, all persons exercising rights under the operating agreement must act consistently with the obligation of good faith and fair dealing.

That distinction matters. If a managing member or manager is running company finances, that person may have statutory duties that include:

● acting loyally toward the LLC and the other owners,
● avoiding undisclosed self-dealing or adverse interests,
● refraining from grossly negligent or reckless conduct,
● avoiding intentional misconduct or knowing violations of law, and
● keeping financial dealings consistent with good faith and fair dealing.

When a person secretly pays LLC expenses on personal or family credit cards, fails to record those charges in the company books, and later demands sudden repayment, several issues can arise. Other owners may question whether the charges were legitimate company expenses, whether they were authorized, whether finance charges were incurred unnecessarily, and whether the person handling the funds was acting loyally and with due care. What might have been a simple reimbursement issue can quickly become a California LLC member dispute or breach of fiduciary duty dispute.

How Commingling Creates Litigation Risk

Commingling personal and business finances creates more than accounting confusion. It can also fuel claims such as:

1. Breach of Fiduciary Duty

If a manager or managing member handles company money in a way that is opaque, self-protective, or inconsistent with the operating agreement, that conduct may support a breach of fiduciary duty claim. Hidden reimbursements, undocumented advances, and surprise demands for payment often create exactly the kind of distrust that leads to internal LLC litigation.

2. Disputed Reimbursements, Loans, and Capital Contributions

Was the payment a reimbursable business expense? A member loan? A capital contribution? If nothing was documented at the time, everyone may remember it differently later. That ambiguity often becomes central in owner disputes.

3. Alter Ego and Veil-Piercing Arguments

California law generally protects LLC members and managers from company debts solely by reason of their status. But that is not the end of the story. California also preserves common-law alter ego liability. Courts look at the totality of the circumstances, including factors such as commingling of funds, failure to segregate records, treatment of company assets as personal assets, inadequate capitalization, and use of the entity as a mere shell.

Just as important, commingling alone does not automatically destroy limited liability. California courts require more than sloppy practices. They look for both a unity of interest and an inequitable result if the entity form is respected. In other words, alter ego is an extreme remedy, but repeated financial commingling can help build that case.

Best Practices to Protect the LLC and Its Owners

Businesses can reduce risk with basic discipline:

● Maintain separate LLC bank accounts and business credit cards.
● Do not use personal or family credit cards for company expenses unless absolutely necessary.
● If personal funds are advanced, document the transaction immediately.
● Enter all expenses into the accounting system promptly and accurately.
● Preserve receipts, invoices, approvals, and reimbursement requests.
● Use written policies for reimbursements, member loans, and capital calls.
● Review books regularly so that all managers or authorized members can see the company’s true financial position.
● Follow the operating agreement and update it if the current procedures are unclear.

The Bottom Line

In a California LLC, financial transparency is not optional. When personal and business finances are mixed together without disclosure, documentation, or proper accounting, the risks multiply. The company may face internal disputes, reimbursement fights, breach of fiduciary duty claims, and arguments that the owners failed to respect the LLC’s separate existence.

Good business hygiene matters. Clean books, separate accounts, timely disclosures, and written approvals do more than keep the accountant happy. They help preserve limited liability, protect relationships among owners, and reduce the chance that an ordinary expense issue turns into costly California business litigation.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.

05/11/2026

Answering a USPTO Trademark Opposition: What Businesses Worldwide Need to Know

If your business has applied for a federal trademark in the United States and then receives a notice of opposition from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, that is a serious development, but it is not the end of the application. It means another party believes your proposed registration would damage its rights and has formally challenged your application after publication. See 15 U.S.C. § 1063(a), TBMP § 301.01.

For companies anywhere in the world that want to sell products or services in the U.S., an opposition proceeding matters because U.S. trademark registration can be central to market entry, distributor relationships, e-commerce enforcement, brand licensing, and long-term brand value. A weak response can lead to default, abandonment of the application, or years of avoidable conflict over consumer confusion.

What an opposition actually is

After the USPTO examining attorney approves an application for publication, the mark is published in the Official Gazette. At that point, a third party that believes it would be damaged by the registration may file an opposition. See 15 U.S.C. § 1063(a). In practice, oppositions often arise when another brand owner believes your mark is too close to its own, or when it contends your mark is not registrable for some other reason.

An opposition is not just another office action. It is an inter partes proceeding before the TTAB that functions much more like litigation. The notice of opposition and the answer correspond to a complaint and an answer in court. See 37 C.F.R. § 2.116(c), TBMP § 301.01.

The first rule: do not miss the answer deadline

Once the Board institutes the case, it sets the deadline for the applicant’s answer. If no answer is filed within the time initially set, or as later reset by the Board, the opposition may be decided by default. See 37 C.F.R. § 2.106(a). That is one of the fastest ways to lose a federal trademark application.

The answer generally must be filed electronically through ESTTA, the TTAB’s filing system, absent rare technical or extraordinary circumstances. See 37 C.F.R. § 2.106(b)(1), TBMP § 302.01.

What the answer must do

A proper answer is not a one-line statement that you “disagree.” Federal rules require the applicant to state its defenses in short and plain terms and to admit or deny the allegations on which the opposer relies. If the applicant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to an allegation, it may say so, and that statement operates as a denial. See 37 C.F.R. § 2.106(b)(2), Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b).

A strong answer usually does four things:

1 Responds to each numbered allegation with an admission, denial, or statement of insufficient knowledge.
2 Preserves defenses that may apply, such as failure to state a valid claim, lack of likelihood of confusion, estoppel, acquiescence, laches where available, or other affirmative defenses recognized by TTAB practice. See 37 C.F.R. § 2.106(b)(2).
3 Avoids unnecessary admissions that could later harm the application.
4 Keeps the factual record consistent with how the business actually uses, markets, and plans to expand its brand in the United States.

In TTAB practice, some so-called “affirmative defenses” are really amplifications of denials. Even so, they can help clarify the applicant’s position if they are pleaded carefully. See TBMP § 311.02.

Counterclaims can be mandatory

One of the most important procedural traps is the counterclaim rule. If the opposer relies on an existing registration and the applicant wants to attack the validity of that pleaded registration, that challenge generally must be asserted as a counterclaim if the grounds are known when the answer is filed. See 37 C.F.R. § 2.106(b)(3)(i). And an attack on the validity of the opposer’s registration will not be heard unless a counterclaim or separate cancellation petition is filed. See 37 C.F.R. § 2.106(b)(3)(ii).

That means an applicant should evaluate early whether it has grounds to challenge the opposer’s registration, rather than waiting until later in the case.

What the TTAB can and cannot do

Businesses often assume an opposition is the same as a trademark infringement lawsuit. It is not. The TTAB’s role is to decide registrability, not to award marketplace damages or issue use injunctions. That distinction matters for global businesses entering the U.S. market, because the opposition may affect whether the mark registers federally, while any broader dispute over actual use in commerce may require separate court litigation.

What happens after the answer

After the pleadings close, the case moves into discovery, testimony, briefing, and sometimes an oral hearing. TTAB proceedings are largely conducted on a written record, and oral hearings occur only if requested. See TBMP § 301.01.

This means the answer is only the opening move. A business should already be thinking about documents, witnesses, priority facts, channels of trade, and how U.S. consumers encounter the mark. If the case centers on likely confusion, the real-world evidence behind branding, marketing, and product positioning becomes critical.

The practical takeaway

If your company wants to build a brand in the United States, treat a notice of opposition as a formal federal trademark dispute, not an administrative inconvenience. A timely, well-drafted answer protects your application, preserves defenses, identifies any counterclaims, and positions your business to defend its brand while reducing the risk of consumer confusion in the U.S. marketplace.

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.

AEI Law, P.C., is The Hero's Law Firm

05/28/2026

05/25/2026

05/20/2026

05/18/2026

05/14/2026

05/11/2026

Address

Opening Hours

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Contact The Business

Shortcuts

Share

Category

Monday	9am - 6pm
Tuesday	9am - 6pm
Wednesday	9am - 6pm
Thursday	9am - 6pm
Friday	9am - 6pm